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

This is a text-only version of the document "South Powder River Basin Coal - Final Environmental Impact Statement - Vol 1 of 2 - 2003". To see the original version of the document click here.

U.S. Department of the Interior
Bureau of Land Management Wyoming State Office Casper Field Office
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

December 2003

FINAL South Powder River Basin Coal Environmental Impact Statement Volume 1 of 2

North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Black Thunder Mine

Antelope Mine

North Rochelle Mine

MISSION STATEMENT It is the mission of the Bureau of Land Management to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations.

BLM/WY/PL-04/007+1320

FINAL SOUTH POWDER RIVER BASIN COAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

Prepared by WWC Engineering Sheridan, Wyoming Under the Direction of U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Casper Field Office Casper, Wyoming and Cooperating Agencies U.S. Department of the Interior Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Denver, Colorado and U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Douglas, Wyoming

November 2003

Executive Summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This EIS1 analyzes the environmental impacts of leasing five tracts of federal coal reserves adjacent to existing surface coal mines in the southern PRB. Operators of four mines, North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope, have filed four applications to lease five tracts of federal coal as maintenance tracts under the regulations at Title 43 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 3425.1 (43 CFR 3425.1) Leasing On Application. All four applications have been reviewed by the BLM Wyoming State Office, Division of Minerals and Lands Authorization. That office determined that all four lease applications met the regulatory requirements for lease by applications, or LBAs. The five LBA tracts considered in this EIS and the adjacent mines are shown in Figure ES-1. They are the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts, adjacent to the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex; the Little Thunder LBA Tract, adjacent to the Black Thunder Mine; the West Roundup LBA Tract, adjacent to the North Rochelle Mine; and the West Antelope LBA Tract, adjacent to the Antelope Mine. The applications are summarized below. On March 10, 2000, PRCC filed one application with the BLM for federal coal reserves in two maintenance tracts adjacent to the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. The tracts are referred to as the NARO
1 Refer to page xii for a list of abbreviations and acronyms used in this document.

North and NARO South LBA Tracts. The NARO North LBA Tract is located in southern Campbell County, Wyoming, approximately 13 miles southeast of Wright, Wyoming. The NARO South LBA Tract is located in southern Campbell County and northern Converse County, Wyoming, approximately 19 miles southeast of Wright, Wyoming (Figure ES-1). BLM determined that the two tracts in the application would be processed separately and, if the decision is made to hold a lease sale for both tracts, they would be offered for sale separately. PRCC’s coal lease application was assigned case file numbers WYW150210 (NARO North) and WYW154001 (NARO South). The North Antelope/Rochelle Complex is operated by PRCC, a subsidiary of Peabody Holding Company, Inc. On March 23, 2000, ALC filed an application with the BLM for federal coal reserves in a maintenance tract located west of and immediately adjacent to the Black Thunder Mine. ALC is a subsidiary of Arch Coal, Inc. The tract, which is referred to as the Little Thunder LBA Tract, was assigned case file number WYW150318. The application area is located in southern Campbell County, Wyoming, approximately six miles east-southeast of Wright, Wyoming (Figure ES-1). The Black Thunder Mine is operated by TBCC, a subsidiary of Arch Western Resources, LLC. On July 28, 2000, TCC filed an application with the BLM for federal coal reserves in a maintenance tract located west of and immediately adjacent to the North Rochelle Mine. ES-1

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Executive Summary

14 16 59

LEGEND

West Hay Creek LBA Buckskin Mine Eagle Butte Mine West Extension LBA To Buffalo 38 Miles Eagle Butte LBA Fort Union Mine Rawhide Mine Dry Fork Mine

Wyodak Mine
90

ROZET
Crook County GILLETTE

MOORCROFT

Caballo Mine

Campbell County

Johnson County

Belle Ayr Mine Caballo Rojo Mine
50

Maysdorf LBA

Cordero Mine

Cordero-Rojo Complex

Coal Creek Mine
59

Campbell County Weston County

West Rocky Butte LBA

116

WRIGHT

RENO JUNCTION

North Jacobs Ranch LBA Jacobs Ranch LBA Jacobs Ranch Mine To Newcastle 29 Miles
Niobrara County

Thundercloud LBA LITTLE THUNDER LBA
59

387

West Black Thunder LBA North Rochelle LBA WEST ROUNDUP LBA Powder River LBA NARO NORTH LBA NARO SOUTH LBA

Black Thunder Mine North Rochelle Mine

450

North Antelope/Rochelle Complex North Antelope/Rochelle LBA Antelope LBA Antelope Mine
Weston County

Campbell County Converse County

Horse Creek LBA

WEST ANTELOPE LBA

SCALE: 1"= 10 MILES To Douglas 46 Miles

Figure ES-1. General Location Map with Federal Coal Leases and LBA Tracts.

ES-2

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Executive Summary The application area is located in southern Campbell County, Wyoming, approximately 10 miles southeast of Wright, Wyoming (Figure ES-1). The tract, which is referred to as the West Roundup LBA Tract, was assigned case file number WYW151134. The North Rochelle Mine is operated by TCC. At the time the application was filed, TCC was a subsidiary of Vulcan Intermediary, LLC. In May 2003, Arch Coal announced that it was purchasing Vulcan Intermediary’s coal holdings, including the North Rochelle Mine. On September 12, 2000, ACC filed an application with the BLM for federal coal reserves in a maintenance tract located west of and immediately adjacent to the Antelope Mine. The tract, which is referred to as the West Antelope LBA Tract, was assigned case file number WYW151643. The application area is located in southern Campbell County and northern Converse County, Wyoming, approximately 19 miles south-southeast of Wright, Wyoming (Figure ES-1). The Antelope Mine is operated by ACC, a subsidiary of Kennecott Energy Company. These federal coal lands are located within the Powder River Federal Coal Region, which was decertified in January 1990. Although the Powder River Federal Coal Region is decertified, the PRRCT, a federal/state advisory board established to develop recommendations concerning management of federal coal in the region, has continued to meet regularly and review all federal lease South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS applications in the region. The PRRCT reviewed these four maintenance coal lease applications at a public meeting held on October 25, 2000, in Cheyenne, Wyoming. The PRRCT recommended that the BLM continue to process all four lease applications at that meeting. To evaluate the environmental impacts of leasing and mining the coal, the BLM must prepare an EA or an EIS to evaluate the sitespecific and cumulative environmental and socioeconomic impacts of leasing and developing the federal coal in the application area. BLM does not authorize mining by issuing a lease for federal coal, but the impacts of mining the coal are considered in this EIS because it is a logical consequence of issuing a lease. The BLM determined that one EIS would be prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts of coal mining that would result from the issuance of these five leases. This EIS has been prepared to evaluate the site-specific and cumulative environmental impacts of leasing and developing the federal coal included in these application areas, as required by NEPA. Scoping for these lease applications was conducted from October 1 to October 31, 2001. A Notice of Scoping and Notice of Intent to Prepare an EIS was published in the Federal Register on October 3, 2001 and in the Gillette News-Record on September 25, 2001 and October 2, 2001. A public scoping meeting was held in Gillette, Wyoming on October 10, 2001.

ES-3

Executive Summary Parties on the distribution list were sent copies of the SPRB Coal Draft EIS in early 2003. A notice announcing the availability of the Draft EIS was published in the Federal Register on February 7, 2003 by the EPA. The BLM published a Notice of Availability/Notice of Public Hearing in the Federal Register on February 20, 2003 and in the Gillette News Record and Douglas Budget on February 5 and February 12, 2003. A comment period on the Draft EIS commenced on February 7, 2003 with publication of the EPA Notice of Availability and ended on April 11, 2003. A public hearing was held at 7:00 pm on March 4, 2003 at the Best Western Tower West Lodge in Gillette, Wyoming. Four speakers commented during the public hearing, and the BLM received 12 written comment letters on the Draft EIS. These comment letters and the responses to those comments are included in Appendix M of this Final EIS. BLM will use the analysis in this EIS to decide whether or not to hold separate public, competitive, sealedbid coal lease sales and issue federal coal leases for the federal coal included in each tract. After a 30day review period on the Final EIS has ended, BLM will make a separate decision to hold or not to hold a competitive lease sale for the federal coal included in each of the five LBA tracts. For each sale that is held, the bidding at that sale would be open to any qualified bidder; it would not be limited to the applicant. For each lease sale that is held, a federal coal lease would be issued to the highest bidder at the ES-4 sale if a federal sale panel determined that the high bid at that sale meets or exceeds the fair market value of the coal as determined by BLM's economic evaluation, and if the U.S. Department of Justice determines that there are no antitrust violations if a lease is issued to the high bidder at the sale. OSM and USDA-FS are cooperating agencies on this EIS. OSM will use the analysis in this EIS to make decisions related to mining the federal coal in these tracts, if they are leased. The USDA-FS is a cooperating agency on this EIS because the NARO North, Little Thunder, and West Roundup LBA Tracts include lands that are part of the TBNG, which is administered by the USDA-FS. The lands in the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts have been subjected to four coal planning screens and determined to be acceptable for consideration for leasing. A decision to lease the federal coal lands in this application would be in conformance with the Approved Resource Management Plan for Public Lands Administered by the Bureau of Land Management Buffalo Field Office (BLM 2001a) [an update of the Buffalo Resource Area Resource Management Plan (BLM 1985a)] and the BLM Platte River Resource Area Resource Management Plan (BLM 1985b). The federal surface lands managed by the USDA-FS in the NARO North, Little Thunder, and West Roundup LBA Tracts are within the area South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Executive Summary evaluated in the USDA-FS Medicine Bow National Forest and Thunder Basin National Grassland Land and Resource Management Plan (USDAFS 1985), the Final EIS for the Northern Great Plains Management Plans Revision (USDA-FS 2001a), and the Land and Management Plan (LRMP) for the Thunder Basin National Grassland (USDA-FS 2001b). The LBA sale process is, by law and regulation, an open, public, competitive sealed-bid process. For each lease sale that is held, the applicant may not be the successful high bidder. The analysis in this EIS assumes that the applicant would be the successful bidder on each LBA tract that is offered for sale and that each tract that is leased would be mined as a maintenance tract for the applicant mine. This draft EIS analyzes different alternatives for each tract. For each tract, the Proposed Action considers leasing the tract as it was applied for. Alternative 1 for each tract is the No Action Alternative. Alternative 1 for each tract considers rejecting the lease application for that tract. Under each Alternative 1, the tract would not be leased but the existing leases at the adjacent mine or mines would be developed according to the existing approved mining and reclamation plans. Selection of the No Action Alternative would not preclude an application to lease any rejected tract in the future. BLM is evaluating adding coal to or removing coal from the tracts in order to avoid potential future bypass situations or to increase the competitiveness of the tracts or the remaining unleased federal coal in this area. These different tract configurations are considered as other alternatives in this EIS. The Proposed Actions and alternatives for the NARO North and South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts are shown in Figure ES-2, ES-3a and 3b, ES-4, ES-5a and 5b, and ES-6, respectively. The Proposed Actions and alternatives are described in Tables ES-1, ES-2, ES-3, and ES-4. Other alternatives that were considered but not analyzed in detail include holding competitive coal lease sales and issuing leases for one or more of the tracts to the successful bidder (not the applicant) for the purpose of developing a new stand-alone mine and delaying the competitive sales of one or more of the LBA tracts. Critical elements of the human environment (BLM 1988) that could be affected by the proposed project include air quality, cultural resources, Native American religious concerns, threatened, endangered, proposed, and candidate plant and animal species, USDA-FS sensitive species, hazardous or solid wastes, water quality, wetlands/riparian zones, environmental justice, and invasive nonnative species. Five critical elements (areas of critical environmental concern, prime and unique farmland, wild and scenic ES-5

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Executive Summary
10 11 12

R. 71 W. R. 70 W. 7

Re no Ro ad

BNSF + UP

Double Tracks

Piney Canyon (Mackey) Road

T. 42 N.
Antelope

T. 42 N. T. 41 N.
1 6 5 4 3
Road

T. 41 N.
3 2

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

LEGEND
North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Permit Boundary NARO North LBA Tract as Applied for (BLM's Preferred Alternative) Existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Federal Coal Leases
0 2500 5000 10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure ES-2. NARO North LBA Tract Configuration.

ES-6

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Executive Summary
14
Tracks

13
Antelo pe Road

R. 71 W. R. 70 W. 18

BNSF + UP

Double

T. 41 N.

26 Campbell County Converse County

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

LEGEND
North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Permit Boundary
0 2500 5000 10000

NARO South LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2

Area Removed Under Alternative 3 Existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Federal Coal Leases

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure ES-3a. NARO South LBA Alternative Tract Configurations.

Tracks

13
Antelo pe Road

R. 71 W. R. 70 W. 18

BNSF + UP

Double

T. 41 N.

26 Campbell County Converse County

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

LEGEND
0 2500 5000 10000

North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Permit Boundary Area Added Under BLM's Preferred Alternative

NARO South LBA Tract as Applied for Existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Federal Coal Leases

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure ES-3b. NARO South LBA Preferred Alternative Tract Configuration.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

ES-7

Executive Summary
R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

25 26

Small Road

T. 44 N. T. 43 N.
3 2 1 6

T. 44 N. T. 43 N.

LEGEND
Black Thunder Mine Permit Boundary Little Thunder LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternatives 2 & 3, also Area Added Under BLM's Preferred Alternative

State Highway 450

7 12

North Tract Under Alternative 3 South Tract Under Alternative 3 Existing Black Thunder Mine Federal Coal Leases

Hilight Road

14 13

27 BNSF + UP Double Tracks

31
0 2500 5000 10000

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure ES-4. Little Thunder LBA Alternative Tract Configurations.

ES-8

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Executive Summary
R. 71 W. R. 70 W. T. 43 N. T. 42 N.
3
BNSF & UP Double Tracks

31 36

Hilight Road

T. 43 N. T. 42 N.

Reno Road

Antelope Road

8 7

9 10

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

LEGEND
0 2500 5000 10000

North Rochelle Mine Permit Boundary West Roundup LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2

Area Added Under Alternative 3 North Rochelle Mine Federal Coal Lease WYW-127221 Modification Area Existing North Rochelle Mine Federal Coal Leases

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure ES-5a. West Roundup LBA Alternative Tract Configurations.

R. 71 W. R. 70 W. T. 43 N. T. 42 N.
3
BNSF & UP Double Tracks

31 36

Hilight Road

T. 43 N. T. 42 N.

Reno Road

Antelope Road

8 7

9 10

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

LEGEND
0 2500 5000 10000

North Rochelle Mine Permit Boundary West Roundup LBA Tract as Applied for

Area Added Under BLM's Preferred Alternative Existing North Rochelle Mine Federal Coal Leases

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure ES-5b. West Roundup LBA Preferred Alternative Tract Configuration.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

ES-9

Executive Summary
R. 71 W.
17 16 15 14
Antelo pe Ro ad

BN SF &

Campbell County Converse County 30 29 28 27 26

Double Tracks

T. 41 N. T. 40 N.

(a.k.a . Ante lope Road )

P &U SF s BN Track le Trip

Co unt yR oa d3 7

59 way High State

R. 71 W.

LEGEND
Antelope Mine Permit Boundary West Antelope LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2 Area Removed Under Alternative 3, also Area Removed Under BLM's Preferred Alternative Existing Antelope Mine Federal Coal Leases

2500

5000

10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure ES-6. West Antelope LBA Alternative Tract Configurations.

ES-10

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Executive Summary Table ES-1. Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts and North Antelope/Rochelle Complex.
No Action Alternative (Existing North Antelope/Rochelle Added by Proposed Action Complex) 877.0 mmt 564.0 mmt 833.2 mmt 506.9 mmt 718 mmt 14,895.50 ac Disturbed2 20,410 ac 27,187 ac 75 mmt 105 mmt 11.0 yrs 1,175 $ 916.5 million $ 686.8 million 4,503.02 ac 6,700 ac 21,035 ac 15 mmt 0 mmt 5.0 yrs 10 $ 557.6 million $ 421.8 million 5,571.19 ac 7,945 ac 21,835 ac 15 mmt 0 mmt 6.0 yrs 10 $ 675.3 million $ 514.4 million 5,326.11 7,700 ac 21,835 ac 15 mmt 0 mmt 5.5 yrs 10 $ 635.0 million $ 483.7 million 3,776.27 ac 4,863 ac 21,035 ac 15 mmt 0 mmt 4.0 yrs 10 $ 478.4 million $ 359.4 million Added by Alternative 2 710.0 mmt 613.9 mmt Added by BLM’s Preferred Alternative 668.1 mmt 577.3 mmt Added by Alternative 3 464.4 mmt 434.9 mmt

Item In-Place Coal (as of 1/1/03) Recoverable Coal (as of 1/1/03)1 Coal Mined Through 2002 Lease Area2 Total Area to be Permit Area2

Average Annual Post-2002 Coal Production Maximum Annual Post-2002 Coal Production (years 2004-2006) Remaining Life of Mine (post2002) Average No. of Employees (at maximum production rate) Total Projected State Revenues (post2002)3 Total Projected Federal Revenues (post-2002)4
1

Assumes 95 percent recovery of leased coal (with the exception of the NARO South Tract as proposed, which is estimated to be 83 percent recovery of leased coal; the NARO South Alternative 2 Tract, which is estimated to be 79 percent recovery of leased coal; the NARO South Preferred Alternative Tract, which is estimated to be 78 percent recovery of leased coal; and NARO South Alternative 3 Tract, which is estimated to be 91 percent recovery of leased coal). For the Proposed Action and Alternatives, the disturbed acreage exceeds the leased acreage because of the need for highwall reduction, topsoil removal and other activities outside the lease boundaries. When added to the existing mine, the permit area is larger than leased or disturbed areas to assure that all disturbed lands are within the permit boundary and to allow easily defined legal land description. Permit areas under the Proposed Action, Preferred Alternative, and Alternatives 2 and 3 are the anticipated permit amendment baseline study areas. Projected revenue to the State of Wyoming is $1.10 per ton of coal sold (UW 1994). Includes income from severance tax, property and production taxes, sales and use taxes, and Wyoming's share of federal royalty payments, bonus bids, and AML fees. Federal revenues are based on $5.00 per ton price amount of recoverable coal federal royalty of 12.5 percent minus State’s 50 percent share, plus $0.35 per ton for AML fees amount of recoverable coal minus State’s 50 percent share, plus $5.00 per ton price amount of recoverable coal black lung tax of 4.0 percent, plus bonus payment on LBA leased coal of $0.26 per ton (based on average of last 11 LBAs) amount of in-place coal minus State’s 50 percent share.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

ES-11

Executive Summary Table ES-2. Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for Little Thunder LBA Tract and Black Thunder Mine.
No Action Alternative (Existing Black Thunder Mine) 899.3 mmt 854.3 mmt 765 mmt 12,772.90 ac 18,476 ac 21,238.0 ac 37.1 mmt 23.0 yrs 580 $ 939.7 million $ 704.2 million 3,449.32 ac 5,424 ac 7,678.0 ac 5.4 mmt 7.5 yrs 0 $ 484.0 million $ 364.8 million 5,083.50 ac 6,577 ac 7,678.0 ac 5.4 mmt 10.1 yrs 0 $ 608.3 million $ 470.6 million 1,065.49 ac 1,382 ac 1,612.4 ac 5.4 mmt 0 yrs 0 $ 123.1 million $ 97.2 million 4,018.01 ac 5,195 ac 6,065.6 ac 5.4 mmt 7.5 yrs 0 $ 485.2 million $ 373.4 million Added by Proposed Action 479.3 mmt 440.0 mmt Added by Alternative 2 (BLM’s Preferred Alternative) 695.3 mmt 553.0 mmt Added by Alternative 3 (North Tract) 155.7 mmt 111.9 mmt Added by Alternative 3 (South Tract) 539.6 mmt 441.1 mmt

Item In-Place Coal (as of 1/1/03) Recoverable Coal (as of 1/1/03)1 Coal Mined Through 2002 Lease Area2 Total Area to be Disturbed2 Permit Area2 Average Annual Post-2002 Coal Production Remaining Life of Mine (post-2002) Average No. of Employees Total Projected State Revenues (post-2002)3 Total Projected Federal Revenues (post-2002)4
1

Assumes 95 percent recovery of leased coal for the No Action Alternative; 92 percent recovery of leased coal for Proposed Action; 79.5 percent recovery of leased coal for Alternative 2; 71.9 percent recovery of leased coal for Alternative 3, North Tract; and 81.8 percent recovery of leased coal for Alternative 3, South Tract. For the Proposed Action and Alternatives, the disturbed acreage exceeds the leased acreage because of the need for highwall reduction, topsoil removal and other activities outside the lease boundaries. When added to the existing mine, the permit area is larger than leased or disturbed areas to assure that all disturbed lands are within the permit boundary and to allow easily defined legal land description. Permit areas under the Proposed Action and Alternatives 2 and 3 are the anticipated permit amendment baseline study areas. Projected revenue to the State of Wyoming is $1.10 per ton of coal sold (UW 1994). Includes income from severance tax, property and production taxes, sales and use taxes, and Wyoming's share of federal royalty payments, bonus bids, and AML fees. Federal revenues are based on $5.00 per ton price amount of recoverable coal federal royalty of 12.5 percent minus State’s 50 percent share, plus $0.35 per ton for AML fees amount of recoverable coal minus State’s 50 percent share, plus $5.00 per ton price amount of recoverable coal black lung tax of 4.0 percent, plus bonus payment on LBA leased coal of $0.26 per ton (based on average of last 11 LBAs) amount of in-place coal minus State’s 50 percent share.

ES-12

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Executive Summary Table ES-3. Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for West Roundup LBA Tract and North Rochelle Mine.
No Action Alternative (Existing North Rochelle Mine) 259.0 mmt 233.0 mmt 73.2 mmt 3,443.50 ac 5,288 ac 7,042.0 ac 35 mmt 6.7 yrs 250 $ 256.3 million $ 193.9 million 1,870.65 ac 3,161 ac 3,228.5 ac 0 mmt 5.0 yrs 150 $ 190.6 million $ 144.2 million 2,652.69 ac 3,161 ac 3,228.5 ac 0 mmt 6.6 yrs 150 $ 254.4 million $ 192.4 million 3,049.93 ac 4,105 ac 3,228.5 ac 0 mmt 8.8 yrs 150 $ 339.1 million $ 256.5 million 2,812.51 ac 3,865 ac 3,228.5 ac 0 mmt 8.2 yrs 150 $ 316.3 million $ 239.2 million Added by Proposed Action 192.6 mmt 173.3 mmt Added by BLM’s Preferred Alternative 319.4 mmt 287.5 mmt

Item In-Place Coal (as of 1/1/03) Recoverable Coal (as of 1/1/03)1 Coal Mined Through 2002 Lease Area2 Total Area to be Disturbed2 Permit Area2 Average Annual Post-2002 Coal Production Remaining Life of Mine (post2002) Average No. of Employees Total Projected State Revenues (post-2002)3 Total Projected Federal Revenues (post-2002)4
1 2

Added by Alternative 2 257.0 mmt 231.3 mmt

Added by Alternative 3 342.6 mmt 308.3 mmt

Assumes 90 percent recovery of leased coal. For the Proposed Action and Alternatives, the disturbed acreage exceeds the leased acreage because of the need for highwall reduction, topsoil removal and other activities outside the lease boundaries. When added to the existing mine, the permit area is larger than leased or disturbed areas to assure that all disturbed lands are within the permit boundary and to allow easily defined legal land description. Permit areas under the Proposed Action and Alternatives 2 and 3 are the anticipated permit amendment baseline study areas. Projected revenue to the State of Wyoming is $1.10 per ton of coal sold (UW 1994). Includes income from severance tax, property and production taxes, sales and use taxes, and Wyoming's share of federal royalty payments, bonus bids, and AML fees. Federal revenues are based on $5.00 per ton price amount of recoverable coal federal royalty of 12.5 percent minus State’s 50 percent share, plus $0.35 per ton for AML fees amount of recoverable coal minus State’s 50 percent share, plus $5.00 per ton price amount of recoverable coal black lung tax of 4.0 percent, plus bonus payment on LBA leased coal of $0.26 per ton (based on average of last 11 LBAs) amount of in-place coal minus State’s 50 percent share.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

ES-13

Executive Summary Table ES-4. Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for West Antelope LBA Tract and Antelope Mine.
No Action Alternative (Existing Antelope Mine) 524.7 mmt 344.6 mmt 320.5 mmt 195.5 mmt 8,019.20 ac 8,821.1 ac 10,848.6 ac 13.4 mmt 24 yrs 265 $ 379.1 million $ 288.6 million 3,542.19 ac 3,200.0 ac 4,328.4 ac 9.6 mmt 0 yr 0 $ 251.2 million $ 195.2 million 3,877.90 ac 3,500.0 ac 4,328.4 ac 10.6 mmt 0 yr 0 $ 279.7 million $ 216.7 million 2,809.13 ac 2,467.0 ac 3,448.4 ac 7.1 mmt 0 yr 0 $ 187.4 million $ 143.4 million Added by Proposed Action 293.9 mmt 245.6 mmt 228.4 mmt Added by Alternative 2 321.8 mmt 273.4 mmt 254.3 mmt Added by Alternative 3 (BLM’s Preferred Alternative) 202.3 mmt 183.2 mmt 170.4 mmt

Item
In-Place Coal (as of 1/1/03) Mineable Coal (as of 1/1/03) Recoverable Coal (as of 1/1/03)1 Coal Mined Through 2002 Lease Area2 Total Area To Be Disturbed2 Permit Area2 Average Annual Post-2002 Coal Production Remaining Life of Mine (post-2002) Average No. of Employees Total Projected State Revenues (post-2002)3 Total Projected Federal Revenues (post-2002)4
1 2

Assumes 93 percent recovery of leased coal remaining after eliminating coal that won’t be mined beneath Antelope Creek and adjacent buffer zone. For the Proposed Action and Alternatives, the disturbed acreage is less than leased acreage because some of the coal is beneath Antelope Creek and the adjacent buffer zone and would not be mined, and because of the need for highwall reduction, topsoil removal and other activities outside the lease boundaries. When added to the existing mine, the permit area is larger than leased or disturbed areas to assure that all disturbed lands are within the permit boundary and to allow easily defined legal land description. Permit areas under the Proposed Action and Alternatives 2 and 3 are the anticipated permit amendment baseline study areas. Projected revenue to the State of Wyoming is $1.10 per ton of coal sold (UW 1994). Includes income from severance tax, property and production taxes, sales and use taxes, and Wyoming's share of federal royalty payments, bonus bids, and AML fees. Federal revenues are based on $5.00 per ton price amount of recoverable coal federal royalty of 12.5 percent minus State’s 50 percent share, plus $0.35 per ton for AML fees amount of recoverable coal minus State’s 50 percent share, plus $5.00 per ton price amount of recoverable coal black lung tax of 4.0 percent, plus bonus payment on LBA leased coal of $0.26 per ton (based on average of last 11 LBAs) amount of in-place coal minus State’s 50 percent share.

ES-14

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

rivers, floodplains, and wilderness) are not present in the project area and are not addressed further. In addition to the critical elements that are potentially present in the project area, this EIS discusses the status and potential effects of the project on topography and physiography, geology and mineral resources, soils, water availability and quality, AVFs, vegetation, wildlife, land use and recreation, paleontological resources, visual resources, noise, transportation resources, and socioeconomics. The General Analysis Area, shown in Figure ES-7, is located in the PRB, a part of the Northern Great Plains that includes most of northeastern Wyoming. The NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts are located in the southcentral part of the PRB, where the elevation ranges from about 4,500 to 5,000 ft. In the General Analysis Area, there are up to four mineable coal seams. The nomenclature for these seams varies from mine operator to mine operator and the number of mineable coal seams varies from tract to tract. There are: • one mineable seam in the West Roundup LBA Tract (referred to by TCC as the Wyodak); • two mineable coal seams in the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts (referred to by PRCC as the WyodakAnderson 1 and 2); • three mineable coal seams in the Little Thunder LBA Tract (referred to by TBCC as the South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

•

Upper, Middle, and Lower Wyodak); and four mineable seams in the West Antelope LBA Tract (referred to by ACC as the Anderson, Lower Anderson, Canyon/Upper Canyon, and Lower Canyon).

Average coal thickness on each LBA tract varies from around 67 ft up to around 98 ft, and interburden between the coal seams varies from 0 to around 100 ft. Average overburden on each tract ranges from around 110 ft to more than 300 ft. The existing topography on each LBA tract that is leased and mined would be substantially changed during mining. A highwall with a vertical height equal to overburden plus coal thickness would exist in the active pits. Following reclamation, the average surface elevation would be lower due to removal of the coal. The reclaimed land surface would approximate premining contours and the basic drainage network would be retained, but the reclaimed surface would contain fewer, gentler topographic features. This could contribute to reduced habitat diversity and wildlife carrying capacity on the LBA tracts after mining and reclamation is completed. These topographic changes would not conflict with regional land use, and the postmining topography would adequately support anticipated land use for each tract. The geology from the base of the coal to the land surface would be subject to considerable permanent ES-15

Executive Summary
R. 71 W. T. 44 N.
Hilight Road

R. 70 W.

R.69W. T. 44 N.

LEGEND
Existing Lease Boundary

Small Road

Jacobs Ranch Mine
State Highway 450

Little Thunder LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternatives 2 & 3 North Tract Under Alternative 3 South Tract Under Alternative 3 Anticipated Permit Amendment Study Area

LITTLE THUNDER LBA
T. 43 N.
Hilight Road

Black Thunder Mine

Sta te

High way 450

T. 43 N.

Road

Cre ek

West Roundup LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2 Area Added Under Alternative 3 North Rochelle Mine Federal Coal Lease WYW-127221 Modification Area Anticipated Permit Amendment Study Area

T. 42 N.

BNSF + UP Double Tracks

Antelope Road

rds wa Ed

Road

WEST Road Reno ROUNDUP LBA

l hoo Sc

North Rochelle Mine
T. 42 N.

NARO NORTH LBA
Antelope
ad Ro

Piney Canyon (Mackey) Road

North Antelope/ Rochelle Complex

NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2
T. 41 N.

T. 41 N.

Area Removed Under Alternative 3 Anticipated Permit Amendment Study Area

WEST ANTELOPE LBA
Campbell County Converse County

Antelope Mine

NARO SOUTH LBA
T. 40 N.

West Antelope LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2 Area Removed Under Alternative 3 Anticipated Permit Amendment Study Area

R. 71 W.

BNS F

) 37 oad P oad eR +U lop ty R nte oun A C .a. (a.k

Tri ple

Tracks

T. 40 N.

Figure ES-7. General Analysis Area.

ES-16

te Sta

59 ay hw Hig

SCALE: 1"= 3 MILES R. 70 W.

R.69W.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Executive Summary change on each LBA tract that is leased and mined under any of the leasing alternatives. The overburden, interburden, and coal would be removed from each LBA tract. The replaced overburden and interburden would be a relatively homogeneous mixture compared to the premining layered overburden. Development of other minerals potentially present on the LBA tracts could not occur during mining, but could occur after mining. Conventional oil and gas wells would have to be plugged and abandoned during mining but could be recompleted after mining if the remaining reserves justify the expense of the recompletion. CBM development and production are occurring in the Wyoming PRB from coal beds of the Wyodak Anderson zone. These are the same (or equivalent) seams that are being mined along the eastern margin of the basin, including the mines which are considered in this analysis. CBM wells presently exist or have been proposed in and around the five LBA tracts in the General Analysis Area. All facilities and equipment associated with oil and gas development (conventional or CBM) that are present on coal leases would have to be removed prior to mining. Royalties would be lost to both the state and federal governments if conventional oil and gas wells are abandoned prematurely, if federal CBM resources are not recovered prior to mining, or if federal coal resources are not recovered due to conflicts South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS between oil and gas development and coal mining. Mining the coal prior to recovery of all of the CBM resources releases CBM into the atmosphere. Consequences to soil resources from mining each LBA tract that is leased would include changes in the physical, biological, and chemical properties. Following reclamation, the soils would be unlike premining soils in texture, structure, color, accumulation of clays, organic matter, microbial populations, and chemical composition. The replaced topsoil would be much more uniform in type, thickness, and texture. It would be adequate in quantity and quality to support planned postmining land uses (i.e., wildlife habitat and rangeland). For surface coal mining, the major types of emissions that affect air quality occur in the form of fugitive dust and exhaust emissions from large motorized equipment. Activities such as blasting, loading, and hauling of overburden and coal, as well as the large areas of disturbed land, produce particulate emissions. Since 1989, the regulated particulate pollutant in Wyoming has been PM10, which matches federal standards. PM10 is particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns or less. The previous regulated pollutant was TSP. Figures ES-8 through ES-11 show the results of dispersion modeling of PM10 that was conducted for each mine to demonstrate that BACT is utilized to control emissions and that the proposed mining activities will not cause or significantly contribute to ES-17

Executive Summary
Reno Road

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
12 7 8 11

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.
7 8 9

15 BNSF + UP Double Tracks

14
Antelope Road

NARO NORTH
21 22 23 24 19 20 21

Payne Road

Piney Canyon (Mackey) Road

T. 42 34 N. T. 41 3 N.

T. 42 N. T. 41 N.

1 6 5

Antelo pe Road

26 27 Campbell County Converse County

T. 41 34 N. T. 40 3 N.

NARO SOUTH
35 36 31 32 33
Irwin

34
Road

PM10= 49.9 g/m
2 1

T. 41 N. T. 40 N.

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.

LEGEND
North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Permit Boundary Ambient Air Boundary Haul Roads Receptor Location Area Source
0 5000 10000 20000

Existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Federal Coal Leases NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2 Area Removed Under Alternative 3 Leases Relinquished by PRCC (See Figure 1-2)

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Source: PRCC(2001b)

Figure ES-8. Maximum Modeled PM 10Concentrations at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Ambient Air Boundary for the Year 2006.

ES-18

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Executive Summary
R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.
24 19

Small Road

T. 44 N. T. 43 N.

4
State Highway 450

Hilight Road

17 17 16 15

PM10= 34.58 g/m
20 21 22

23 BNSF + UP Double Tracks

24
State

High way 450 30

T. 43 32 N. T. 42 5 N.

4
Edwards Road

1
Reno Road

ol ho Sc

12
Antelope Road

9 8

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.

LEGEND
Black Thunder Mine Permit Boundary Ambient Air Boundary Receptor Location Area Source
0 5000 10000 20000

Existing Black Thunder Mine Federal Coal Leases Little Thunder LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternatives 2 & 3 North Tract Under Alternative 3 South Tract Under Alternative 3

Source: Black Thunder Mine's Air Quality Permit MD-417

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure ES-9. Maximum Modeled PM the Year 2026.

10Concentrations

at the Black Thunder Mine Ambient Air Boundary for

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

ES-19

Cre ek

Roa d

T. 43 N. T. 42 N.

Executive Summary
State Highway 450

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.
12 7 8 9

Hilight Road

19 24 State High way 450 25 30

T. 43 N. T. 42 N.

Roa d

T.
34 35 36 31 32 33 43

Cre ek

2
Reno Road

ol ho Sc

Edwards Road

T. 42 N.

10
BNSF + UP Double Tracks

12 Antelope Road

PM 10= 42.7 g/m
24 19

Piney Canyon (Mackey) Road

T. 42 N. T. 41 N.

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.

LEGEND
North Rochelle Mine Permit Boundary Ambient Air Boundary Haul Roads Receptor Location Area Source
0 5000 10000 20000

Existing North Rochelle Mine Federal Coal Leases West Roundup LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2 Area Added Under Alternative 3 North Rochelle Mine Federal Coal Lease WYW-127221 Modification Area

Source: TCC(2003) GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure ES-10. Maximum Modeled PM for the Year 2012.

10Concentrations

at the North Rochelle Mine Ambient Air Boundary

ES-20

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Executive Summary
T. 42 35 N. T. 412 N. R. 72 W. R. 71 W.
BNSF & UP Double Tracks

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
32 33 34 35
Antelope Road

T. 42 N. T. 41 N.

PM 10= 49.2 g/m
7 8

3
9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10

15 14 13 18 17 16 14 13 18 17 16 15

Campbell County Converse County 26 25

30 30 29 28 27 26 25

T. 41 35 N. T. 40 N.
2

T. 41 N. T. 40 N.

59 way High State

22 37 oad d) yR t Roa oun pe C telo An .a. (a.k 27

R. 72 W. R. 71 W.

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

LEGEND
Antelope Mine Permit Boundary Ambient Air Boundary Haul Roads Receptor Location Area Source
0 5000 10000 20000

Existing Antelope Mine Federal Coal Leases West Antelope LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2 Area Removed Under Alternative 3

Source: ACC(2000b)

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure ES-11. Maximum Modeled PM Year 2016.

10Concentrations

at the Antelope Mine Ambient Air Boundary for the

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

ES-21

Executive Summary an exceedance of annual ambient air quality standards. For the results shown in Figures ES-8 through ES-11, the modeled production rates are equal to or greater than the proposed production rates for mining the LBA tracts, if they are leased. Air quality impacts are monitored to determine if mining operations are meeting annual ambient air quality standards. At the four mines included in this analysis, there were a total of seven TSP monitoring samplers and 12 PM10 monitoring samplers in 2002. Prior to April 2001, there were no violations of the PM10 standards anywhere in the Wyoming PRB. Between April 2001 and June 2003, there were 21 monitored exceedances of the 24hour PM10 standard at four mines in the Wyoming PRB. Two of the applicant mines for the LBA tracts being considered in this EIS (North Rochelle and Black Thunder) were responsible for 19 of the 21 exceedances. The annual PM10 levels have also been increasing since the mid-1990s. As a result of these increases in particulate emissions, all PM10 monitors are currently required by WDEQ/AQD to sample air quality for a 24-hour period every three days, beginning in 2002. Prior to 2002, each mine sampled air quality for a 24-hour period every six days at multiple monitoring sites. All of the mines are utilizing BACT measures to control particulate emissions and complying with the increased monitoring frequency. Under Alternative 1, the No Action Alternative, for each of the LBA ES-22 tracts, the impacts to air quality would be the same as those currently permitted. If the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts are leased, these moderately adverse, short-term impacts to air quality would be extended onto the newly leased lands during the time they are mined. The PM10 24-hour NAAQS has not been exceeded at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. If the North Antelope/ Rochelle Complex acquires the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts, an increase in emissions is anticipated due to increased average annual production, increased overburden movement, and increased blast frequency. The PM10 24-hour NAAQS was not exceeded at the Black Thunder Mine prior to 2002. From January 2002 through January 2003, there were five 24-hour exceedances of the PM10 24-hour NAAQS at one of the Black Thunder Mine’s air quality monitoring sites. Two of these exceedances have been flagged in the AIRS database by the WDEQ/AQD as having been impacted by winds in excess of 40 mph during the collection period. As a result, the Black Thunder Mine has implemented additional actions including elimination of unnecessary roads, periodic application of magnesium chloride and surfactants to roads, reducing the dump height of the draglines, and increasing efforts for timely reclamation of disturbed areas.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Executive Summary Emissions associated with mining the Little Thunder LBA Tract are expected to increase over those modeled in Black Thunder Mine’s current air quality permit if the tract is leased. Maximum coal production is anticipated to be 68.5 mmtpy with or without the Little Thunder LBA Tract, but production at this rate would occur for a longer time with the LBA tract. Overburden thickness would increase. Black Thunder Mine, in conjunction with WDEQ/AQD, is developing improvements in emission control activities to remedy current elevated levels of emissions. If the mine cannot demonstrate compliance in a permit for the proposed maximum production rate of 100 mmtpy, a lower maximum production rate and/or further expansion of emission control activities at the mine would have to be evaluated for compliance prior to approval of mining operations on the Little Thunder LBA Tract. The PM10 24-hour NAAQS was not exceeded at the North Rochelle Mine through 2000. During 2001 and 2002, there were a total of 14 exceedances of the PM10 24-hour NAAQS at the North Rochelle Mine’s air quality monitoring sites. Five of these exceedances have been flagged in the AIRS database by the WDEQ/AQD as having been impacted by winds in excess of 40 mph during the collection period. Specific measures implemented at the North Rochelle Mine so far as a result include chemical stabilization of disturbed ground, surface roughening through creation of windrows, and mulching and crimping activities. These measures South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS are being implemented on disturbed acres susceptible to wind scouring, including stockpiles, areas stripped for mine advance, and areas being brought to final grade. In addition, the mine is inter-seeding areas where the recent drought has hindered revegetation success. An increase in emissions is projected if the West Roundup LBA Tract is leased and mined as compared to the currently permitted North Rochelle Mine operation. Coal production is anticipated to be approximately 35 mmtpy, with or without the West Roundup LBA Tract, but production at this rate would occur for a longer time with the LBA tract. Overburden thickness would increase. North Rochelle Mine, in conjunction with WDEQ/AQD, has developed and is continuing to develop emission control measures to remedy current elevated levels of emissions. If compliance cannot be demonstrated in a permit for the proposed production rate of 35 mmtpy, a lower annual production rate and/or further expansion of emission control activities at the mine would have to be evaluated for compliance prior to approval of mining operations on the West Roundup LBA Tract. The PM10 24-hour NAAQS has not been exceeded at the Antelope Mine. If the Antelope Mine acquires the West Antelope LBA Tract, the emissions due to coal and overburden removal operations (i.e., haulage, blasting, etc.) at the maximum planned production rate of 32 mmtpy would occur for a longer period of time than is ES-23

Executive Summary planned in the current approved air quality permit, although ACC does not anticipate that mine life would be extended if they acquire the tract. Blasting is responsible for another type of emission from surface coal mining. Overburden blasting sometimes produces gaseous orange-colored clouds that contain NO2. NO2 is one of several products resulting from the incomplete combustion of the explosives used in the blasting process. There have been no reported events of public exposure to NO2 from blasting activities at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, North Rochelle Mine, or Antelope Mine through 2001. There were several reported incidences of public exposure to NO2 from blasting at the Black Thunder Mine prior to 2001. These mines have all employed measures to control and/or limit public exposure to intermittent, short-term (blasting) releases. Required permit measures have been implemented at the Black Thunder Mine to control/limit public exposure to intermittent, short-term (blasting) releases, including notification of neighbors and workers in the general area of the mine prior to the blast; timing blast detonation to avoid temperature inversions and minimize inconvenience to neighbors; monitoring of weather and atmospheric conditions prior to the decision to detonate a blast; posting of signs on major public roads that enter the general mine area and on all locked gates accessing the active mine area; and closing public roads when ES-24 appropriate to protect the public. No reports of public exposure to NO2 related to blasting at the Black Thunder Mine have been received since early 2001. According to OSM, no citizen complaints related to any blasting in the Wyoming PRB were received by OSM or WDEQ during the 2001 and 2002 evaluation years, which ended on September 30, 2002 (OSM 2002b). Changes in runoff characteristics and sediment discharges would occur during mining of each LBA tract, and erosion rates could reach high values on the disturbed areas because of vegetation removal. However, state and federal regulations require that surface runoff from mined lands be treated to meet effluent standards, so sediment control structures would be used to manage discharges of surface water from the mine permit areas. After mining and reclamation are completed on each tract, surface water flow, quality, and sediment discharge would approximate premining conditions. Mining the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts would enlarge the area of lowered groundwater levels in the coal and overburden aquifers associated with the existing mining operations, as well as the area where the existing coal and overburden aquifers would be removed and replaced by mine backfill. At each mine, drawdown in the adjacent continuous coal aquifer would be expected to increase roughly in proportion to the increase in area affected by mining and South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Executive Summary would extend farther than drawdown in the discontinuous overburden aquifers. The data available indicate that hydraulic properties of the backfill would be comparable to the premining overburden and coal aquifers. TDS concentration levels of groundwater in the backfill would initially be expected to be higher than in the premining overburden and coal aquifers, but would be expected to meet Wyoming Class III standards for use as stock water. AVF investigations conducted within the General Analysis Area have identified AVFs that occur along Porcupine Creek, Antelope Creek, Little Thunder Creek, and North Prong Little Thunder Creek downstream of the LBA tracts. Based on preliminary AVF determinations, it is unlikely that any potential AVFs on the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, or West Roundup LBA Tracts meet the criteria to be significant to agriculture. AVFs that are not significant to agriculture can be disturbed during mining but must be restored as part of the reclamation process. A portion of Antelope Creek within the current Antelope Mine permit area has been designated by WDEQ/LQD as “possible subirrigated AVF of minor importance to agriculture”. A portion of this declared AVF is within the West Antelope LBA Tract, however, ACC’s current approved mining and reclamation plan avoids disturbing Antelope Creek and an adjacent designated buffer zone on existing leases. If they acquire the West Antelope LBA Tract, ACC does not plan to disturb the portion of South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS Antelope Creek and designated buffer zone that passes through the tract. Jurisdictional wetland inventories have been completed on the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts. COE has not yet reviewed or confirmed the wetland inventories covering portions of the LBA tracts, but formal wetlands delineations would be completed prior to mining, as part of the mining permit and approval process, if some or all of the LBA tracts are leased. A maximum of 62.16 acres of jurisdictional and 51.58 acres of non-jurisdictional wetlands would be disturbed if all five LBA tracts are leased and subsequently mined. COE requires replacement of all impacted jurisdictional wetlands in accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Replacement of non-jurisdictional wetlands may be required by the private surface land owner or the surface managing agency. WDEQ/LQD allows and sometimes requires mitigation of non-jurisdictional wetlands affected by mining, depending on the values associated with the wetland features. In Wyoming, once a wetland delineation is completed and verified by COE, it is made a part of the mine permit document. The reclamation plan is then revised to incorporate restoration of at least equal types and number of jurisdictional wetlands. Mining would progressively remove the native vegetation on each LBA tract that is leased. Reclamation and revegetation of this land would occur contemporaneously with ES-25

Executive Summary mining. Re-established vegetation would be dominated by species mandated in the reclamation seed mixtures, which are approved by the WDEQ. The majority of these species would be native to the LBA tracts. Initially, the reclaimed land on each tract would be dominated by grassland vegetation which would be less diverse than the premining vegetation. Estimates for the time it would take to restore sagebrush to premining density levels range from 20 to 100 years. An indirect impact associated with this vegetative change would potentially be a decreased big game habitat carrying capacity. However, a diverse, productive, and permanent vegetative cover would be established on each LBA tract within about 10 years following reclamation, prior to release of the final reclamation bond. The decrease in plant diversity would not seriously affect the potential productivity of the reclaimed areas, and the proposed postmining land uses (wildlife habitat and rangeland) should be achieved even with the changes in vegetation composition and diversity. The reclamation plans for each LBA tract that is leased would also include steps to control invasion by weedy (invasive, nonnative) plant species. The surface of each LBA tract includes privately owned land, and the private landowners would have the right to manipulate the vegetation on their lands as they desire, once the final reclamation bond is released. One threatened plant species, Ute ladies’-tresses, has been found on Antelope Creek, in northwestern ES-26 Converse County. Surveys of potentially suitable habitat have been conducted on the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts during times of flowering of the known population. Ute ladies’tresses orchid individuals were not identified during these surveys. Site-specific wildlife data for the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts were principally obtained from WDEQ/LQD permit applications and annual wildlife reports for the applicant mines. Baseline and annual monitoring surveys cover large perimeters around the existing mine permit areas. Consequently, a majority of the LBA tracts have been surveyed during baseline and annual wildlife surveys for Jacobs Ranch Mine, Black Thunder Mine, North Rochelle Mine, Antelope Mine, and the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. In addition, PRCC conducted wildlife baseline investigations in 2000 on the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts, TBCC conducted wildlife baseline investigations in 2002 on the Little Thunder LBA Tract, TCC conducted wildlife baseline investigations in 2002 on the West Roundup LBA Tract, and ACC initiated wildlife baseline investigations in 2003 on the West Antelope LBA Tract and will complete the baseline survey in 2004. No crucial big game habitat or migration corridors are recognized by the WGFD in the General Analysis Area. In the short term, wildlife would be displaced from the LBA tracts in areas of active mining. Habitat would be South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Executive Summary disturbed in parcels, with reclamation progressing as new disturbance occurs. In the long term, following reclamation, carrying capacity and habitat diversity may be reduced due to flatter topography, less diverse vegetative cover, and reduction in sagebrush density. Upland game birds known to occur within the General Analysis Area include mourning doves, wild turkey, gray partridge, sharp-tailed grouse, and sage grouse. Although mourning doves are common seasonal residents of the General Analysis Area, the primary upland game species within the area is the sage grouse. Sage grouse are yearlong residents and are found to regularly occur in suitable habitats in the General Analysis Area. Three currently inactive and two active sage grouse leks have been surveyed in the vicinity of the LBA tracts, but none of these active or inactive sage leks are located on any of the LBA tracts. Raptor species that commonly nest in the General Analysis Area are the golden eagle, ferruginous hawk, redtailed hawk, Swainson’s hawk, great horned owl, and burrowing owl. Each of the four applicant mines annually monitors territorial occupancy and nest productivity on and around their existing leases. Raptor nesting activity has frequently occurred in active mining and construction areas and the four applicant mines have successfully executed state-of-the-art mitigation techniques to protect nest productivity. There is an approved raptor mitigation plan for each of South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS the existing applicant mines. These monitoring and mitigation plans would be amended to include the NARO North and South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts if they are leased. The amended raptor mitigation plans would be subject to review and approval by USFWS before the amended mining plan is approved. Federally listed T&E wildlife species that may occur in the General Analysis Area include bald eagle (threatened), black-footed ferret (endangered), and black-tailed prairie dog (candidate). The habitat requirements for, occurrences of, and potential project effects on these species are included in Appendices G though J. On September 9, 2003, USFWS published a withdrawal of the proposed rule to list the mountain plover as threatened (USFWS 2003); however, the information on this species is also included in the appendices listed above. Some wildlife surveys conducted on the NARO North and South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts have been specifically conducted for T&E species, others did not specifically target T&E species, but habitats for listed species and occurrences of listed species were observed and noted. Bald eagles have recently been observed in the vicinity of each of the five LBA tracts during wildlife surveys conducted for the applicant mines. Bald eagle roosts and unique or concentrated sources of carrion or prey have not been documented in the study areas for any of the LBA tracts. Black-footed ES-27

Executive Summary ferrets are rare and very unlikely to occur in the vicinity of any of the LBA tracts. They are closely associated with prairie dogs. With the exception of a single skull collected during baseline studies for the Antelope Mine in 1979, no evidence of ferrets has been recorded during surveys in or around the LBA tracts. Mountain plovers may also be associated with prairie dog colonies. There have been no sightings of mountain plover in the vicinity of the West Roundup LBA Tract. There have been occasional sightings of mountain plovers in the vicinity of the NARO North, NARO South, and Little Thunder LBA Tracts. The mountain plover is a regular migrant and summer resident in the vicinity of the Antelope Mine and portions of the West Antelope LBA Tract. There are black-tailed prairie dog colonies located on existing coal leases and on the NARO South, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts. Active mining would preclude other land uses. Recreational use is severely limited during mining operations. The surface estate of the NARO South and West Antelope LBA Tracts is all privately owned. On private lands, access for recreational use is determined by the landowner. Portions of the surface estate of the NARO North, Little Thunder, and West Roundup LBA Tracts are part of the TBNG, which is administered by the USDAFS. Access to these lands would be restricted during mining and reclamation. Energy development in the PRB (primarily coal mining and oil and gas development) has and ES-28 will continue to contribute to a reduction in hunting opportunities for some animals (pronghorn, mule deer, and sage grouse). Leasing the LBA tracts would result in reductions of livestock grazing (cattle and sheep), loss of wildlife habitat (particularly big game), and curtailment of oil and gas development on the LBA tracts during coal removal and reclamation activities. This would include removal of all existing oil and gas surface and downhole production and transportation equipment and facilities. New drilling would not be possible in areas of active mining, but could potentially take place in areas not being mined, or in reclaimed areas. CBM that is not recovered prior to removal of the coal would be lost through venting. Wildlife and livestock use would be displaced while the tracts are being mined and reclaimed. Access for recreational (hunting) and other (ranching, oil and gas development) activities would be restricted during mining operations. Cultural resources on the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts would be impacted by mining, but adverse impacts would be mitigated through data recovery and/or avoidance of significant properties. Formal Wyoming SHPO consultation is required for concurrence with determination of the eligibility of sites for inclusion on the NRHP prior to mining. The eligible cultural properties on each LBA tract which cannot be avoided or which have not already been subjected to data recovery action South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Executive Summary would be carried forward in the mining and reclamation plan as requiring protective stipulations until a testing, mitigation, or data recovery program is developed in consultation with the SHPO. No sites of Native American religious or cultural importance have been identified on the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, or West Antelope LBA Tracts. If such sites or localities are identified at a later date, appropriate action must be taken to address concerns related to those sites. No unique or significant paleontological resources have been identified on the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts, and the likelihood of encountering significant paleontological resources is small. Mining activities at the existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, and Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mines are currently visible from State Highway 450, State Highway 59, County Road 37, Antelope Road, Reno Road, and Edwards Road. Mining activities on the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts would also be visible from these roads. No unique visual resources have been identified on or near any of the LBA tracts. The landscape character would not be significantly changed following reclamation. Noise levels on the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS Tracts would be increased considerably by mining activities such as blasting, excavating, loading, and hauling. Because of the remoteness of the LBA tracts and because mining is already ongoing in the area, there would be few new off-site noise impacts. After mining and reclamation are completed, noise would return to premining levels. No new or reconstructed transportation facilities would be required if the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts are leased and subsequently mined. Leasing the LBA tracts would extend the length of time that coal is shipped from the permitted North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder Mine, and North Rochelle Mine. Mine life would not be increased for the Antelope Mine, but average annual coal production levels would be higher. Active pipelines and utility lines would have to be relocated in accordance with previous agreements, or agreements would have to be negotiated for their removal or relocation. Socioeconomic impacts resulting from the leasing and subsequent mining of the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts would include an increase in federal, state, and local revenues as a result of the coal bonus and royalty payments as well as severance and property taxes. Royalty and bonus payments for the federal coal in the LBA tracts would ES-29

Executive Summary be split with the state. If the five LBA tracts are leased and mined as proposed, cumulative federal revenues would be about $1.1 billion, assuming a coal bonus of 26 cents per ton (the average of bonus payments for past coal lease sales in the Wyoming PRB) and a coal price of $5.00 per ton. A 1994 University of Wyoming study estimated that the total direct fiscal benefit to the State of Wyoming from coal mining taxes and royalties is $1.10 per ton of coal produced. Using that estimate, if the five LBA tracts are leased and mined as proposed, cumulative state revenues would be about $1.5 billion. Mine life would be extended and employment would be increased or maintained at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder Mine, and North Rochelle Mine. Mine life and employment would be stable at the Antelope Mine, but maximum production levels would be extended. Economic stability would be maintained in the communities in this area without placing major additional demands on the existing infrastructure or services. With regard to Environmental Justice issues, it was determined that potentially adverse impacts would not disproportionately affect minorities, low-income groups, or Native American tribes or groups. No tribal lands or Native American communities are included in the General Analysis Area, and no Native American treaty rights or Native American trust resources are known to exist for this area. ES-30 Under the No Action Alternative, the impacts described in the preceding paragraphs to topography and physiology, geology and minerals, soils, air quality, water resources, AVFs, wetlands, vegetation, wildlife, threatened, endangered, proposed, and candidate species, USDA-FS sensitive species, land use and recreation, cultural resources, Native American concerns, paleontological resources, visual resources, noise, transportation, and socioeconomics would occur on the existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder Mine, North Rochelle Mine, and Antelope Mine coal leases, but these impacts would not be extended onto the LBA tracts. Portions of the LBA tracts adjacent to the existing applicant mines would be disturbed to recover the coal in the existing leases. Selection of the No Action Alternative would not preclude an application to lease any rejected tract in the future. If impacts are identified during the leasing process that are not mitigated by existing required mitigation measures, BLM can include additional mitigation measures, in the form of stipulations on new leases, within the limits of its regulatory authority. BLM has not identified additional special stipulations that should be added if the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, or West Antelope LBA Tracts are leased, or areas where additional or increased monitoring measures are recommended. Cumulative impacts result from the incremental impacts of an action South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Executive Summary added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless of who is responsible for such actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor, but collectively significant, actions occurring over time. Since decertification of the Powder River Federal Coal Region in 1990, the BLM Wyoming State Office has issued 11 new federal coal leases containing approximately 3.2 billion tons of coal using the LBA process. This leasing process has undergone the scrutiny of two appeals to the Interior Board of Land Appeals and one audit by the General Accounting Office. Applications are currently pending for eight additional federal coal tracts, including the applications for the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts. These eight pending LBA applications include an estimated 2.1 billion tons of coal. All of the pending applications have been reviewed and recommended for processing by the PRRCT. Four regional EISs evaluating coal development in the PRB in Wyoming have previously been prepared. They are: Final Environmental Impact Statement, Eastern Powder River Coal Basin of Wyoming, BLM, October 1974; Final Environmental Impact Statement, Eastern Powder River Coal, BLM, March 1979; Final Environmental Impact Statement, Powder River Coal Region, BLM, December 1981; and Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Round II Coal Lease Sale, Powder River Region, BLM, January 1984. Since 1989, coal production in the PRB has increased by approximately 6.8 percent per year. The increasing state production is primarily due to increasing sales of low-sulfur, lowcost PRB coal to electric utilities who must comply with Phase I requirements of Title III of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. Electric utilities account for 97 percent of Wyoming's coal sales. Oil production has decreased in the Wyoming PRB since 1990, but natural gas production has been increasing, particularly in Campbell County. This is due to the development of shallow CBM resources west of the coal mines. CBM exploration and production are currently ongoing throughout the Wyoming PRB. Since the early 1990s, BLM has completed numerous EAs and EISs analyzing CBM projects. The most recent of these is the Final Environmental Impact Statement and Proposed Plan Amendment for the Powder River Basin Oil and Gas Project (BLM 2003a), which was mailed to the public in January 2003. It analyzes the potential impacts of constructing and operating about 39,400 new CBM wells and 3,200 new conventional wells and associated facilities, starting in 2002 and continuing for 10 years. The project area for this analysis ES-31

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Executive Summary encompasses approximately eight million acres, and includes all or portions of Campbell, Converse, Sheridan, and Johnson Counties in northeastern Wyoming. Under the current process for approving CBM drilling, CBM wells can be drilled on private and state oil and gas leases after approval by the WOGCC and the Wyoming SEO. On federal oil and gas leases, BLM must analyze the individual and cumulative environmental impacts of all drilling, as required by NEPA, before CBM drilling can be authorized. CBM wells have been drilled in or around the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts. CBM drilling and production are expected to continue in the areas around the coal mines and on the LBA tracts. Due to the proximity of the coal mining and CBM production operations, cumulative impacts to groundwater, surface water, air quality, and wildlife have occurred and are likely to continue as more CBM resources are developed adjacent to existing surface coal mines. Other minerals or materials that are produced in the Wyoming PRB include uranium, bentonite, and scoria. Other mineral development levels in the Wyoming PRB are currently lower than predicted in the regional EISs. In addition to the ongoing coal mining and leasing and the CBM development, there are other projects which are in progress or have been proposed in the Wyoming PRB. These projects include the ES-32 Two Elk 300-Mw coal-fired power plant proposed for construction by NAPG east of the Black Thunder Mine; the Wygen II 500-Mw coalfired power plant that would be built near the Wyodak Mine east of Gillette by Black Hills Corporation; the proposed DM&E rail line; the Two Elk Unit Two 500-Mw coal-fired power plant, which NAPG also proposes to build east of the Black Thunder Mine; and construction and operation by NAPG of another 500-Mw coal-fired power plant, the Middle Bear facility, near the Cordero-Rojo Mining Complex. The existing development in the PRB has resulted in the introduction of roads, railroads, power lines, fences, mine structures, and oil and gas production equipment, and this will continue as development in the PRB continues. This area has already undergone change from a semiagricultural-based economy to a coal mining and oil and gas economy. Environmentally, the open, basically treeless landscape has been visibly altered by construction, equipment, and human activities. BLM estimates that approximately 108,010.9 acres of federal coal are currently leased in Campbell and Converse Counties. This represents approximately 1.9 percent of the combined areas of Campbell and Converse Counties. If the five LBA tracts are leased under BLM’s Preferred Alternatives, approximately 16,000 additional acres would be added. The acres of leased federal coal leases would increase to approximately 2.2 percent of the combined areas of South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Executive Summary Campbell and Converse Counties. If the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts are leased, the total area that would be affected by mining would increase, but the tracts would be mined as maintenance tracts for existing mines. Mining disturbance is progressive with reclamation proceeding contemporaneously. Cumulative impacts vary by resource and range from being almost undetectable to being substantial. Cumulative impacts on air quality, groundwater quantity and quality, and wildlife habitat have created the greatest concern. An air quality impact assessment predicting potential far-field cumulative air quality impacts, using the EPA CALMET/CALPUFF dispersion modeling system, has been prepared to predict maximum potential air quality impacts at mandatory federal PSD Class I areas downwind of proposed oil and gas development in the PRB in northeast Wyoming and southeast Montana. The assessment considered potential air pollutant emission sources from proposed CBM development in Wyoming and Montana combined with other reasonably foreseeable development (RFD) emission sources to predict the total potential cumulative impact to air quality. Surface coal mining operations in Montana and Wyoming were included as other RFD emission sources in this assessment. The cumulative far-field impacts predicted in this air quality impact assessment would be the same under the Proposed Action and all of the alternatives for leasing or not leasing federal coal considered in this EIS because the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts are all maintenance tracts, which would be leased to extend operations at existing mines. Selection of any of the leasing alternatives considered in this EIS would not introduce new sources of impacts to air quality, but would change the location of the sources of those impacts to the newly leased tracts and would extend the period of time that those existing sources would be in operation. Selection of any or all of the No Action Alternatives (Alternative 1) considered in this EIS (not leasing the coal included in one or more of the LBA tracts) would not affect any of the currently approved mining operations on existing leases. Coal mines develop predictive models to assess the potential air quality impacts of their mining operations. The predictive modeling conducted for PRB mines indicates that mining operations do not have significant off-site particulate pollution impacts, even when production and pollution from neighboring mines are considered. This modeling is based on the assumption that mining activities are sufficiently removed from the permit boundaries and that neighboring mines are not actively mining in the immediate vicinity (within 0.6 to 2.5 miles). In cases where mines are in close proximity (within two miles), WDEQ/AQD follows a modeling ES-33

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Executive Summary protocol which accounts for all mine-generated particulate air pollutants from all nearby mines to determine impacts to ambient air quality. Examples of the impacts predicted by these models are shown in Figures ES-8 through ES11. Figure ES-12 shows modeled and extrapolated worst-case coal aquifer drawdown as a result of surface coal mining at the mines located south and east of Wright, Wyoming, if the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts are leased. Currently, coal drawdowns from the Jacobs Ranch, Black Thunder, and North Rochelle Mines have coalesced, and drawdowns from the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex and Antelope Mine have coalesced. The areas of drawdown from the five southern mines will coalesce in the future with or without the addition of mining activity on the five LBA tracts considered in this EIS. Modeling indicated that the groundwater impacts from CBM development and surface coal mining would be additive in nature and that the addition of CBM development would extend the area experiencing a loss in hydraulic head to the west of the mining area. Monitoring of backfill areas indicates that reclaimed areas are being recharged with water generally suitable for livestock use (the premining use). Wildlife habitat quality has declined in the PRB due to a continuing trend of landscape fragmentation from roads, rail lines, oil and gas wells, coal mines, and fences. ES-34 Under the Preferred Alternatives, approximately 16,000 acres of federal coal included in the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts would be leased and mined. Including the LBA tracts, approximately 1.4 percent of the Cheyenne River Pronghorn Herd Unit, 10.7 percent of the Hilight Pronghorn Herd Unit, and 5.3 percent of the Thunder Basin Mule Deer Herd Unit would be affected by surface coal mining operations. Cumulative impacts to raptors as a result of disturbance of raptor nesting and foraging habitat related to surface coal mining and CBM development would include increases in vehicular traffic in and around the LBA tracts and existing mining operations, which may result in increased road kill and associated increases in collisions with bald eagles or other raptors feeding on carrion. While no sage grouse leks are located on the LBA tracts, the cumulative effects to sage grouse and other upland game birds that would be expected as a result of existing and proposed surface coal mining and other current, proposed, and future activities, such as oil and gas development, agriculture, and urban development, may include an increase in sage grouse mortality; displacement and harassment, and physical disturbance of sage grouse leks and nesting and brooding areas. Disturbance from existing and proposed operations at the five surface coal mines within the General Analysis Area, including the five SPRB LBA Tracts, would affect approximately six percent of the Cheyenne River drainage area. Cumulative impacts to aquatic South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Executive Summary
R. 75 W. T. 45 N. R. 74 W. R. 73 W. R. 72 W. R. 71 W. R. 70 W. R. 69 W. T. 45 N.

CBM Production has Significantly Affected the Extent of Drawdown in this Area Campbell County

Weston County

5'
T. 44 N.

5' 5'

T. 44 N.

Jacobs Ranch Mine T. 43 N. Black Thunder Mine North Rochelle Mine T. 42 N. North Antelope/ Rochelle Complex T. 41 N. West Antelope LBA

T. 43 N.

Little Thunder LBA West Roundup LBA NARO North LBA

T. 42 N.

5'
NARO South LBA

5' 5'
T. 41 N. Campbell County Converse County

Antelope Mine T. 40 N.

T. 40 N.

T. 39 N.

R. 75 W.

R. 74 W.

R. 73 W.

R. 72 W.

R. 71 W.

R. 70 W.

R. 69 W.

LEGEND
Proposed Lease Boundary Existing Lease Boundary Extent of Jacobs Ranch Mine Drawdown (Including North Jacobs Ranch LBA Tract) Extent of Black Thunder Mine Drawdown (Including Little Thunder LBA Tract) Extent of North Rochelle Mine Drawdown (Including West Roundup LBA Tract) Extent of North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Drawdown (Including NARO North and South LBA Tracts) Extent of Antelope Mine Drawdown (Including West Antelope LBA Tract)
0 20000

Extent of Drawdown Due to all Anticipated Mining. Source: USGS CHIA Study (Martin et al. 1988). Cumulative Worst-Case Drawdown for Jacobs Ranch Mine, Black Thunder Mine, North Rochelle Mine, North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, and Antelope Mine (Including the Five LBA Tracts Included in this EIS). Approximate Wyodak Coal Outcrop Line Clinker Area of Greater than 5 ft. Measured Drawdown in 20 years of Mining (1980 - 2000) (Hydro-Engineering 2001)
40000 80000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure ES-12. Extrapolated Worst-Case Wyodak Coal Aquifer Drawdown Scenarios Showing Extent of Actual 20-Year Drawdowns and USGS Modeled Cumulative Drawdowns.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

ES-35

Executive Summary species that would be expected as a result of surface coal mining, oil and gas development, and agriculture effects on the area’s waterways, such as fluctuations in natural streamflow and changes in water quality, including increases in sedimentation, salt concentrations, and other contaminants, may include changes in species’ habitats and diversity. Cumulative impacts to most wildlife would increase as additional habitat is disturbed but would moderate as more land is reclaimed. Wildlife monitoring indicates that wildlife use reclaimed areas, although population levels in reclaimed areas may not reach predisturbance levels. This EIS presents the BLM's analysis of environmental impacts under authority of the NEPA and associated rules and guidelines. The BLM will use this analysis to make separate decisions to lease or not lease the federal coal included in the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts. A decision to hold a competitive sale and issue a lease for the lands in any of these applications is a prerequisite for mining, but it is not the enabling action that would allow mining to begin. The BLM does not authorize mining operations by issuing a lease. After a lease has been issued, but prior to mine development, the lessee must file a permit application package with the WDEQ/LQD and OSM for a surface mining permit and approval of the MLA mining plan. An analysis of a detailed sitespecific mining and reclamation plan occurs at that time.

ES-36

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................ES-1 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 1-1 1.1 Purpose and Need for Action.................................................... 1-14 1.2 Regulatory Authority and Responsibility .................................. 1-18 1.3 Relationship to BLM Policies, Plans, and Programs.................. 1-20 1.4 Conformance with Existing Land Use Plans ............................. 1-20 1.5 Consultation and Coordination................................................ 1-24 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES .......................................... 2-1 2.1 Proposed Action and Alternatives for the NARO North LBA Tract ......................................................................................... 2-5 2.1.1 NARO North LBA Tract Proposed Action ...................... 2-5 2.1.2 NARO North LBA Tract Alternative 1 ........................... 2-9 2.2 Proposed Action and Alternatives for the NARO South LBA Tract ....................................................................................... 2-10 2.2.1 NARO South LBA Tract Proposed Action.................... 2-10 2.2.2 NARO South LBA Tract Alternative 1 ......................... 2-14 2.2.3 NARO South LBA Tract Alternative 2 ......................... 2-15 2.2.4 NARO South LBA Tract Alternative 3 ......................... 2-17 2.3 Proposed Action and Alternatives for the Little Thunder LBA Tract ....................................................................................... 2-18 2.3.1 Little Thunder LBA Tract Proposed Action ................. 2-18 2.3.2 Little Thunder LBA Tract Alternative 1 ...................... 2-23 2.3.3 Little Thunder LBA Tract Alternative 2 ...................... 2-23 2.3.4 Little Thunder LBA Tract Alternative 3 ...................... 2-25 2.4 Proposed Action and Alternatives for the West Roundup LBA Tract ....................................................................................... 2-27 2.4.1 West Roundup LBA Tract Proposed Action ................ 2-27 2.4.2 West Roundup LBA Tract Alternative 1...................... 2-31 2.4.3 West Roundup LBA Tract Alternative 2...................... 2-32 2.4.4 West Roundup LBA Tract Alternative 3...................... 2-33 2.5 Proposed Action and Alternatives for the West Antelope LBA Tract ....................................................................................... 2-35 2.5.1 West Antelope LBA Tract Proposed Action ................. 2-35 2.5.2 West Antelope LBA Tract Alternative 1....................... 2-39 2.5.3 West Antelope LBA Tract Alternative 2....................... 2-40 2.5.4 West Antelope LBA Tract Alternative 3....................... 2-41 2.6 Alternatives Considered but Not Analyzed in Detail.................. 2-43 2.6.1 Alternative 4.............................................................. 2-43 2.6.2 Alternative 5.............................................................. 2-44 2.7 Comparison of Alternatives...................................................... 2-46 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT................................................................ 3-1 3.1 General Setting ......................................................................... 3-1 i

2.0

3.0

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Table of Contents 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 Topography and Physiography................................................... 3-3 Geology ..................................................................................... 3-3 3.3.1 Mineral Resources....................................................... 3-6 Soils.......................................................................................... 3-9 Air Quality and Climate........................................................... 3-10 3.5.1 Topography ............................................................... 3-11 3.5.2 Climate and Meteorology ........................................... 3-11 3.5.3 Regulatory Framework .............................................. 3-11 3.5.4 Existing Air Quality ................................................... 3-20 3.5.5 Historical Ambient Air Quality: Particulates.............. 3-23 3.5.5.1 Regional ...................................................... 3-23 3.5.5.2 Site Specific ................................................ 3-25 3.5.5.3 Control Measures........................................ 3-27 3.5.6 Historical Ambient Air Quality: NO2 .......................... 3-28 3.5.6.1 Regional ...................................................... 3-28 3.5.6.2 Site Specific ................................................ 3-29 3.5.7 Air Quality Related Values - Visibility and Acidification of Lakes ................................................ 3-31 3.5.7.1 Visibility...................................................... 3-31 3.5.7.2 Acidification of Lakes .................................. 3-33 Water Resources ..................................................................... 3-33 3.6.1 Groundwater............................................................. 3-33 3.6.2 Surface Water ........................................................... 3-36 3.6.3 Water Rights ............................................................. 3-38 Alluvial Valley Floors ............................................................... 3-40 Wetlands................................................................................. 3-43 Vegetation ............................................................................... 3-45 Wildlife.................................................................................... 3-46 3.10.1 Big Game .................................................................. 3-49 3.10.2 Other Mammals ........................................................ 3-50 3.10.3 Raptors ..................................................................... 3-51 3.10.4 Game Birds ............................................................... 3-52 3.10.5 Migratory Bird Species of Management Concern in Wyoming ................................................................... 3-54 3.10.6 Other Species............................................................ 3-56 3.10.7 Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Animal Species, USDA-FS Region 2 Sensitive Species, and BLM Sensitive Species........................... 3-57 Ownership and Use of Land .................................................... 3-57 Cultural Resources.................................................................. 3-76 Native American Consultation ................................................. 3-78 Paleontological Resources........................................................ 3-79 Visual Resources..................................................................... 3-80 Noise....................................................................................... 3-81 Transportation Facilities.......................................................... 3-82 Socioeconomics ....................................................................... 3-88 3.18.1 Population................................................................. 3-88 South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.6

3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10

3.11 3.12 3.13 3.14 3.15 3.16 3.17 3.18

Table of Contents 3.18.2 Local Economy .......................................................... 3-88 3.18.3 Employment.............................................................. 3-92 3.18.4 Housing .................................................................... 3-93 3.18.5 Local Government Facilities and Services .................. 3-94 3.18.6 Social Conditions ...................................................... 3-94 3.18.7 Environmental Justice .............................................. 3-95 3.19 Hazardous and Solid Waste ..................................................... 3-96 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES.................................................. 4-1 4.1 Direct and Indirect Impacts of Action Alternatives ..................... 4-6 4.1.1 Topography and Physiography..................................... 4-6 4.1.2 Geology ....................................................................... 4-9 4.1.2.1 Mineral Resources....................................... 4-12 4.1.3 Soils.......................................................................... 4-16 4.1.4 Air Quality – Direct and Indirect Environmental Consequences ........................................................... 4-19 4.1.4.1 Regulatory Background............................... 4-19 4.1.4.2 Specific Regulatory Applicability.................. 4-22 4.1.4.3 Existing Air Quality Issues .......................... 4-24 4.1.4.4 NARO North and South LBA Tracts ............. 4-27 4.1.4.5 Little Thunder LBA Tract............................. 4-32 4.1.4.6 West Roundup LBA Tract ............................ 4-38 4.1.4.7 West Antelope LBA Tract ............................. 4-44 4.1.5 Water Resources ....................................................... 4-49 4.1.6 Alluvial Valley Floors ................................................. 4-68 4.1.7 Wetlands................................................................... 4-70 4.1.8 Vegetation ................................................................. 4-71 4.1.9 Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Plant Species, USDA-FS Region 2 Sensitive Species, and BLM Sensitive Species........................... 4-73 4.1.10 Wildlife...................................................................... 4-74 4.1.11 Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Wildlife Species, USDA-FS Region 2 Sensitive Species, and BLM Sensitive Species........................... 4-82 4.1.12 Land Use and Recreation........................................... 4-82 4.1.13 Cultural Resources.................................................... 4-84 4.1.14 Native American Concerns......................................... 4-84 4.1.15 Paleontological Resources.......................................... 4-84 4.1.16 Visual Resources....................................................... 4-85 4.1.17 Noise......................................................................... 4-85 4.1.18 Transportation Facilities............................................ 4-86 4.1.19 Socioeconomics ......................................................... 4-87 4.1.20 Hazardous and Solid Waste....................................... 4-90 4.2 No Action Alternative............................................................... 4-91 4.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation, and Monitoring................. 4-92 4.4 Residual Impacts..................................................................... 4-99 4.4.1 Topography and Physiography................................... 4-99 iii

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Table of Contents 4.4.2 4.4.3 4.4.4 4.4.5 4.4.6 4.4.7 4.4.8 4.4.9 4.4.10 Geology and Minerals ................................................ 4-99 Soils.......................................................................... 4-99 Air Quality ................................................................ 4-99 Water Resources ..................................................... 4-100 Alluvial Valley Floors ............................................... 4-100 Wetlands................................................................. 4-100 Vegetation ............................................................... 4-100 Wildlife.................................................................... 4-100 Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Species, USDA-FS Region 2 Sensitive Species, and BLM Sensitive Species ...................................... 4-100 4.4.11 Land Use and Recreation......................................... 4-100 4.4.12 Cultural Resources.................................................. 4-101 4.4.13 Native American Concerns....................................... 4-101 4.4.14 Paleontological Resources........................................ 4-101 4.4.15 Visual Resources..................................................... 4-101 4.4.16 Noise....................................................................... 4-101 4.4.17 Transportation Facilities.......................................... 4-101 4.4.18 Socioeconomics ....................................................... 4-101 Cumulative Impacts .............................................................. 4-101 4.5.1 Topography and Physiography................................. 4-111 4.5.2 Geology and Minerals .............................................. 4-111 4.5.3 Soils........................................................................ 4-112 4.5.4 Air Quality .............................................................. 4-113 4.5.4.1 Emission Sources...................................... 4-115 4.5.4.2 Predicted Air Quality Impacts .................... 4-117 4.5.4.3 Cumulative Impacts .................................. 4-119 4.5.5 Water Resources ..................................................... 4-128 4.5.6 Alluvial Valley Floors ............................................... 4-142 4.5.7 Wetlands................................................................. 4-142 4.5.8 Vegetation ............................................................... 4-143 4.5.9 Wildlife.................................................................... 4-145 4.5.10 Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Species, USDA-FS Region 2 Sensitive Species, and BLM Sensitive Species ..................................... 4-150 4.5.11 Land Use and Recreation......................................... 4-150 4.5.12 Cultural Resources.................................................. 4-152 4.5.13 Native American Concerns....................................... 4-152 4.5.14 Paleontological Resources........................................ 4-153 4.5.15 Visual Resources..................................................... 4-153 4.5.16 Noise....................................................................... 4-153 4.5.17 Transportation Facilities.......................................... 4-154 4.5.18 Socioeconomics ....................................................... 4-154 The Relationship Between Local Short-term Uses of Man’s Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-term Productivity ...................................................... 4-157 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources....... 4-159 South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.5

4.6 4.7 iv

Table of Contents 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION............................................... 5-1 REFERENCES CITED ......................................................................... 6-1 GLOSSARY ......................................................................................... 7-1 INDEX ................................................................................................ 8-1 LIST OF FIGURES Figure ES-1. Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure ES-2. ES-3a. ES-3b. ES-4. ES-5a. ES-5b. ES-6. ES-7. ES-8. General Location Map with Federal Coal Leases and LBA Tracts .........................................................................ES-2 NARO North LBA Tract Configuration .................................ES-6 NARO South LBA Alternative Tract Configurations..............ES-7 NARO South LBA Preferred Tract Configuration..................ES-7 Little Thunder LBA Alternative Tract Configurations ...........ES-8 West Roundup LBA Alternative Tract Configurations ..........ES-9 West Roundup LBA Preferred Tract Configuration...............ES-9 West Antelope LBA Alternative Tract Configurations .........ES-10 General Analysis Area.......................................................ES-16 Maximum Modeled PM10 Concentrations at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Ambient Air Boundary for the Year 2006 ...................................................................ES-18 Maximum Modeled PM10 Concentrations at the Black Thunder Mine Ambient Air Boundary for the Year 2026....ES-19 Maximum Modeled PM10 Concentrations at the North Rochelle Mine Ambient Air Boundary for the Year 2012 ....ES-20 Maximum Modeled PM10 Concentrations at the Antelope Mine Ambient Air Boundary for the Year 2016 ..................ES-21 Extrapolated Worst-Case Wyodak Coal Aquifer Drawdown Scenarios Showing Extent of Actual 20-Year Drawdowns and USGS Modeled Cumulative Drawdowns ......................................................................ES-35 General Location Map with Federal Coal Leases and LBA Tracts ................................................................................. 1-2 North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Federal Coal Leases and NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts as Applied for ...... 1-7 Black Thunder Mine Federal Coal Leases and Little Thunder LBA Tract as Applied for ......................................... 1-9 North Rochelle Mine Federal Coal Leases and West Roundup LBA Tract as Applied for ...................................... 1-12 Antelope Mine Federal Coal Leases and West Antelope LBA Tract as Applied for ..................................................... 1-13 NARO North LBA Tract Configuration ................................... 2-6 NARO South LBA Alternative Tract Configurations.............. 2-11 v

Figure ES-9. Figure ES-10. Figure ES-11. Figure ES-12.

Figure 1-1. Figure 1-2. Figure 1-3. Figure 1-4. Figure 1-5. Figure 2-1. Figure 2-2a.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Table of Contents Figure 2-2b. Figure 2-3. Figure 2-4a. Figure 2-4b. Figure 2-5. Figure 3-1. Figure 3-2. Figure 3-3. Figure 3-4. Figure 3-5. Figure 3-6. Figure 3-7. Figure 3-8. Figure 3-9. Figure 3-10. Figure 3-11. Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure 3-12. 3-13. 3-14. 3-15. 3-16. 3-17. 3-18. 3-19. NARO South LBA Preferred Alternative Tract Configuration ..................................................................... 2-11 Little Thunder LBA Alternative Tract Configurations ........... 2-19 West Roundup LBA Alternative Tract Configurations .......... 2-28 West Roundup LBA Preferred Alternative Tract Configuration ..................................................................... 2-28 West Antelope LBA Alternative Tract Configurations ........... 2-36 General Analysis Area........................................................... 3-2 Stratigraphic Relationships and Hydrologic Characteristics of Upper Cretaceous, Lower Tertiary, and Recent Geologic Units, PRB, Wyoming............................................................ 3-5 Wind Rose, Air Quality and Meteorological Stations at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex ...................................... 3-12 Wind Rose, Air Quality and Meteorological Stations at the Black Thunder Mine ........................................................... 3-13 Wind Rose, Air Quality and Meteorological Stations at the North Rochelle Mine ........................................................... 3-14 Wind Rose, Air Quality and Meteorological Stations at the Antelope Mine..................................................................... 3-15 Active PM10 Monitoring Stations in Northeastern Wyoming ............................................................................ 3-21 Cumulative Coal Production and Overburden Removal vs. Ambient Particulates for the SPRB General Anaylsis Area (1995 through 2002)........................................................... 3-26 Visibility in the Badlands and Bridger Wilderness Areas ..... 3-32 Surface Drainage in the General Analysis Area ................... 3-37 Surface Ownership Within the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts ............................................................... 3-59 Surface Ownership Within the Little Thunder LBA Tract ..... 3-60 Surface Ownership Within the West Roundup LBA Tract .... 3-61 Surface Ownership Within the West Antelope LBA Tract ..... 3-62 Oil and Gas Ownership on the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts ............................................................... 3-63 Oil and Gas Ownership on the Little Thunder LBA Tract ..... 3-64 Oil and Gas Ownership on the West Roundup LBA Tract .... 3-65 Oil and Gas Ownership on the West Antelope LBA Tract ..... 3-66 Relationship Between A-Scale Decibel Readings and Sounds of Daily Life............................................................ 3-83 Transportation Facilities Within and Adjacent to the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts..................................... 3-84 Transportation Facilities Within and Adjacent to the Little Thunder LBA Tract ............................................................. 3-85 Transportation Facilities Within and Adjacent to the West Roundup LBA Tract ............................................................ 3-86 Transportation Facilities Within and Adjacent to the West Antelope LBA Tract ............................................................. 3-87 South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Figure 3-20. Figure 3-21. Figure 3-22. Figure 3-23.

Table of Contents Figure 3-24. Figure 4-1. Figure 4-2. Figure 4-3. Figure 4-4. Figure 4-5. Figure 4-6. Figure 4-7. Figure 4-8. Figure 4-9. Figure 4-10. Figure 4-11. Figure 4-12. Figure 4-13. Estimated Wyoming and Federal Revenues from 2002 Coal Production in Campbell and Converse Counties .......... 3-91 Maximum Modeled PM10 Concentrations at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Ambient Air Boundary for the Year 2001 ..................................................................... 4-29 Maximum Modeled PM10 Concentrations at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Ambient Air Boundary for the Year 2006 .................................................................... 4-30 Maximum Modeled PM10 Concentrations at the Black Thunder Mine Ambient Air Boundary for the Year 2002...... 4-34 Maximum Modeled PM10 Concentrations at the Black Thunder Mine Ambient Air Boundary for the Year 2026...... 4-35 Maximum Modeled PM10 Concentrations at the North Rochelle Mine Ambient Air Boundary for the Year 2002 ...... 4-40 Maximum Modeled PM10 Concentrations at the North Rochelle Mine Ambient Air Boundary for the Year 2012 ...... 4-41 Maximum Modeled PM10 Concentrations at the Antelope Mine Ambient Air Boundary for the Year 2006 .................... 4-46 Maximum Modeled PM10 Concentrations at the Antelope Mine Ambient Air Boundary for the Year 2016 .................... 4-47 North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Life of Mine Drawdown Map, Resulting from Currently Approved Mining and the Proposed Action.................................................................. 4-55 Black Thunder Mine Life of Mine Drawdown Map, Resulting from Currently Approved Mining and the Proposed Action.................................................................. 4-59 North Rochelle Mine Life of Mine Drawdown Map, Resulting from Currently Approved Mining and the Proposed Action.................................................................. 4-62 Antelope Mine Life of Mine Drawdown Map, Resulting from Currently Approved Mining and the Proposed Action................................................................................. 4-66 Estimated Wyoming and Federal Revenues from the Leasing and Subsequent Mining of the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts ........................................................... 4-89 Extrapolated Worst-Case Wyodak Coal Aquifer Drawdown Scenarios Showing Extent of Actual 20-Year Drawdowns and USGS Modeled Cumulative Drawdowns ...................................................................... 4-134 Cumulative Worst-Case Coal Aquifer Drawdown for the Five Southern Mines with Maximum Modeled Drawdown Contours From PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS Superimposed ............................................................ 4-141

Figure 4-14.

Figure 4-15.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

vii

Table of Contents LIST OF TABLES Table ES-1. Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts and North Antelope/Rochelle Complex ..........................................................................ES-11 Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for Little Thunder LBA Tract and Black Thunder Mine ..................................ES-12 Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for West Roundup LBA Tract and North Rochelle Mine ..................................ES-13 Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for West Antelope LBA Tract and Antelope Mine............................................ES-14 Leases Issued Since Decertification, Powder River Basin, Wyoming .............................................................................. 1-5 Pending LBAs, Powder River Basin, Wyoming. ...................... 1-6 Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts and North Antelope/Rochelle Complex ............................................................................. 2-47 Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for Little Thunder LBA Tract and Black Thunder Mine .................................... 2-48 Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for West Roundup LBA Tract and North Rochelle Mine .................................... 2-49 Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for West Antelope LBA Tract and Antelope Mine.............................................. 2-50 Summary Comparison of Magnitude and Duration of Direct and Indirect Impacts for the Proposed Action, Alternative 2, Alternative 3, and the No Action Alternative for the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts............................ 2-51 Summary Comparison of Magnitude and Duration of Cumulated Impacts ............................................................ 2-60 Assumed Background Air Pollutant Concentrations, Applicable Ambient Air Quality Standards, and PSD Increment Values (in g/m3) ............................................... 3-17 Approximate Distances and Directions from the General Analysis Area to PSD Class I and Class II Sensitive Receptor Areas ................................................................... 3-19 South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Table ES-2. Table ES-3. Table ES-4.

Table 1-1. Table 1-2. Table 2-1.

Table 2-2. Table 2-3. Table 2-4. Table 2-5.

Table 2-6. Table 3-1. Table 3-2.

viii

Table of Contents Table 3-3. Table Table Table Table Table 3-4. 3-5. 3-6. 3-7. 3-8. Summary of WDEQ/AQD Reports on Air Quality Monitoring in Wyoming's PRB, 1980-2002 .......................... 3-24 Annual Ambient NO2 Concentration Data ........................... 3-29 2001 and 2002 Annual Mean NO2 Concentration Data ....... 3-30 Existing Acid Neutralizing Capacity in Sensitive Lakes ........ 3-34 Dominant Vegetation Types in the General Analysis Area.... 3-47 40 Migratory Bird Species of Management Concern in Wyoming for Coal Mines: Their Regional Status, and Expected, and Actual Occurrence on or Near the SPRB Coal LBA Tracts.................................................................. 3-55 Distribution of Surface Ownership Within Each LBA Tract and Study Area................................................................... 3-58 NARO North and South LBA Tracts Oil and Gas Ownership.......................................................................... 3-67 Little Thunder LBA Tract Oil and Gas Ownership................ 3-69 West Roundup LBA Tract Oil and Gas Ownership............... 3-70 West Antelope LBA Tract Oil and Gas Ownership................ 3-71 Estimated 2003 Fiscal Revenues from 2002 Coal Production in Campbell and Converse Counties.................. 3-90 Comparison of Existing and Proposed North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Disturbance Area and Mining Operations ............... 4-2 Comparison of Existing and Proposed Black Thunder Mine Disturbance Area and Mining Operations ............................. 4-3 Comparison of Existing and Proposed North Rochelle Mine Disturbance Area and Mining Operations ............................. 4-4 Comparison of Existing and Proposed Antelope Mine Disturbance Area and Mining Operations ............................. 4-5 Average Overburden, Interburden, and Coal Thicknesses and Approximate Postmining Surface Elevation Changes of the Five LBA Tracts .................................................................... 4-8 Average Overburden, Interburden, and Coal Thicknesses for the Applicant Mines’ Existing Permit Areas .................... 4-11 Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutants .............................................................. 4-20 Water Supply Wells Possibly Subject to Drawdown if NARO North and South LBA Tracts are Mined............................... 4-57 Water Supply Wells Possibly Subject to Drawdown if Little Thunder LBA Tract is Mined ............................................... 4-60 Water Supply Wells Possibly Subject to Drawdown if West Roundup LBA Tract is Mined .............................................. 4-64 Water Supply Wells Possibly Subject to Drawdown if West Antelope LBA Tract is Mined............................................... 4-68 Maximum Wetland Impacts in the NARO North and South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts................................................................................. 4-71

Table 3-9. Table 3-10. Table Table Table Table 3-11. 3-12. 3-13. 3-14.

Table 4-1. Table 4-2. Table 4-3. Table 4-4. Table 4-5. Table 4-6. Table 4-7. Table 4-8. Table 4-9. Table 4-10. Table 4-11. Table 4-12.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Table of Contents Table 4-13. Table 4-14. Table 4-15. Table 4-16. Table 4-17. Table 4-18. Table 4-19. Table 4-20. Table 4-21. Table 4-22. Projected Socioeconomic Impacts from Leasing the NARO North and South LBA Tracts under the Proposed Action or Action Alternatives.............................................................. 4-88 Projected Socioeconomic Impacts from Leasing the Little Thunder LBA Tract under the Proposed Action or Action Alternatives ........................................................................ 4-88 Projected Socioeconomic Impacts from Leasing the West Roundup LBA Tract under the Proposed Action or Action Alternatives ........................................................................ 4-88 Projected Socioeconomic Impacts from Leasing the West Antelope LBA Tract under the Proposed Action or Action Alternatives ........................................................................ 4-88 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring Measures for Surface Coal Mining Operations Required by SMCRA and State Law ........................................................ 4-94 Status of Wyoming PRB Coal Mines .................................. 4-104 Coal Production and Development Levels, Campbell and Converse Counties, Wyoming............................................ 4-105 Range of Predicted Maximum Potential Near-Field Impacts under Alternatives 1, 2A, and 2B of the Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS.......................................................... 4-118 Predicted Maximum Potential Near-Field Impacts under Alternative 3 of the Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS ................................................................................... 4-120 Maximum Predicted PSD Class I Area Cumulative Far-Field Impacts (in g/m3) under Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS Alternative 1 (Proposed Action) and all South PRB Coal EIS Alternatives ................................................................ 4-122 Predicted Total Cumulative Change in Acid Neutralizing Capacity at Sensitive Area Lakes (percent change) ............ 4-122 Predicted Visibility Impacts in the Mandatory Federal PSD Class I Washakie Wilderness Area from Direct Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS Alternative Sources - Daily FLAG Refined Method ................................................................ 4-125 Predicted Visibility Impacts in Class I Areas - Daily FLAG Refined Method ....................................................... 4-126 Federal, State, and Local Governmental Agencies Consulted in EIS Preparation................................................ 5-4 List of Contributors and Reviewers ....................................... 5-5 List of Preparers ................................................................... 5-6 BLM Distribution List for Coal Leasing.................................. 5-8 Distribution List for SPRB Coal Final EIS............................ 5-11

Table 4-23. Table 4-24.

Table 4-25. Table 5-1. Table Table Table Table 5-2. 5-3. 5-4a. 5-4b.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Table of Contents LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A. Appendix B. Appendix C. Appendix D. Federal and State Permitting Requirements and Agencies Unsuitability Criteria for the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts Coal Lease-by-Application Flow Chart Bureau of Land Management Special Coal Lease Stipulations, U.S. Forest Service Special Stipulations, and Form 3400-12 Coal Lease Air Quality Impact Technical Support Document Non-Mine Groundwater and Surface Water Rights Within and Adjacent to the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts Biological Assessment for the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts, South Powder River Basin Coal EIS Biological Assessment for the Little Thunder LBA Tract, South Powder River Basin Coal EIS Biological Assessment for the West Roundup LBA Tract, South Powder River Basin Coal EIS Biological Assessment For The West Antelope LBA Tract, South Powder River Basin Coal EIS USDA-FS Region 2 Sensitive Species and Management Indicator Species Evaluation and BLM Sensitive Species Evaluation For the South Powder River Basin EIS CBM Wells Capable of Production on or in Sections Adjacent to the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts Comment Letters on the Draft EIS and Response

Appendix E. Appendix F.

Appendix G. Appendix H. Appendix I. Appendix J. Appendix K.

Appendix L.

Appendix M.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Abbreviations and Acronyms
Abbreviations and Acronyms Used in this Report AAQS Ambient Air Quality Standards Ac acre(s) ACC Antelope Coal Company ac-ft acre-foot, acre-feet ac-ft/yr acre-foot per year, acre-feet per year AIRS Aerometric Information and Retrieval System ALC Ark Land Company AML Abandoned Mine Land ANC acidification neutralization capacity ANFO ammonium nitrate fuel oil AQD Air Quality Division AQRV air quality related values ARCO Atlantic Richfield Company AREV SEO water rights database and program ARS Air Resource Specialists, Inc. AVF alluvial valley floor BACT best available control technology bcy bank cubic yards BLM Bureau of Land Management BNSF Burlington Northern Santa Fe BN-UP, BN&UP Burlington Northern-Union Pacific B.P. before present Btu British thermal units Btu/lb British thermal units per pound CAA Clean Air Act CAAA Clean Air Act Amendment CBM coal bed methane CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 CFR Code of Federal Regulations cfs cubic feet per second CHIA Cumulative Hydrologic Impact Assessment CO carbon monoxide COE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CREG Consensus Revenue Estimating Group CWA Clean Water Act cy cubic yards dBA A-weighted decibels DEIS Draft Environmental Impact Statement DM&E Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad Corporation DOI Department of the Interior dv deciview, a measure of view impairment EA Environmental Assessment EC elemental carbon particles (re: air quality) EIS Environmental Impact Statement ENCOAL Encoal Corporation EPA Environmental Protection Agency EQC Environmental Quality Council ESA Endangered Species Act F Fahrenheit

xii

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Abbreviations and Acronyms
Abbreviations and Acronyms Used in this Report FCLAA Federal Coal Leasing Act Amendments of 1976 FDM Fugitive Dust Model FEA Final Environmental Assessment FEIS Final Environmental Impact Statement FLM Federal Land Management FLPMA Federal Land Policy Management Act of 1976 FR Federal Register ft feet, foot ft/day feet per day ft/mile feet per mile cubic feet ft3 FY fiscal year g gram GAGMO Gillette Area Ground Water Monitoring Organization GDP Gross Domestic Product gpm gallons per minute GSP Gross State Product HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant hp horsepower hr hour IBLA Interior Board of Land Appeals IMPROVE Interagency Monitoring of Protected Environments IWAQM Interagency Workgroup on Air Quality Monitoring JRCC Jacobs Ranch Coal Company km kilometers KMCC Kerr-McGee Coal Corporation Kv kilovolts LAC limits of acceptable change (re: air quality) LBA lease by application lbs/mmBtu pounds per million British thermal units LFC Liquids From Coal LOP Life of Project LRMP Land and Resource Management Plan LW Lower Wyodak coal seam MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology MBHFI migratory birds of high federal interest µeq/L microequivalents per liter micrograms per cubic meter µg/m3 µmhos/cm micromhos per centimeter MCF thousand cubic feet MDEQ Montana Department of Environmental Quality MDEQ/AWM Montana Department of Environmental Quality/Air and Waste Management Bureau MEI maximally exposed individual mg/L milligrams per liter MLA Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 MLE most likely exposure mm million mmbcy million bank cubic yards mmt million tons

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

xiii

Abbreviations and Acronyms
Abbreviations and Acronyms Used in this Report mmtpy million tons per year mph miles per hour MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area MW Middle Wyodak coal seam Mw megawatts NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NADP National Atmospheric Deposition Program NAPG North American Power Group NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 NIOSH National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health NO nitrogen oxide nitrogen dioxide NO2 nitrogen oxides NOx NPS National Park Service NRCS National Resource Conservation Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places NSPS National Source Performance Standards NWI National Wetlands Inventory photochemical oxidants O3 OC organic carbon particles OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration OSM Office of Surface Mining Reclamation & Enforcement PECs passive enclosure control systems P.M. Prime Meridian particulates finer than 2.5 microns in effective diameter PM2.5 particulates finer than 10 microns in effective diameter PM10 PMT postmining topography PP&L Pacific Power and Light Company ppm parts per million PRB Powder River Basin PRBRC Powder River Basin Resource Council PRCC Powder River Coal Company PRRCT Powder River Regional Coal Team PSD Prevention of Significant Deterioration R2P2 Resource Recovery and Protection Plan RH relative humidity RMP Resource Management Plan ROD Record of Decision ROW Right-of-Way SARA Superfund Amendment & Reauthorization Act of 1986 scf/ton standard cubic feet per ton SEO State Engineer’s Office SHPO State Historic Preservation Office SIP State Implementation Plan SLAMS State and Local Air Monitoring Stations SMCRA Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 sulfur dioxide SO2 SPRB South Powder River Basin T&E threatened and endangered TBCC Thunder Basin Coal Company, LLC

xiv

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Abbreviations and Acronyms
Abbreviations and Acronyms Used in this Report TBNG Thunder Basin National Grassland TCC Triton Coal Company, LLC TDS total dissolved solids TPY tons per year TSP total suspended particulates TWC Thunderbird Wildlife Consulting, Inc. U.S. United States USC, U.S.C. United States Code USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture USDA-FS U.S. Department of Agriculture - Forest Service USDI U.S. Department of the Interior USGS U.S. Geological Survey USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service UW Upper Wyodak coal seam VMT vehicle miles traveled VOCs volatile organic compounds VRM visual resource management WAAQS Wyoming Ambient Air Quality Standards WAQSR Wyoming Air Quality Standards and Regulations WARMS Wyoming Air Resources Monitoring System WCIC Wyoming Coal Information Committee WDEQ Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality WDEQ/AQD Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality/Air Quality Division WDEQ/LQD Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality/Land Quality Division WGFD Wyoming Game and Fish Department WMA Wyoming Mining Association WOC Wyoming Outdoor Council WOGCC Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission WRRI Water Resources Research Institute WSBLC Wyoming State Board of Land Commissioners WSGS Wyoming State Geological Survey WSO-RMG Wyoming State Office Reservoir Management Group

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1.0 Introduction 1.0 INTRODUCTION This EIS1 analyzes the environmental impacts of leasing five tracts of federal coal reserves adjacent to operating mines in the southern PRB. Operators of four mines, North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope, filed four applications to lease five tracts of federal coal as maintenance tracts under the regulations at 43 CFR 3425, Leasing On Application. All four applications have been reviewed by BLM, Wyoming State Office, Division of Minerals and Lands Authorization. That office determined that all four lease applications met the regulatory requirements for lease by applications, or LBAs. The five LBA tracts considered in this EIS and the adjacent mines are shown in Figure 1-1. They are the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts, adjacent to the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex; the Little Thunder LBA Tract, adjacent to the Black Thunder Mine; the West Roundup LBA Tract, adjacent to the North Rochelle Mine; and the West Antelope LBA Tract, adjacent to the Antelope Mine. The applications are summarized below. On March 10, 2000, PRCC filed an application with the BLM for federal coal reserves in two separate tracts located north and south of and immediately adjacent to the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. The tracts are referred to as the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts. The NARO North Tract is located in
1

southern Campbell County, Wyoming, approximately 13 miles southeast of Wright, Wyoming. The NARO South Tract is located in southern Campbell County and northern Converse County, Wyoming, approximately 19 miles southeast of Wright, Wyoming (Figure 1-1). The federal coal reserves were applied for as maintenance tracts for the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. BLM determined that the two tracts in the application would be processed separately and, if the decision is made to conduct a lease sale, would be offered for sale separately. The North Antelope/Rochelle Complex is operated by PRCC, a subsidiary of the Peabody Holding Company, Inc. PRCC’s coal lease application was assigned case file numbers WYW150210 (NARO North) and WYW154001 (NARO South). In 2003, the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex was renamed North Antelope Rochelle Mine. The mine is referred to as the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex in this EIS. On March 23, 2000, ALC filed an application with the BLM for federal coal reserves in a tract located west of and immediately adjacent to the Black Thunder Mine. ALC is a wholly owned subsidiary of Arch Coal, Inc. The Black Thunder Mine is operated by TBCC, a subsidiary of Arch Western Resources, LLC. In this EIS, ALC is referred to as the applicant and TBCC is referred to in discussions of mine operations. The tract is referred to as the Little Thunder LBA Tract. The application area is located in southern Campbell

Refer to page xii for a list of abbreviations and acronyms used in this document.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1-1

1.0 Introduction

14 16 59

LEGEND

West Hay Creek LBA Buckskin Mine Eagle Butte Mine West Extension LBA To Buffalo 38 Miles Eagle Butte LBA Fort Union Mine Rawhide Mine Dry Fork Mine

Wyodak Mine
90

ROZET
Crook County GILLETTE

MOORCROFT

Caballo Mine

Campbell County

Johnson County

Belle Ayr Mine Caballo Rojo Mine
50

Maysdorf LBA

Cordero Mine

Cordero-Rojo Complex

Coal Creek Mine
59

Campbell County Weston County

West Rocky Butte LBA

116

WRIGHT

RENO JUNCTION

North Jacobs Ranch LBA Jacobs Ranch LBA Jacobs Ranch Mine To Newcastle 29 Miles
Niobrara County

Thundercloud LBA LITTLE THUNDER LBA
59

387

West Black Thunder LBA North Rochelle LBA WEST ROUNDUP LBA Powder River LBA NARO NORTH LBA NARO SOUTH LBA

Black Thunder Mine North Rochelle Mine

450

North Antelope/Rochelle Complex North Antelope/Rochelle LBA Antelope LBA Antelope Mine
Weston County

Campbell County Converse County

Horse Creek LBA

WEST ANTELOPE LBA

SCALE: 1"= 10 MILES To Douglas 46 Miles

Figure 1-1. General Location Map with Federal Coal Leases and LBA Tracts.

1-2

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1.0 Introduction County, Wyoming, approximately six miles east-southeast of Wright, Wyoming (Figure 1-1). The federal coal reserves were applied for as a maintenance tract for the Black Thunder Mine. ALC’s coal lease application was assigned case file number WYW150318. On July 28, 2000, TCC filed an application with the BLM for federal coal reserves in a tract located west of and immediately adjacent to the North Rochelle Mine. The application area is located in southern Campbell County, Wyoming, approximately 10 miles southeast of Wright, Wyoming (Figure 1-1). The tract is referred to as the West Roundup LBA Tract. TCC’s coal lease application was assigned case file number WYW151134. The federal coal reserves were applied for as a maintenance tract for the North Rochelle Mine. At the time the application was filed, the North Rochelle Mine was owned and operated by TCC, a subsidiary of Vulcan Intermediary, LLC. In May 2003, Arch Coal announced that it was purchasing Vulcan Coal Holdings, LLC, including the North Rochelle Mine. In this EIS, the applicant for the West Roundup LBA Tract will be referred to as TCC. On September 12, 2000, ACC filed an application with the BLM for federal coal reserves in a tract located west of and immediately adjacent to the Antelope Mine. The tract is referred to as the West Antelope LBA Tract. The application area is located in southern Campbell County and northern Converse County, Wyoming, South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS approximately 19 miles southsoutheast of Wright, Wyoming (Figure 1-1). The federal coal reserves were applied for as a maintenance tract for the Antelope Mine. The Antelope Mine is operated by ACC, a subsidiary of Kennecott Energy Company. ACC’s coal lease application was assigned case file number WYW151643. These federal coal lands are located within the Powder River Federal Coal Region, which was decertified in January 1990. Although the Powder River Federal Coal Region is decertified, the PRRCT, a federal/state advisory board established to develop recommendations concerning management of federal coal in the region, has continued to meet regularly and review all federal lease applications in the region. The PRRCT reviewed these four maintenance coal lease applications at a public meeting held on October 25, 2000, in Cheyenne, Wyoming. The PRRCT recommended that the BLM continue to process all four lease applications at that meeting. On June 14, 2001, ALC filed an application with the BLM to modify the Little Thunder LBA Tract configuration to increase the lease area and coal volume. BLM reviewed the modified tract configuration and notified the company by letter dated July 20, 2001 that their application had been modified. On June 27, 2001, ACC filed an application with the BLM to modify the West Antelope LBA Tract configuration to increase the lease 1-3

1.0 Introduction area and coal volume. BLM reviewed the modified tract configuration and notified the company by letter dated July 18, 2001 that their application had been modified. In order to process an LBA, the BLM must evaluate the quantity, quality, maximum economic recovery, and fair market value of the federal coal and fulfill the requirements of NEPA by evaluating the environmental impacts of leasing the federal coal. BLM does not authorize mining by issuing a lease for federal coal, but the impacts of mining the coal are considered in this EIS because it is a logical consequence of issuing a lease. The BLM determined that one EIS would be prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts that would be expected to occur if leases are issued for these five LBAs. This EIS has been prepared to evaluate the sitespecific and cumulative environmental impacts of leasing and developing the federal coal included in these application areas. In return for receiving a lease, a lessee must pay the federal government a bonus equal to the amount it bid at the time the lease sale was held (the bonus can be paid in five yearly installments), make annual rental payments to the federal government, and make royalty payments to the federal government when the coal is mined. Federal bonus, rental, and royalty payments are equally divided with the state in which the lease is located. Since decertification of the Powder River Federal Coal Region, 11 federal 1-4 coal leases have been sold at competitive sealed-bid sales and one federal coal lease has been exchanged in the Wyoming portion of the Powder River Federal Coal Region (Table 1-1). All of the mines with applications being considered in this EIS have been issued maintenance leases since decertification (Table 1-1 and Figure 1-1). Table 1-2 summarizes the applications that are currently pending. A coal exchange proposed by Pittsburg and Midway Coal Mining Company is also currently being evaluated. As proposed, federal coal in Sheridan County, Wyoming would be exchanged for privately owned lands and minerals in Lincoln, Carbon, and Sheridan Counties, Wyoming. NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts The NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts as applied for and the existing federal coal leases in the adjacent North Antelope/Rochelle Complex are shown in Figure 1-2. As applied for, the NARO North LBA Tract includes approximately 2,369.4 acres and an estimated 323 million tons of in-place coal reserves. PRCC estimates that approximately 306.9 million tons of coal would be produced from the NARO North LBA Tract as applied for, assuming a recovery factor of 95 percent. As applied for, the NARO South LBA Tract includes approximately 2,133.6 acres and an estimated 241 million tons of in-place coal reserves. Not all of the coal included in the NARO South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1.0 Introduction Table 1-1. Leases Issued Since Decertification, Powder River Basin, Wyoming.
Mineable Tons of Coal1 147,423,560 Successful Bid $20,114,930.00

LBA Name (Lease Number) Lessee Effective Date Jacobs Ranch LBA (WYW117924) Jacobs Ranch Mine 10/1/1992 West Black Thunder LBA (WYW118907) Black Thunder Mine 10/1/1992 North Antelope/Rochelle LBA (WYW119554) North Antelope/Rochelle Complex 10/1/1992 West Rocky Butte LBA (WYW122586) No Existing Mine2 1/1/1993 Eagle Butte LBA (WYW124783) Eagle Butte Mine 8/1/1995 Antelope LBA (WYW128322) Antelope Mine 2/1/1997 North Rochelle LBA (WYW127221) North Rochelle Mine 1/1/1998 Powder River LBA (WYW136142) North Antelope/Rochelle Complex 9/1/1998 Thundercloud LBA (WYW136458) Black Thunder Mine 1/1/1999 Horse Creek LBA (WYW141435) Antelope Mine 12/1/2000 North Jacobs Ranch LBA (WYW146744) Jacobs Ranch Mine 5/1/2002 TOTALS Lease Exchange Name (Lease Number) Lessee Effective Date EOG (Belco) I-90 Lease Exchange (WYW150152) EOG (formerly Belco) 4/1/2000

Acres1 1,708.620

3,492.495

429,048,216

$71,909,282.69

3,064.040

403,500,000

$86,987,765.00

463.205

56,700,000

$16,500,000.00

1,059.175

166,400,000

$18,470,400.00

617.200

60,364,000

$9,054,600.00

1,481.930

157,610,000

$30,576,340.00

4,224.225

532,000,000

$109,596,500.00

3,545.503

412,000,000

$158,000,008.50

2,818.695

275,577,000

$91,220,120.70

4,982.939

537,500,000

$379,504,652.00

27,458.027

3,178,122,776

$991,934,598.89

Acres 599.170

Mineable Tons of Coal 106,000,000

Action Exchanged for rights to Belco I-90 Lease (WYW0322794)

1 2

Information from Sale Notice. The West Rocky Butte Lease is now owned by the Caballo Mine.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1-5

1.0 Introduction Table 1-2. Pending LBAs, Powder River Basin, Wyoming.
Estimated Tons of Coal1 (mmt) 323.0

LBA Lease Number Applicant Mine NARO North WYW150210 North Antelope/Rochelle NARO South WYW154001 North Antelope/Rochelle Little Thunder WYW150318 Black Thunder West Roundup WYW151134 North Rochelle West Hay Creek WYW151634 Buckskin West Antelope WYW151643 Antelope Maysdorf (formerly Mt. Logan) WYW154432 Cordero-Rojo West Extension WYW155132 Eagle Butte TOTALS
1

Application Date 3/10/00

Acres 2,369.380

Status DEIS 3/03 Hearing 4/16/03 FEIS in Preparation DEIS 3/03 Hearing 4/16/03 FEIS in Preparation DEIS 3/03 Hearing 4/16/03 FEIS in Preparation DEIS 3/03 Hearing 4/16/03 FEIS in Preparation DEIS 3/03 Hearing 4/16/03 FEIS in Preparation DEIS 3/03 Hearing 4/16/03 FEIS in Preparation PRRCT reviewed 5/30/2002

3/10/00

2,133.635

241.0

3/23/00

3,449.317

479.3

7/28/00

1,870.638

173.2

8/31/00

838.098

130.0

9/12/00

3,542.190

293.9

9/20/01

2,809.480

296.3

12/28/01

1,642.590

200.0

PRRCT reviewed 5/30/2002

18,655.328

2,136.7

Estimated tons of in-place coal as reported in the lease application.

South LBA Tract is mineable, however. For example, some of the coal included in the South tract is located within the BNSF & UP railroad ROW. This coal would not be mined because it has been determined to be unsuitable for mining according to the coal leasing unsuitability criteria (43 CFR 3461), but it was included in the tract to allow maximum recovery of all the mineable coal adjacent to the ROW. PRCC estimates that approximately 10 million tons of coal are within the 1-6

ROW, and an additional 20 million tons of coal are in partially burned areas that are therefore not recoverable. The fact that the coal within the ROW and partially burned area cannot all be recovered will be considered by BLM in the fair market value determination for the LBA tract. PRCC estimates that approximately 200 million tons of coal would be produced from the NARO South LBA Tract as applied for.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1.0 Introduction
Reno Road

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
12 7 8 9 10 11

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.
12 7 8 9

BNSF + UP Double Tracks

Antelope Road

NARO NORTH
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21

Piney Canyon (Mackey) Road

T. 42 34 N. T. 41 3 N.

T. 42 N. T. 41 N.

10 9 11

Antelo pe Road

These portions of leases WYW-60231, WYW-87364, WYW-125794, WYW-0321779, and WYW-119554 have been relinquished by PRCC.

26 27 Campbell County Converse County

NARO SOUTH
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.

LEGEND
North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Permit Boundary NARO North LBA Tract as Applied for (WYW-150210) NARO South LBA Tract as Applied for (WYW-154001) North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Lease WYW-0321779 North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Lease WYW-136142 North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Lease WYW-119554 North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Lease WYW-151896 North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Lease WYW-60231 North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Lease WYW-125794
0 5000 10000 20000

North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Lease WYW-87364 North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Lease WYW-155534

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 1-2. North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Federal Coal Leases and NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts as Applied for.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1-7

1.0 Introduction The North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, as currently permitted, includes 27,187 acres and originally contained approximately 1,645.8 million tons of mineable coal reserves. As of January 1, 2003, PRCC had an estimated 877 million tons of in-place coal reserves remaining at the mine, and the company estimates that approximately 833.15 million tons of those remaining reserves are recoverable. PRCC’s currently approved (by WDEQ/AQD in August 2001) air quality permit allows two alternative mining scenarios, both of which will require modification of the existing mine plan. One scenario permits a maximum of 105 million tons of coal per year to be mined (during years 2004 through 2006), while the other scenario permits a maximum of 84 million tons of coal per year to be mined (during years 2002 through 2007). The mine produced approximately 68.9 million tons of coal in 1999, 70.8 million tons of coal in 2000, 74.8 million tons of coal in 2001, and 74.8 million tons of coal in 2002. The NARO North LBA Tract is contiguous with the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex and the NARO South LBA Tract is contiguous with both the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex and the Antelope Mine, which is operated by ACC. Portions of both tracts lie within the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex’s current mining permit boundary (Figure 1-2). The area applied for is substantially similar to the adjacent mines for which detailed site-specific environmental data have been collected and for which 1-8 environmental analyses have previously been prepared to secure the existing leases and the necessary mining permits. The surface of the NARO North LBA Tract is owned by the United States of America and PRCC. The federally owned surface is part of the TBNG, administered by the USDA-FS. The surface of the NARO South LBA Tract is owned by PRCC, the Bridle Bit Ranch Company, and the Dilts brothers (John, Jerry, and Steve). Current land uses of the tracts include grazing by domestic animals and wildlife, oil and gas production, and recreation. The mining method would be a combination of truck and shovel and dragline, which are the mining methods currently in use at this mine. The coal would be used primarily for electric power generation. After mining, the land would be reclaimed for livestock grazing and wildlife use as is the current practice at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. Little Thunder LBA Tract The Little Thunder LBA Tract as applied for and the existing federal coal leases in the adjacent Black Thunder Mine are shown in Figure 13. As applied for, the Little Thunder LBA Tract includes approximately 3,449.3 acres and an estimated 479.3 million tons of in-place coal reserves. Not all of the coal included in the South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1.0 Introduction
R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.
24 19

30
Small Road

T. 44 N. T. 43 N.

4
State Highway 450

Hilight Road

22 BNSF + UP Double Tracks

Sta te H igh wa y4 50 23

T. 43 32 N. T. 42 5 N.

Cre ek

Roa d

T. 43 N. T. 42 N.

4
Edwards Road

6
Reno Road

ol ho Sc

11
Antelope Road

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.

LEGEND
Black Thunder Mine Permit Boundary Little Thunder LBA Tract as Applied for (WYW-150318) Black Thunder Mine Lease WYW-2313 Black Thunder Mine Lease WYW-118907
0 5000 10000 20000

Black Thunder Mine Lease WYW-136458

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 1-3. Black Thunder Mine Federal Coal Leases and Little Thunder LBA Tract as Applied for.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1-9

1.0 Introduction tract is mineable, however. For example, some of the coal included in the tract is located within the BNSF & UP railroad and Wyoming Highway 450 ROWs. This coal would not be mined because it has been determined to be unsuitable for mining according to the coal leasing unsuitability criteria (43 CFR 3461), but it was included in the tract to allow maximum recovery of all the mineable coal adjacent to the ROWs. The fact that the coal within the ROWs cannot all be recovered will be considered by the BLM in the fair market value determination for the LBA tract. TBCC estimates that approximately 440 million tons of coal would be produced from the Little Thunder LBA Tract as applied for. The Black Thunder Mine, as currently permitted, includes 21,238 acres and originally contained approximately 1,494.5 million tons of mineable federal coal reserves. As of January 1, 2003, TBCC had an estimated 899.3 million tons of in-place coal reserves remaining at the mine, and the company estimates that approximately 854.3 million tons of those remaining reserves are recoverable. TBCC’s currently approved (by WDEQ/AQD in July 1999) air quality permit allows up to 100 million tons of coal per year to be mined through year 2027. The mine produced approximately 48.7 million tons of coal in 1999, 60.1 million tons of coal in 2000, 67.6 million tons of coal in 2001, and 65.1 million tons in 2002. The Little Thunder LBA Tract is contiguous with the Black Thunder Mine. A portion of the tract lies within the Black Thunder Mine’s current mining permit boundary (Figure 1-3). The area applied for is substantially similar to the adjacent mine for which detailed site-specific environmental data have been collected and for which environmental analyses have previously been prepared to secure the existing leases and the necessary mining permit. The surface of the Little Thunder LBA Tract is owned by ALC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Arch Coal, Inc.), the Naomi M. Hopkins Trust, TBCC, and the United States of America. The federally owned surface is part of the TBNG, administered by the USDA-FS. Current land uses of the tract include grazing by domestic animals and wildlife, oil and gas production, and recreation. The mining method would be a combination of truck and shovel and dragline, which are the mining methods currently in use at this mine. The coal would be used primarily for electric power generation. After mining, the land would be reclaimed for livestock grazing and wildlife use as is the current practice at the Black Thunder Mine. West Roundup LBA Tract The West Roundup LBA Tract as applied for and the existing federal coal leases in the adjacent North Rochelle Mine are shown in Figure 1South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1-10

1.0 Introduction 4. As applied for, the West Roundup LBA Tract consists of two tracts separated by the North Rochelle Mine railroad spur and facilities and a county road (Reno Road). The two tracts include approximately 1,870.7 acres and an estimated 192.6 million tons of in-place coal reserves. The applicant estimates that approximately 173.3 million tons of coal would be produced from the West Roundup LBA Tract as applied for assuming a recovery factor of 90 percent. The North Rochelle Mine, as currently permitted, includes 7,042 acres and originally contained approximately 337 million tons of mineable coal reserves. As of January 1, 2003, there was an estimated 259 million tons of in-place coal reserves remaining at the mine, and the company estimates that approximately 233 million tons of those remaining reserves are recoverable. The currently approved (by WDEQ/AQD in May 2000) air quality permit for the North Rochelle Mine allows up to 35 million tons of coal per year to be mined through year 2018. The mine produced approximately 8.2 million tons of coal in 1999, 17.2 million tons of coal in 2000, 23.9 million tons of coal in 2001, and 23.9 million tons of coal in 2002. The West Roundup LBA Tract is contiguous with both the North Rochelle Mine and the Black Thunder Mine, which is operated by TBCC. A portion of the tract lies within both the North Rochelle Mine’s and the Black Thunder Mine’s current mining South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS permit boundaries (Figure 1-4). The area applied for is substantially similar to the adjacent mines for which detailed site-specific environmental data have been collected and for which environmental analyses have previously been prepared to secure the existing leases and the necessary mining permits. The surface of the West Roundup LBA Tract is owned by TCC, TBCC, and the United States of America. The federally owned surface is part of the TBNG, administered by the USDA-FS. Current land uses of the tract include grazing by domestic animals and wildlife, oil and gas production, and recreation. The mining method would be a combination of truck and shovel and dragline, which are the mining methods currently in use at this mine. The coal would be used primarily for electric power generation. After mining, the land would be reclaimed for livestock grazing and wildlife use as is the current practice at the North Rochelle Mine. West Antelope LBA Tract The West Antelope LBA Tract as applied for and the existing federal coal leases in the adjacent Antelope Mine are shown in Figure 1-5. As applied for, the West Antelope LBA Tract includes approximately 3,542.2 acres and an estimated 293.9 million tons of in-place coal reserves. Not all of the coal included in the tract is mineable, however. For both 1-11

1.0 Introduction
3 State Highway 450 2

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
1 6

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.
1 6

Hilight Road

Sta te H igh 24 way 450

T. 43 N. T. 42 N.

Roa d

T.
34 35 36 31 32 33 43

Cre ek

2
Reno Road

ol ho Sc

Edwards Road

T. 42 N.

10
BNSF + UP Double Tracks

Piney Canyon (Mackey) Road

T. 41 N.

Antelope Road

T. 42 N.

T. 42 N. T. 41 N.

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.

LEGEND
North Rochelle Mine Permit Boundary West Roundup LBA Tract as Applied for (WYW-151134) North Rochelle Mine Lease WYW-71692 North Rochelle Mine Lease WYW-127221
0 5000 10000 20000

North Rochelle Mine Lease WYW-127221 Proposed Modification

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 1-4. North Rochelle Mine Federal Coal Leases and West Roundup LBA Tract as Applied for.

1-12

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1.0 Introduction
36 31 32
BNSF & UP Double Tracks

T. 42 35 N. T. 41 2 N.

R. 72 W. R. 71 W.

Antelope Road

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
36 31

T. 42 N. T. 41 N.

12
way State High

Campbell County 26 Converse County 25

30 30 29 28 27 26 25

T. 41 35 N. T. 40 N.
2

T. 41 N. T. 40 N.

& SF BN 12

s ck Tra 6 le Trip

22 37 d ) Roa oad nty eR Cou lop nte A .a. (a.k 27

R. 72 W. R. 71 W.

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

LEGEND
Antelope Mine Permit Boundary West Antelope LBA Tract as Applied for (WYW-151643) Antelope Mine Lease WYB-031719 Antelope Mine Lease WYW-0321780 Antelope Mine Lease WYW-0322255
0 5000 10000 20000

Antelope Mine Lease WYW-141435 Antelope Mine Lease WYW-128322

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 1-5. Antelope Mine Federal Coal Leases and West Antelope LBA Tract as Applied for.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1-13

1.0 Introduction operational and environmental reasons, ACC’s approved mining plan avoids disturbing Antelope Creek and an adjacent buffer zone, so any coal reserves that are beneath Antelope Creek and the buffer zone would not be recovered. No disturbance, except for haulroads and conveyor crossings, is allowed within Antelope Mine’s Antelope Creek buffer zone without prior approval of the WDEQ/LQD. Although it has not been determined to be unsuitable for mining according to the coal leasing unsuitability criteria (43 CFR 3461), this coal would not be mined; however, it was included in the tract to allow maximum recovery of the reserves adjacent to the Antelope Creek buffer zone. The fact that the coal within the buffer zone would not be mined will be considered by BLM in the fair market value determination for the West Antelope LBA Tract. ACC estimates that approximately 228.4 million tons of coal would be produced from the West Antelope LBA Tract as applied for. The Antelope Mine, as currently permitted, includes 10,848.6 acres and originally contained approximately 554.8 million tons of mineable coal reserves. As of January 1, 2003, ACC had an estimated 344.6 million tons of mineable coal reserves remaining at the mine, and the company estimates that approximately 320.5 million tons of those remaining reserves are recoverable. ACC’s currently approved (by WDEQ/AQD in April 2001) air quality permit allows up to 32 million tons of coal per year to be mined through year 2017. The mine 1-14 produced approximately 22.7 million tons of coal in 1999, 23 million tons of coal in 2000, 24.6 million tons of coal in 2001, and 26.8 million tons of coal in 2002. The West Antelope LBA Tract is contiguous with the Antelope Mine. A small portion of the tract lies within the Antelope Mine=s current mining permit boundary (Figure 1-5). The area applied for is substantially similar to the adjacent mine for which detailed site-specific environmental data have been collected and for which environmental analyses have previously been prepared to secure the existing leases and the necessary mining permits. The surface of the West Antelope LBA Tract is owned by ACC and Gene and Patricia Litton. Current land uses of the tract include grazing by domestic animals and wildlife and recreation. The mining method would be a combination of truck and shovel and dragline, which are the mining methods currently in use at this mine. The coal would be used primarily for electric power generation. After mining, the land would be reclaimed for livestock grazing and wildlife use as is the current practice at the Antelope Mine. 1.1 Purpose and Need for Action BLM administers the federal coal leasing program under the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920. A federal coal lease grants the lessee the exclusive South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1.0 Introduction right to obtain a mining permit for, and to mine coal on, the leased tract subject to the terms of the lease, the mining permit, and applicable state and federal laws. Before a new lease can be mined, the lessee must obtain approval of a detailed mining and reclamation plan. This EIS was prepared in response to applications BLM received to lease five tracts of federal coal received from four existing mines in the Wyoming PRB. The purpose of these applications is to allow the applicant mines access to a continuing supply of low sulfur compliance coal, which they can continue to sell to power plants for the purpose of power generation. Continued leasing of PRB coal enables coal-fired power plants to meet Clean Air Act requirements without constructing new plants, revamping existing plants, or switching to existing alternative fuels, which would probably significantly increase power costs for individuals and businesses. In response to these coal lease applications, the BLM must decide whether to hold a competitive, sealed-bid lease sale for the tract as applied for, hold a competitive sealedbid lease sale for a modified tract, or reject the current lease application and not offer the tract for sale at this time. A primary goal of the National Energy Policy is to add energy supplies from diverse sources, including domestic oil, gas, and coal as well as hydropower and nuclear power. BLM and USDA-FS recognize that the continued extraction of coal is essential to meet the nation’s future South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS energy needs. As a result, private development of federal coal reserves is integral to the BLM and USDA-FS coal leasing programs under the authority of the MLA, as well as FLPMA and FCLAA. The coal leasing program, managed by BLM and USDA-FS, encourages the development of domestic oil, gas, and coal reserves and reduction of the U.S. dependence on foreign sources of energy. As a result of the leasing and subsequent mining and sale of federal coal resources in the PRB, the public receives lease bonus payments, lease royalty payments, and a supply of low cost, low sulfur coal for power generation. BLM will use the analysis in this EIS to make a decision on whether or not to hold a public, competitive, sealedbid coal lease sale for each of the five coal tracts and issue federal coal leases. A separate Record of Decision will be issued for each tract and a separate sale will be held for each tract that the BLM decision maker approves for leasing. For each lease sale that is held, the bidding will be open to any qualified bidder; bidding will not be limited to the applicant. For each lease sale that is held, a lease will be issued to the highest bidder if a federal sale panel determines that the high bid at that sale meets or exceeds the fair market value of the coal as determined by BLM's economic evaluation and if the U.S. Department of Justice determines that there would be no antitrust violations if a lease is issued to the high bidder at that sale.

1-15

1.0 Introduction Other agencies may use this analysis to make decisions related to leasing and mining the federal coal in these tracts. OSM, the federal agency responsible for regulating surface coal mining operations, is a cooperating agency on this EIS. OSM will use this EIS to make decisions related to the approval of the MLA mining plans for these tracts, if any or all of these leases are issued. The USDA-FS is also a cooperating agency in the preparation of this EIS, because the surface of some of the land included for consideration for leasing in three of the tracts is owned by the Federal government and administered by the USDA-FS as part of the TBNG. PRCC has applied for the coal reserves in the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts in order to increase average annual coal production and to extend the life of the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. Based upon a plan for increasing, then diminishing, annual coal production over the life of the mine, PRCC estimates that the existing recoverable reserves at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex will be depleted within approximately 11 years at an average production rate of approximately 75 mmtpy (the annual production rate will range from 8.7 mmtpy to 105 mmtpy). According to the most recent information from PRCC, beginning year 2003 they plan to produce an average of approximately 90 mmtpy for 16 years if they acquire the two NARO LBA Tracts (the annual production rate would range between 26 mmtpy and 105 mmtpy). Thus, acquiring these new leases would enable them to 1-16 increase their average annual coal production by approximately 15 million tons and production life by five years. If the LBA tracts are leased to PRCC as maintenance tracts, the permit area for the adjacent mine would have to be amended to include the new lease areas before they could be disturbed. This process takes several years to complete. PRCC has applied for federal coal reserves now so that they can complete the permitting process in time to mine the new federal reserves in a logical progression as existing reserves are depleted. TBCC has applied for the coal reserves in the Little Thunder LBA Tract in order to increase annual coal production and to extend the life of the Black Thunder Mine. Based upon diminishing annual coal production over the life of the mine, TBCC estimates that the existing recoverable reserves at the Black Thunder Mine will be depleted within approximately 23 years at an average production rate of approximately 37.1 mmtpy (the annual production rate will range between 9.0 mmtpy and 68.5 mmtpy). According to the most recent information from TBCC, beginning year 2003 they plan to produce an average of approximately 42.5 mmtpy for 30.5 years if they acquire a lease for the Little Thunder LBA Tract (the annual production rate would range between 10.5 mmtpy and 68.5 mmtpy). Thus acquiring the new lease would enable them to increase their average annual coal production by approximately 5.4 million tons and production life by eight years. If the LBA tract is leased South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1.0 Introduction to ALC as a maintenance tract, the permit area for the adjacent mine would have to be amended to include the new lease area before it could be disturbed. This process takes several years to complete. ALC has applied for federal coal reserves now so that they can negotiate new contracts and then complete the permitting process in time to meet anticipated new contract requirements. TCC has applied for the coal reserves in the West Roundup LBA Tract in order to extend the life of the North Rochelle Mine. Based upon increasing annual coal production over the life of the mine, the applicant currently estimates that the existing recoverable reserves at the North Rochelle Mine will be depleted within approximately 6.7 years at an average production rate of approximately 35 mmtpy. According to the most recent information, beginning year 2003 the North Rochelle Mine plans to produce an average of approximately 35 mmtpy for 11.7 years if they acquire a lease for the West Roundup LBA Tract. Thus acquiring the new lease would enable the mine to increase its productive life by five years. If the LBA tract is leased to the applicant as a maintenance tract, the permit area for the adjacent mine would have to be amended to include the new lease area before it could be disturbed. This process takes several years to complete. TCC has applied for federal coal reserves now so that they can negotiate new contracts and then complete the permitting process in time to meet anticipated new contract requirements. ACC has applied for the coal reserves in the West Antelope LBA Tract in order to increase average annual coal production, but they do not plan to prolong the expected mine life beyond 2026. Based upon diminishing annual coal production over the life of the mine, ACC estimates that the existing recoverable reserves at the Antelope Mine will be depleted within approximately 24 years at an average production rate of approximately 13.4 mmtpy. According to the most recent information from ACC, beginning year 2003 they plan to produce an average of approximately 23 mmtpy for 24 years, with a maximum production rate of 32 mmtpy, if they acquire a lease for the West Antelope LBA Tract. Thus acquiring a new lease would enable them to increase annual production by approximately 9.6 mmtpy. If the LBA tract is leased to ACC as a maintenance tract, the permit area for the adjacent mine would have to be amended to include the new lease area before it could be disturbed. This process takes several years to complete. ACC has applied for federal coal reserves now so that they can negotiate new contracts and then complete the permitting process in time to meet anticipated new contract requirements. This EIS analyzes the environmental impacts of issuing federal coal leases and mining the federal coal in the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope lease applications as required by NEPA and associated rules and guidelines. A decision to hold a competitive sale and issue a lease for the lands in any of these 1-17

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1.0 Introduction applications is a prerequisite for mining but it is not the enabling action that would allow mining to begin. The BLM does not authorize mining operations by issuing a lease. After a lease has been issued but prior to mine development, the lessee must file a permit application package with the WDEQ/LQD and OSM for a surface mining permit and approval of the MLA mining plan. An analysis of a detailed site-specific mining and reclamation plan occurs at that time. Authorities and responsibilities of the BLM and other concerned regulatory agencies are described in the following sections. 1.2 Regulatory Authority Responsibility and The tracts proposed for leasing are within an area that has been included in several EIS planning documents, including the BLM Approved Resource Management Plan for Public Lands Administered by the Bureau of Land Management Buffalo Field Office (BLM 2001a) [an update of the Buffalo Resource Area Resource Management Plan (BLM 1985a)] and the BLM Platte River Resource Area Resource Management Plan (BLM 1985b). Federal surface lands managed by the USDA-FS are included in the NARO North, Little Thunder, and West Roundup LBA Tracts. These lands are within the area evaluated in the USDA-FS Medicine Bow National Forest and Thunder Basin National Grassland Land and Resource Management Plan (USDA-FS 1985), the Final EIS for the Northern Great Plains Management Plans Revision for the Thunder Basin National Grassland (USDA-FS 2001a), and the Land and Management Plan (LRMP) for the Thunder Basin National Grassland (USDA-FS 2001b). As a result, the USDA-FS is a cooperating agency on this EIS and USDA-FS consent will be required before a lease sale can be held for each of these three tracts. OSM is a cooperating agency on this EIS. After a coal lease is issued, SMCRA gives OSM primary responsibility to administer programs that regulate surface coal mining operations and the surface effects of underground coal mining operations. Pursuant to Section 503 of SMCRA, the WDEQ developed, and in November 1980 the Secretary of the Interior approved, a permanent program authorizing WDEQ to South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

The NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope coal lease applications were submitted and will be processed and evaluated under the following authorities: • • • • • • MLA, as amended; the Multiple-Use Yield Act of 1960; NEPA; FCLAA; FLPMA; and SMCRA. Sustained

The BLM is the lead agency responsible for leasing federal coal lands under the MLA as amended by FCLAA and is also responsible for preparation of this EIS to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of issuing each coal lease.

1-18

1.0 Introduction regulate surface coal mining operations and surface effects of underground mining on nonfederal lands within the State of Wyoming. In January 1987, pursuant to Section 523(c) of SMCRA, WDEQ entered into a cooperative agreement with the Secretary of the Interior authorizing WDEQ to regulate surface coal mining operations and surface effects of underground mining on federal lands within the state. Pursuant to the cooperative agreement, a federal coal lease holder in Wyoming must submit a permit application package to OSM and WDEQ/LQD for any proposed coal mining and reclamation operations on federal lands in the state. WDEQ/LQD reviews the permit application package to insure the permit application complies with the permitting requirements and the coal mining operation will meet the performance standards of the approved Wyoming program. OSM, BLM, and other federal agencies review the permit application package to insure it complies with the terms of the coal lease, the MLA, NEPA, and other federal laws and their attendant regulations. If the permit application package does comply, WDEQ issues the applicant a permit to conduct coal mining operations. OSM recommends approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval of the MLA mining plan to the Assistant Secretary of the Interior, Land and Minerals Management. Before the MLA mining plan can be approved, the BLM must concur with this recommendation. USDA-FS must also concur if USDA-FS lands are included. If a proposed LBA tract is leased to an existing mine, the lessee is required to revise its coal mining permit prior to mining the coal, following the processes outlined above. As a part of that process, a new mining and reclamation plan would be developed showing how the lands in each LBA tract that is leased would be mined and reclaimed. The revised permit area would be larger than the revised lease area in order to allow for disturbances outside the actual coal removal areas for such purposes as overstripping, matching to undisturbed topography, constructing flood control and sediment control facilities, and related activities. Specific impacts which would occur during the mining and reclamation of the LBA tract would be addressed in the mining and reclamation plans, and specific mitigation measures for anticipated impacts would be described in detail at that time. WDEQ enforces the performance standards and permit requirements for reclamation during a mine's operation and has primary authority in environmental emergencies. OSM retains oversight responsibility for this enforcement. BLM and USDA-FS have authority in those emergency situations where WDEQ or OSM cannot act before environmental harm and damage occurs. Appendix A presents other federal and state permitting requirements that must be satisfied to mine these LBA tracts. 1-19

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1.0 Introduction BLM also has the responsibility to consult with and obtain the comments of other state or federal agencies which have jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to potential environmental impacts. 1.3 Relationship to BLM Policies, Plans, and Programs In addition to the federal acts listed under Section 1.2, guidance and regulations for managing and administering public lands, including the federal coal lands in the PRCC, ALC, TCC, and ACC applications, are set forth in 40 CFR 1500 (Protection of Environment), 43 CFR 1601 (Planning, Programming, Budgeting), and 43 CFR 3400 (Coal Management). Specific guidance for processing applications follow BLM Manual 3420, Competitive Coal Leasing (BLM 1989) and the 1991 Powder River Regional Coal Team Operational Guidelines For Coal Lease-ByThe Applications (BLM 1991). National Environmental Policy Act Handbook (BLM 1988) has been followed in developing this EIS. 1.4 Conformance with Existing Land Use Plans FCLAA requires that lands considered for leasing be included in a comprehensive land use plan and that leasing decisions be compatible with that plan. The BLM Approved Resource Management Plan for Public Lands Administered by the Bureau of Land Management Buffalo Field Office (BLM 2001a) [an update of the Buffalo Resource Area Resource Management 1-20 Plan (BLM 1985a)] governs and addresses the leasing of federal coal in Campbell County, and the BLM Platte River Resource Area Resource Management Plan (BLM 1985b) governs the management of the BLMadministered lands and minerals in Converse County. The current land and resource management plan for the TBNG governs the management of USDA-FS (public) lands in Campbell and Converse Counties, Wyoming. The USDA-FS completed the USDAFS Medicine Bow National Forest and Thunder Basin National Grassland Land and Resource Management Plan in 1985 (USDA-FS 1985). The Final EIS for the Northern Great Plains Management Plans Revision for the Thunder Basin National Grassland (USDA-FS 2001a) and the Land and Resource Management Plan for the Thunder Basin National Grassland (USDA-FS 2001b) address revisions to the 1985 TBNG LRMP. The Final EIS and Land and Resource Management Plans Revision Record of Decision for the Thunder Basin National Grassland was signed on July 31, 2002 (USDAFS 2002a). Coal land use planning involves four planning screens to determine whether the subject coal is acceptable for further lease consideration. The four coal screens are: • • • development potential of the coal lands; unsuitability criteria application; multiple land use decisions that eliminate federal coal deposits; and surface owner consultation.

•

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1.0 Introduction Only those federal coal lands that pass these screens are given further consideration for leasing. These coal screens were applied to federal coal lands in Campbell and Converse Counties in the early 1980s by the BLM and USDA-FS. The results were published in the BLM Buffalo RMP, the Platte River RMP, and the TBNG LRMP in 1985. The five LBA tracts considered in this EIS are located in the area covered by the USDA-FS screening analysis published in the TBNG LRMP in 1985. In 1993, BLM, USDA-FS, and USFWS began the process of reapplying these screens to federal coal lands in Campbell, Converse, and Sheridan Counties. This analysis was adopted in the BLM Buffalo Field Office RMP update (BLM 2001a) and the USDA-FS Thunder Basin National Grassland LRMP Revision (USDA-FS 2001b), discussed above. The results of this analysis were included as Appendix D of the 2001 BLM Buffalo Field Office RMP update and can be viewed on the Wyoming BLM website at in the NEPA documents section. A coal tract that is acceptable for further consideration for leasing must be located within an area that has been determined to have coal development potential. The lands in these coal lease applications are within the area identified as having coal development potential by the BLM and the USDA-FS in the coal screening analyses published in both the 1985 and 2001 BLM and USDAFS planning documents. The coal mining unsuitability criteria listed in the federal coal management regulations (43 CFR 3461) have been applied to high to moderate coal development potential lands in the Wyoming PRB. Appendix B of this EIS summarizes the unsuitability criteria, describes the general findings for the 1985 BLM Buffalo and Platte River RMPs, the 1985 USDA-FS TBNG LRMP, the 2001 BLM Approved Resource Management Plan for Public Lands Administered by the Bureau of Land Management Buffalo Field Office, and the 2002 USDA-FS Final EIS for the Northern Great Plains Management Plans Revision for Thunder Basin National Grassland, and presents a validation of these findings for the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts. As indicated in Appendix B, no lands in the NARO North or West Antelope LBA Tracts have been found to be unsuitable for mining. The lands in the NARO South LBA Tract within the BNSF & UP railroad ROW, and the lands in the Little Thunder LBA Tract within the BNSF & UP railroad and Highway 450 ROWs have been found to be unsuitable for mining under Unsuitability Criteria Numbers 2 and 3. USDA-FS has determined that lands under a USDA-FS special use permit for ancillary facilities at the North Rochelle Mine are unsuitable for mining under Unsuitability Criterion Number 2 (USDA-FS 2002b). These lands were not included in the application for the West Roundup LBA Tract, but BLM is considering leasing a tract that would include these lands as an alternative 1-21

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1.0 Introduction to the tract as applied for. Although the lands described above have been determined to be unsuitable for mining, they would be included in the LBA tracts to allow recovery of all the mineable coal outside of the railroad and highway ROWs, associated buffer zones, and the USDA-FS special use permit for ancillary facilities at the North Rochelle Mine and to comply with the coal leasing regulations, which do not allow leasing in less than 10-acre aliquot parts. A stipulation stating that no mining activity may be conducted in the portion of the leases within the BNSF & UP railroad and Highway 450 ROWs and USDA-FS special use permit will be attached if leases are issued for these tracts. The exclusion of the coal underlying the railroad and highway ROWs and USDA-FS special use permit from mining activity by lease stipulation honors the finding of unsuitability for mining under Unsuitability Criteria Numbers 2 and 3 for the BNSF & UP railroad and Highway 450 ROWs and USDAFS special use permit for ancillary facilities at the North Rochelle Mine. Surface owner consultation was completed during the preparation of coal screening analyses published in the 1985 and 2001 RMPs and LRMPs. Qualified private surface owners in the Gillette coal development potential area were provided the opportunity to express their preference for or against surface mining of federal coal under their private surface estate during both these screenings (see Chapter 7 for a definition of a “qualified surface owner”). The current surface 1-22 ownership of the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts is discussed in Section 1.0 of this chapter and in Section 3.11. For each tract that is offered for sale, BLM will review the current surface ownership in the tract, and any private surface owners who are determined to be qualified will be consulted prior to holding a lease sale for that tract. As part of the coal planning for the 1985 BLM Buffalo and Platte River RMPs and the 1985 USDA-FS TBNG LRMP, a multiple land use conflict analysis was completed to identify and “eliminate additional coal deposits from further consideration for leasing to protect resource values of a locally important or unique nature not included in the unsuitability criteria”, in accordance with 43 CFR 3420.1-4e(3). The 1985 multiple use conflict evaluation in the BLM Buffalo RMP identified approximately 221,000 acres within Campbell, Sheridan, and Johnson Counties that were potentially affected by multiple use conflicts in four categories (producing oil and gas fields, communities, recreation and public purpose facilities, and cultural resources). The multiple use conflict evaluation referenced in the 1985 USDA-FS TBNG LRMP determined that there were no multiple use conflicts that were significant enough to require any lands to be withdrawn from leasing consideration in the area covered by the USDA-FS screening analysis. The 1985 BLM Platte River RMP relied on the 1985 USDA-FS TBNG LRMP analysis as the basis for South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1.0 Introduction coal planning. As discussed above, the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts are located within the 1985 USDA-FS TBNG LRMP analysis area. No additional lands were specifically identified as potentially affected by multiple use conflicts in the multiple use analysis referenced in the 2001 Approved Resource Management Plan for Public Lands Administered by the Bureau of Land Management Buffalo Field Office (BLM 2001a) and the 2001 Final EIS for the Northern Great Plains Management Plans Revision for Thunder Basin National Grassland (USDA-FS 2001a). The 1985 BLM Buffalo RMP addressed coal and oil and gas development conflicts in two planning decisions. Decision MM-4 recommended authorizing oil and gas drilling on coal leases only where drilling would not conflict with coal mining, and Decision MM-5 recommended deferring coal leasing in producing oil and gas fields until coal development would not interfere with economic recovery of the oil and gas resource, as determined on a case by case basis. The 1985 USDA-FS TBNG LRMP deferred mineral leasing decisions to the Department of Interior. The multiple use analysis published in the 2001 BLM Buffalo RMP update did not recommend changes to the existing 1985 RMP and LRMP decisions related to mineral development conflicts for either the BLM or the USDA-FS. Decision M-2 in the 1985 BLM Platte River RMP included similar decisions South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS to those in the 1985 BLM Buffalo RMP. The BLM Casper Field Office is currently initiating an update of the 1985 BLM Platte River RMP. As indicated in Section 1.0 of this EIS, the PRRCT reviewed the lease applications included in this EIS at a public meeting on October 25, 2000, in Cheyenne, Wyoming. At that meeting, the PRRCT heard presentations from representatives of some of the oil and gas lessees who might be affected by leasing the tracts included in this analysis regarding deferring leasing the federal coal in these tracts until the majority of the CBM resource in the tracts can be recovered. The PRRCT recommended that the BLM proceed with leasing these tracts. The BLM has followed the PRRCT’s recommendation regarding processing the applications for the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts. CBM wells presently exist or have been proposed in and around the LBA tracts in the General Analysis Area (see Mineral Resources discussion in Section 3.3.1). BLM has also identified federal oil and gas leases and corresponding lessees within existing coal leases and coal lease application areas. Those oil and gas lessees have been and are being contacted and encouraged to develop and recover the CBM resources that may be affected by surface coal mining operations at the existing mines. This approach is consistent with BLM’s policy on conflicts between coal and CBM development, which is to optimize the recovery of 1-23

1.0 Introduction both resources and ensure that the public received a reasonable return, as explained in BLM Instruction Memorandum No. 2000-081. In summary, all of the lands in the PRCC, ALC, TCC, and ACC coal lease applications have been subjected to the four coal planning screens and determined acceptable for further lease consideration. Thus, a decision to lease the federal coal lands in this application would be in conformance with the existing management plans for the BLM and USDA-FS. 1.5 Consultation and Coordination Initial Involvement BLM received the NARO North and NARO South coal lease applications on March 10, 2000, the Little Thunder coal lease application on March 23, 2000, the West Roundup coal lease application on July 28, 2000, and the West Antelope coal lease application on September 12, 2000. The applications were initially reviewed by the BLM, Wyoming State Office, Division of Mineral and Lands Authorization. The BLM ruled that these applications and lands involved met the requirements of regulations governing coal leasing on application (43 CFR 3425). The BLM Wyoming State Director notified the Governor of Wyoming on April 5, 2000, that PRCC had filed a lease application with BLM for the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts. The BLM Wyoming State Director notified the Governor of 1-24 Wyoming on April 15, 2000 that ALC filed a lease application with BLM for the Little Thunder LBA Tract. The BLM Wyoming State Director notified the Governor of Wyoming on August 24, 2000 that TCC filed a lease application with BLM for the West Roundup LBA Tract. The BLM Wyoming State Director notified the Governor of Wyoming on October 3, 2000 that ACC filed a lease application with BLM for the West Antelope LBA Tract. A notice announcing the receipt of the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, and West Roundup coal lease applications published in the Federal Register on September 12, 2000 served as public notice that those coal lease applications had been received. Copies were sent to voting and nonvoting members of the PRRCT, including the governors of Wyoming and Montana, the Northern Cheyenne Tribe, the Crow Tribal Council, the USDA-FS, OSM, USFWS, National Park Service, and U.S. Geological Survey. The PRRCT reviewed all four lease applications at a public meeting held on October 25, 2000, in Cheyenne, Wyoming. Each of the applicants presented information about their existing mine and pending lease application to the PRRCT at that meeting. The PRRCT recommended that the BLM continue to process all four lease applications. The major steps in processing an LBA are shown in Appendix C. The BLM published a Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and Notice of Scoping in South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1.0 Introduction the Federal Register on October 3, 2001 and in the Gillette News Record on September 25, 2001 and October 2, 2001. The publications served as public notice that the ACC coal lease application had been received, announced the time and location of a public scoping meeting, and requested public comment on all four applications. Letters requesting public comment and announcing the time and location of the public scoping meeting were mailed to all parties on the distribution list in September, 2001. A public scoping meeting was held on October 10, 2001 in Gillette, Wyoming. At the public meeting, the applicants orally presented information about their mines and their needs for the coal. The presentation was followed by a question and answer period, during which one oral comment was made. The scoping period extended from October 1 through October 31, 2001, during which time BLM received 12 written comments. Chapter 5 provides a list of other federal, state, and local governmental agencies that were consulted in preparation of this EIS and the distribution list for this EIS. Issues and Concerns Issues and concerns expressed by the public and government agencies relating to the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope coal lease applications and previous coal lease applications included: South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS • potential conflicts with existing conventional oil and gas development and existing and proposed CBM development; cumulative impacts of mineral development to all other resources; validity and currency of resource data; public access; potential impacts to threatened and endangered species and other species of concern; potential air quality impacts (including cumulative impacts to visibility); potential surface and groundwater quality and quantity impacts; potential impacts of and possible mitigation for nitrogen oxide emissions resulting from blasting of coal and overburden; the need to include reasonably foreseeable actions such as the construction and operation of the DM&E railroad and power plants in the cumulative analysis; the need to address increasing coal production in the PRB in the cumulative analysis; potential impacts on cultural and paleontological resources; wetland impacts; and short- and long-term impacts on aquatic and terrestrial wildlife species. Draft EIS Parties on the distribution list were sent copies of the Draft EIS, and copies were made available for review at the BLM offices in Casper and 1-25

•

• • •

•

• • •

1.0 Introduction Cheyenne, Wyoming. Due to the amount of information available on these tracts, a separate document, entitled Supplementary Information on the Affected Environment in the General Analysis Area for the South Powder River Basin Coal Lease Applications EIS, was prepared. This supplementary document provides more detailed information on the affected environment in each tract. Copies of the supplementary information document are available on request and can be viewed at the BLM offices in Casper and Cheyenne. A notice announcing the availability of the Draft EIS was published in the Federal Register on February 7, 2003 by the EPA. The BLM published a Notice of Availability/Notice of Public Hearing in the Federal Register on February 20, 2003. The BLM published a notice of availability and notice of public hearing in the Gillette News-Record and Douglas Budget newspapers on February 5 and February 12, 2003. A comment period on the Draft EIS commenced on February 7, 2003, with publication of the EPA Notice of Availability, and ended on April 11, 2003. A public hearing, as required under 43 CFR 3425.4 (a)(1), was held at 7:00 pm on March 4, 2002, at the Best Western Tower West Lodge in Gillette, Wyoming. The purpose of the public hearing was to solicit public comments on the Draft EIS and on the fair market value, the maximum economic recovery, and the proposed competitive sale of coal from the five LBA tracts. Comments from four speakers were recorded at the 1-26 public hearing. Transcripts of the public hearing can be viewed at the BLM offices in Casper and Cheyenne. Final EIS and Future Involvement Parties on the distribution list are being sent copies of this Final EIS, and copies are being made available for review at the BLM offices in Casper and Cheyenne. In addition to the four comments received at the public hearing, BLM received 12 written comment letters on the Draft EIS. All substantive written comments received on the Draft EIS are included, with agency responses, in this Final EIS. Availability of the Final EIS will be published in the Federal Register by the BLM and the EPA. After a 30-day availability period, BLM will make separate decisions to hold or not to hold a competitive lease sale for the federal coal in each of these five tracts. A public ROD for each of the tracts will be mailed to parties on the mailing list and others who commented on this EIS during the NEPA process. The public and/or the applicants can appeal the BLM decision to hold or not to hold a competitive sale and issue a lease for any of the five tracts. The BLM decision must be appealed within 30 days from the date the Notice of Availability for the Record of Decision is published in the Federal The decision can be Register. implemented at that time if no appeal is received. If competitive lease sales are held, the lease sales will follow the procedures set forth in 43 CFR 3422, 43 CFR 3425, and BLM Handbook H3420-1 (Competitive Coal Leasing).

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1.0 Introduction Department of Justice Consultation After each competitive coal lease sale, but prior to issuance of a lease, the BLM will solicit the opinion of the Department of Justice on whether the planned lease issuance creates a situation inconsistent with federal antitrust laws. The Department of Justice is allowed 30 days to make this determination. If the Department of Justice has not responded in writing within the 30 days, the BLM can proceed with issuance of the lease.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

1-27

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 2.0 PROPOSED ACTION ALTERNATIVES AND would be developed as a new mine (Alternative 4); and • delaying the sale of one or more of the five LBA tracts as applied for to wait for possible higher coal prices and/or to allow recovery of the CBM resources in the tract prior to mining (Alternative 5). Under this alternative, it is assumed that one or more of the five LBA tracts could be developed later as a maintenance tract or a new start mine, depending on how long the sale was delayed.

This chapter describes the Proposed Action and alternatives to this action for each of the five LBA1 tracts being evaluated in this EIS. The five LBA tracts are the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts as applied for by PRCC, the Little Thunder LBA Tract as applied for by ALC, the West Roundup LBA Tract as applied for by TCC, and the West Antelope LBA Tract as applied for by ACC. For each tract, the Proposed Action is to hold a separate competitive lease sale and issue a separate lease for the federal coal lands included in the tract. The No Action Alternative (Alternative 1) for each tract is to reject the lease application for that tract and not offer that tract for competitive sale at this time. Alternatives 2 and 3 evaluate alternate tract configurations considered by BLM. Under Alternatives 2 and 3, separate competitive sales would be held and leases issued for federal coal lands included in one or more of the five LBA tracts as modified by the BLM. Other alternatives considered but not analyzed in detail include: • holding a competitive lease sale and issuing a lease for federal coal lands included in one or more of the five LBA tracts (as applied for or as modified by BLM), with the assumption that one or more of the tracts

Under each Proposed Action, a tract would be offered for lease as applied for at a separate, sealed-bid, competitive lease sale, subject to standard and special lease stipulations developed for the PRB and that tract. The boundaries of each tract would be consistent with the tract configuration proposed by each applicant. For each tract, the Proposed Action assumes that the applicant for that tract would be the successful bidder on that tract and that each tract would be mined as a maintenance lease for an existing mine. The No Action Alternative for each tract assumes that the application for that tract would be rejected, the tract would not be offered for competitive sale, and the coal contained within the tract would not be mined as proposed. Rejection of an application would not affect currently permitted mining activities on existing leases at any of the existing mines and selection of the No Action Alternative 2-1

Refer to page xii for a list of abbreviations and acronyms used in this document.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives would not preclude an application to lease any rejected tract in the future. Portions of the surface of each of the LBA tracts would probably be disturbed due to overstripping to allow coal to be removed from the adjacent, existing leases. In evaluating these lease applications, BLM identified a study area for each tract that includes adjacent unleased federal coal as well as the tract as applied for. In determining a preferred tract configuration for each tract, BLM evaluated both adding and subtracting coal from the tract as applied for in order to maintain or increase the potential for competition for that tract and to prevent potential future bypass of federal coal resources. BLM’s preferred tract delineation for each tract is considered to be BLM’s Preferred Alternative for that tract in this Final EIS. The alternate tract configurations BLM considered are described under Alternatives 2 and 3 for each tract. No alternate tract configurations were identified for the NARO North LBA Tract, so BLM’s Preferred Alternative for the NARO North LBA Tract is the tract that was applied for. For each of the other four LBA tracts considered in this EIS, BLM’s Preferred Alternative either adds or subtracts coal from the tract that was applied for. LBA tracts are nominated for leasing by companies with an interest in acquiring them but, as discussed in Chapter 1, the LBA process is, by law and regulation, an open, public, competitive sealed-bid process. If a tract is offered for lease, the applicant 2-2 for that tract may or may not be the high bidder when the lease sale is held. For each tract, if a decision is made to hold a separate competitive lease sale and there is a successful bidder, a detailed mining and reclamation plan must be developed by the successful bidder and approved before mining can begin on that tract. As discussed in Section 1.2, each mining and reclamation plan would undergo detailed review by state and federal agencies as part of the approval process. Those plans could potentially differ from the plans used to analyze the impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives 2 and 3, which are the Action Alternatives in this EIS, but the differences would not be expected to significantly change the impacts described here. These differences would typically be related to the details of mining and reclaiming the tracts but major factors like tons of coal mined, yards of overburden removed, acres disturbed, etc. would not be significantly different from the plans used in this analysis. An estimate of the coal included in each tract provided by the applicant is given in the following descriptions of the Proposed Action and Action Alternatives for each tract. BLM will independently evaluate the volume and average quality of the coal resources included in each tract offered for sale as part of the fair market value determination process. BLM’s estimate of the mineable federal coal reserves and average quality of the coal included in each South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives tract will be published in the sale notice for each tract that is offered for sale. Some general coal quality information in the area of the LBA tracts considered in this EIS is included in Section 3.3 of this document. Under the Proposed Action and the Action Alternatives for each tract, it is assumed that an area larger than the tract would have to be disturbed in order to recover all of the coal in that tract. The disturbances outside the coal removal area would be due to activities like overstripping, matching undisturbed topography, and construction of flood control and sediment control structures. Hazardous and Solid Waste Under all of the Proposed Actions and Action Alternatives, the procedures and requirements for handling of hazardous and solid wastes would be the same as the procedures and requirements for the existing mining operations. Solid waste that is produced at the existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mines consists of floor sweepings, shop rags, lubricant containers, welding rod ends, metal shavings, worn tires, packing material, used filters, and office and food wastes. North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mines dispose of a portion of their solid wastes within their permit boundaries in accordance with WDEQ-approved solid waste disposal plans. Solid waste is also disposed of at the South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS PRCC, TBCC, TCC, and ACC have reviewed the EPA’s Consolidated List of Chemicals Subject to Reporting Under Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Re-authorization Act (SARA) of 1986 (as amended) and EPA’s List of Extremely Hazardous Substances as defined in 40 CFR 355 (as amended) for hazardous substances used at their mining operations. PRCC, TBCC, TCC, and ACC maintain files containing Material Safety Data Sheets for all chemicals, compounds, and/or substances which are or would be used during the course of mining. PRCC, TBCC, TCC, and ACC are responsible for ensuring that all production, use, storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous and extremely hazardous materials as a result of mining are in accordance with all applicable existing or 2-3 Campbell County landfill. Sewage is handled by WDEQ-permitted sewage systems present on the existing mine facilities. Maintenance and lubrication of most of the equipment takes place at existing shop facilities at all four mines. Major lubrication, oil changes, etc., of most equipment are performed inside the service building lube bays at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mines, where used oil is currently contained and deposited in storage tanks. All of the collected used oils are then recycled off site. These practices would not change if the applicants acquire these LBA tracts.

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives hereafter promulgated federal, state, and local government rules, regulations, and guidelines. All mining activities involving the production, use, and/or disposal of hazardous or extremely hazardous materials are and would continue to be conducted so as to minimize potential environmental impacts. PRCC, TBCC, TCC, and ACC must comply with emergency reporting requirements for releases of hazardous materials. Any release of hazardous or extremely hazardous substances in excess of the reportable quantity, as established in 40 CFR 117, is reported as required by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended. The materials for which such notification must be given are the extremely hazardous substances listed in Section 302 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act and the hazardous substances designated under Section 102 of CERCLA, as amended. If a reportable quantity of a hazardous or extremely hazardous substance is released, immediate notice must be given to the WDEQ Solid and Hazardous Waste Division, WDEQ Water Quality Division, and all other appropriate federal and state agencies. Each mining company is expected to prepare and implement several plans and/or policies to ensure environmental protection from hazardous and extremely hazardous materials. These plans/policies include: 2-4 • Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plans; Spill Response Plans; Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans; Inventories of Hazardous Chemical Categories Pursuant to Section 313 of SARA, as Amended; and Emergency Response Plans.

• •

•

All mining operations are also required to be in compliance with regulations promulgated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act), Safe Drinking Water Act, Toxic Substances Control Act, Mine Safety and Health Act, Department of Transportation, and the Federal Clean Air Act. In addition, mining operations must comply with all attendant state rules and regulations relating to hazardous material reporting, transportation, management, and disposal. Compliance with these rules is the current practice at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mines. Acquisition of the LBA tracts by the applicants would not change these current practices nor the type of any wastes generated or disposed at the mines, although quantities of some wastes would increase in proportion to anticipated increases in coal production (e.g., fuel, lubricants, and shop and office wastes). South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 2.1 Proposed Action and Alternatives for the NARO North LBA Tract LBA Tract (Preferred Section 29: Lots 5 through 16; 495.89 acres Section 30: Lots 9 through 20; 443.67 acres T.42N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 25: Lots 5 through 15; 447.19 acres Section 26: Lots 7 through 10; 162.22 acres Section 35: Lots 1, 2, 7 through 10, 15 and 16; 324.82 acres Total: 2,369.38 acres

2.1.1 NARO North Proposed Action Alternative)

PRCC has applied for two separate LBA tracts (NARO North and NARO South). Each tract will be evaluated separately and if a decision is made to lease both of these tracts, a separate competitive lease sale will be held for each tract. Under the Proposed Action for the NARO North LBA Tract, the tract as applied for by PRCC would be offered for lease at a separate, sealed-bid, competitive lease sale, subject to standard and special lease stipulations developed for the PRB (Appendix D). The boundaries of the tract would be consistent with the tract configuration proposed in the NARO North LBA Tract lease application (Figure 2-1). The Proposed Action assumes that PRCC will be the successful bidder on the NARO North LBA Tract if it is offered for sale. The Proposed Action is the Preferred Alternative of the BLM for the NARO North LBA Tract. The legal description of the proposed NARO North LBA Tract coal lease lands as applied for by PRCC under the Proposed Action is as follows: T.42N., R.70W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 28: Lots 5 through 16; 495.59 acres South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Land descriptions and acreage are based on the BLM Status of Public Domain Land and Mineral Titles approved Coal Plats as of February 12, 2003 and May 13, 2003. As indicated in Chapter 1, Section 1.4 and Appendix B, no lands in the NARO North LBA Tract were found to be unsuitable for mining. The NARO North tract as applied for includes approximately 2,369.38 mineable acres. PRCC estimates that the NARO North tract includes approximately 323 million tons of inplace coal reserves. Assuming a recovery factor of 95 percent, PRCC estimates that about 306.9 million tons of coal would be recovered from the NARO North LBA Tract as applied for. BLM will independently evaluate the volume and average quality of the coal resources included in the NARO North LBA Tract as part of the fair market value determination process. 2-5

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives
10 11 12

R. 71 W. R. 70 W. 7

Re no Ro ad

BNSF + UP

Double Tracks

Piney Canyon (Mackey) Road

T. 42 N.
Antelope

T. 42 N. T. 41 N.
1 6 5 4 3
Road

T. 41 N.
3 2

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

LEGEND
North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Permit Boundary NARO North LBA Tract as Applied for (BLM's Preferred Alternative) Existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Federal Coal Leases
0 2500 5000 10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 2-1. NARO North LBA Tract Configuration.

2-6

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives BLM's estimate of the mineable reserves and average quality of the coal included in the tracts will be published in the sale notice if the tract is offered for sale. Some coal quality information in the area of the NARO North LBA Tract is included in Section 3.3 of this document. The approved North Antelope/ Rochelle Complex Permit 569 Term T5 includes monitoring and mitigation measures for the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex that are required by SMCRA and Wyoming State Law. If the NARO North LBA Tract is acquired by PRCC, these monitoring and mitigation measures would be extended to cover operations on the NARO North LBA Tract when the coal mining permit is amended to include the tract. This amended permit would have to be approved before mining operations could take place on the tract. These monitoring and mitigation measures are considered to be part of the Proposed Action and other Action Alternatives during the leasing process because they are regulatory requirements. The NARO North LBA Tract would be mined as an integral part of the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex under the Proposed Action. The North Antelope/Rochelle Complex is already operating under both an approved state mining permit and MLA mining plan. Both the approved state mining permit and MLA mining plan would require amendment to include the LBA tract. Since the NARO North LBA Tract would be an extension of the existing North Antelope/Rochelle South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS Complex, the facilities and infrastructure would be the same as those identified in the WDEQ/LQD Mine Permit 569 Term T5 approved December 1, 1999 and the BLM Resource Recovery and Protection Plan approved July 23, 2001 for the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. PRCC=s currently approved air quality permit from the WDEQ/AQD allows up to 105 million tons of coal per year to be mined in years 2004 through 2006. The North Antelope/Rochelle Complex produced 68.9 million tons of coal in 1999, 70.8 million tons of coal in 2000, 74.8 million tons of coal in 2001, and 74.8 million tons of coal in 2002 (Wyoming State Inspector of Mines 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002). Under the No Action Alternative, the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex would mine its remaining 877 million tons of in-place coal reserves in approximately 11 years at an average production rate of 75 mmtpy (the projected production rate ranges between 8.7 mmtpy to 105 mmtpy). Under the Proposed Action, PRCC estimates that average annual coal production would be 90 million tons (the projected production rate ranges between 26 mmtpy to 105 mmtpy), and the life of the mine would be extended by approximately five years. If PRCC acquires both the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts as applied for, they estimate that a total of 1,340 million tons of coal would be mined after January 1, 2003, with an estimated 506.9 million tons coming from the two LBA tracts. As of December 31, 2002, 718 million tons of coal had been mined from within 2-7

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives the current permitted area of the mine. Topsoil removal with heavy equipment would proceed ahead of overburden removal. Whenever possible, direct haulage to a reclamation area would be done, but due to scheduling, some topsoil would be temporarily stockpiled. As required by the reclamation plan, heavy equipment again would be used to haul and distribute the stockpiled topsoil. The North Antelope/Rochelle Complex is one of several mines currently operating in the PRB where the coal seams are notably thick and the overburden is relatively thin. Mining would be conducted in semiindependent pits. Overburden removal has been and would continue to be conducted using trucks and shovels, draglines, and/or direct cast blasting. Most overburden and all coal would be drilled and blasted to facilitate efficient excavation. The design of the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex seeks to confine disturbance to the active mine blocks. As overburden is removed, most would be directly placed into areas where coal has already been removed. Once the overburden has been replaced it is sampled and verified to be suitable overburden material, then graded to approximate final contour, ripped and finally topsoiled. If necessary, material that is found to be unsuitable would be adequately covered with suitable overburden material prior to grading and topsoiling. Elevations consistent with an approved PMT plan would be 2-8 established as quickly as possible. Under certain conditions, the PMT may not be immediately achievable. This occurs when there is an excess of material that may require temporary stockpiling, when there is insufficient material available from current overburden removal operations, or when future mining could redisturb an area already mined. Once a seedbed has been formed, vegetation would be reestablished that is consistent with the postmining land use. Coal would be produced from two seams (Wyodak-Anderson 1 and Wyodak-Anderson 2) that total 60 to 80 ft thick at several working faces to enable blending of the coal to meet customer quality requirements, to comply with BLM lease requirements for maximum economic recovery of the coal resource, and to optimize coal removal efficiency with available equipment. Coal would be loaded with electric-powered shovels into offhighway haul trucks for transport to crushing facilities. Coal haul roads would be temporary structures built within the mine areas. Mining efficiency and air quality protection are and would continue to be facilitated by extensive use of near-pit crushers and overland conveyors. There are three existing crushing facilities within the existing permit area. All transfer points on conveyor belts and the truck dump hopper at the processing plant are controlled by baghouse-type dust collectors, PECs, fogger/spray systems, or stilling sheds. There are five existing storage silos, each with a covered storage slot. While sufficient capacity exists, South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives future changes in facilities may be constructed to improve operating efficiency and air quality protection. An additional near-pit crusher/conveyor, railroad loop, and two silos are planned whether or not PRCC acquires the NARO North or NARO South LBA Tracts. PRCC’s currently approved air quality permit from the WDEQ/AQD allows a maximum of 105 million tons of coal per year to be mined provided additional coal handling and processing facilities are constructed. The fourth crushing facility and two additional storage silos have been permitted for construction. Current full-time employment at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex is approximately 820 but PRCC anticipates that employment will increase to 1,175 under the No Action Alternative. If both the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts are acquired, PRCC anticipates that the average annual coal production would be approximately 90 million tons, the maximum annual coal production would be 105 million tons, and employment would be 1,185 persons at the maximum annual production rate of 105 million tons. 2.1.2 NARO Alternative 1 North LBA Tract not affect permitted mining activities and employment on the existing leases at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex and would not preclude an application to lease the coal included in the NARO North LBA Tract in the future. Portions of the surface of the NARO North LBA Tract could be disturbed due to overstripping to allow coal to be removed from the adjacent existing leases. Approximately 14,895.5 acres of federal coal are currently leased at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex and a total of about 20,410 acres of land will be affected in mining the current leases. If the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts are not leased, PRCC estimates that the average annual production at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex after 2002 will be 75 million tons, annual projected production ranges from 8.7 million tons to 105 million tons, and employment will be approximately 1,175 persons at the maximum production rate. In order to compare the economic and environmental consequences of mining these lands versus not mining them, this EIS was prepared under the assumption that an LBA tract would not be mined in the foreseeable future if the No Action Alternative for that tract is selected. However, selection of the NARO North No Action Alternative would not preclude leasing and mining of the tract in the future, either as a maintenance tract for an existing mining operation or as a new start mine.

Under the NARO North LBA Tract Alternative 1, the No Action Alternative, the application to lease the coal included in the NARO North LBA Tract would be rejected, the tract would not be offered for competitive sale, and the coal included in the tract would not be mined. This would South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2-9

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 2.2 Proposed Action and Alternatives for the NARO South LBA Tract LBA Tract Section 20: Lots 5(S½), 6(S½), 7(S½), 8(S½), 9 through 16; 402.645 acres Section 21: Lots 5(S½), 12, and 13; 99.695 acres Section 28: Lots 3 through 6, 11, and NE¼ SW¼; 238.62 acres Section 29: Lots 1 through 12; 484.08 acres Section 30: Lots 5 through 12; 324.04 acres Total: 2,133.635 acres

2.2.1 NARO South Proposed Action

PRCC has applied for two separate LBA tracts (NARO North and NARO South). Each tract will be evaluated separately and, if a decision is made to lease both of these tracts, a separate competitive lease sale will be held for each tract. Under the Proposed Action for the NARO South LBA Tract, the tract as applied for by PRCC would be offered for lease at a separate, sealed-bid, competitive lease sale, subject to standard and special lease stipulations developed for the PRB (Appendix D). The boundaries of the tract would be consistent with the tract configuration proposed in the NARO South LBA Tract lease application (Figure 2-2a). The Proposed Action assumes that PRCC will be the successful bidder on the NARO South LBA Tract if it is offered for sale. The legal description of the proposed NARO South LBA Tract coal lease lands as applied for by PRCC under the Proposed Action is as follows: T.41N., R.70W., 6th P.M., Campbell and Converse Counties, Wyoming Section 19: Lots 6 through 11, 12(S½), 13 through 20; 584.555 acres

Land descriptions and acreage are based on the BLM Status of Public Domain Land and Mineral Titles approved Coal Plats as of May 13, 2003. As indicated in Chapter 1, Section 1.4 and Appendix B, some of the abovedescribed lands in the NARO South LBA Tract are unsuitable for mining due to the presence of the BNSF & UP railroad ROW and partially burned areas where the coal is not recoverable. Although these lands would not be mined, they are included in the tract to allow maximum recovery of all the mineable coal outside of the railroad ROW and associated buffer zones and the partially burned areas, and to comply with the coal leasing regulations, which do not allow leasing of less than 10-acre aliquot parts. The NARO South tract as applied for includes approximately 2,133.635 mineable acres. PRCC estimates that it includes approximately 241 million tons of in-place coal and that about 200 million tons of that coal would be recoverable. An average recovery South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2-10

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives
14
Tracks

13
Antelo pe Road

R. 71 W. R. 70 W. 18

BNSF + UP

Double

T. 41 N.

26 Campbell County Converse County

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

LEGEND
North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Permit Boundary
0 2500 5000 10000

NARO South LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2

Area Removed Under Alternative 3 Existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Federal Coal Leases

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 2-2a. NARO South LBA Alternative Tract Configurations.

Tracks

13
Antelo pe Road

R. 71 W. R. 70 W. 18

BNSF + UP

Double

T. 41 N.

26 Campbell County Converse County

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

LEGEND
0 2500 5000 10000

North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Permit Boundary Area Added Under BLM's Preferred Alternative

NARO South LBA Tract as Applied for Existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Federal Coal Leases

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 2-2b. NARO South LBA Preferred Alternative Tract Configuration.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2-11

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives factor of approximately 83 percent is therefore assumed, based largely upon PRCC’s estimate of the unmineable reserves within the ROW and unrecoverable coal in partially burned areas. BLM will independently evaluate the volume and average quality of the coal resources included in the NARO South LBA Tract as part of the fair market value determination process. The fact that the coal within the ROW and partially burned area cannot all be recovered will be considered by BLM in the fair market value determination for the LBA tract. BLM's estimate of the mineable reserves and average quality of the coal included in the tracts will be published in the sale notice if the tract is offered for sale. Some coal quality information in the area of the NARO South LBA Tract is included in Section 3.3 of this document. The approved North Antelope/ Rochelle Complex Permit 569 Term T5 includes monitoring and mitigation measures for the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex that are required by SMCRA and Wyoming State Law. If the NARO South LBA Tract is acquired by PRCC, these monitoring and mitigation measures would be extended to cover operations on the NARO South LBA Tract when the coal mining permit is amended to include the tract. This amended permit would have to be approved before mining operations could take place on the tract. These monitoring and mitigation measures are considered to be part of the Proposed Action and other Action 2-12 Alternatives during the leasing process because they are regulatory requirements. The NARO South LBA Tract would be mined as an integral part of the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex under the Proposed Action. The North Antelope/Rochelle Complex is already operating under both an approved state mining permit and MLA mining plan. Both the approved state mining permit and MLA mining plan would require amendment to include the LBA tract. Since the NARO South LBA Tract would be an extension of the existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, the facilities and infrastructure would be the same as those identified in the WDEQ/LQD Mine Permit 569 Term T5 approved December 1, 1999 and the BLM Resource Recovery and Protection Plan approved July 23, 2001 for the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. PRCC’s currently approved air quality permit from the WDEQ/AQD allows up to 105 million tons of coal per year to be mined in years 2004 through 2006. The North Antelope/Rochelle Complex produced 68.9 million tons of coal in 1999, 70.8 million tons of coal in 2000, 74.8 million tons of coal in 2001, and 74.8 million tons of coal in 2002 (Wyoming State Inspector of Mines 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002). Under the No Action Alternative, the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex would mine its remaining 877 million tons of in-place coal reserves in approximately 11 years at an average production rate of 75 mmtpy (the projected production rate ranges between 8.7 mmtpy to 105 mmtpy). South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Under the Proposed Action, PRCC estimates that average annual coal production would be 90 million tons (the projected production rate ranges between 26 mmtpy to 105 mmtpy), and the life of the mine would be extended by approximately five years. If PRCC acquires both the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts as applied for, they estimate that a total of 1,340 million tons of coal would be mined after January 1, 2003, with an estimated 506.9 million tons coming from the two LBA tracts. As of December 31, 2002, 718 million tons of coal had been mined from within the current permitted area of the mine. Topsoil removal with heavy equipment would proceed ahead of overburden removal. Whenever possible, direct haulage to a reclamation area would be done, but due to scheduling, some topsoil would be temporarily stockpiled. As required by the reclamation plan, heavy equipment again would be used to haul and distribute the stockpiled topsoil. The North Antelope/Rochelle Complex is one of several mines currently operating in the PRB where the coal seams are notably thick and the overburden is relatively thin. Mining would be conducted in semiindependent pits. Overburden removal has been and would continue to be conducted using trucks and shovels, draglines, and/or direct cast blasting. Most overburden and all coal would be drilled and blasted to facilitate efficient excavation. The South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS design of the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex seeks to confine disturbance to the active mine blocks. As overburden is removed, most would be directly placed into areas where coal has already been removed. Once the overburden has been replaced it is sampled and verified to be suitable overburden material, then graded to approximate final contour, ripped and finally topsoiled. If necessary, material that is found to be unsuitable would be adequately covered with suitable overburden material prior to grading and topsoiling. Elevations consistent with an approved PMT plan would be established as quickly as possible. Under certain conditions, the PMT may not be immediately achievable. This occurs when there is an excess of material that may require temporary stockpiling, when there is insufficient material available from current overburden removal operations, or when future mining could redisturb an area already mined. Once a seedbed has been formed, vegetation would be reestablished that is consistent with the postmining land use. Coal would be produced from two seams (Wyodak-Anderson 1 and Wyodak-Anderson 2) that total 60 to 80 ft thick at several working faces to enable blending of the coal to meet customer quality requirements, to comply with BLM lease requirements for maximum economic recovery of the coal resource, and to optimize coal removal efficiency with available equipment. Coal would be loaded with electric-powered shovels into offhighway haul trucks for transport to 2-13

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives crushing facilities. Coal haul roads would be temporary structures built within the mine areas. Mining efficiency and air quality protection are and would continue to be facilitated by extensive use of near-pit crushers and overland conveyors. There are three existing crushing facilities within the existing permit area. All transfer points on conveyor belts and the truck dump hopper at the processing plant are controlled by baghouse-type dust collectors, PECs, fogger/spray systems, or stilling sheds. There are five existing storage silos, each with a covered storage slot. While sufficient capacity exists, future changes in facilities may be constructed to improve operating efficiency and air quality protection. An additional near-pit crusher/conveyor, railroad loop, and two silos are planned whether or not PRCC acquires the NARO North or NARO South LBA Tracts. PRCC’s currently approved air quality permit from the WDEQ/AQD allows a maximum of 105 million tons of coal per year to be mined provided additional coal handling and processing facilities are constructed. The fourth crushing facility and two additional storage silos have been permitted for construction. Current full-time employment at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex is approximately 820 but PRCC anticipates that employment will increase to 1,175 under the No Action Alternative. If both the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts are acquired, PRCC anticipates that the average annual coal production would be approximately 90 million tons, the 2-14 maximum annual coal production would be 105 million tons, and employment would be 1,185 persons at the maximum annual production rate of 105 million tons. The NARO South LBA Tract was applied for by PRCC, but it is also located adjacent to the Antelope Mine, operated by ACC. ACC may also be in a position to mine the NARO South LBA Tract under the Proposed Action or Alternative 2 as a maintenance lease. If ACC acquires the tract, the rate of coal production, mining sequence, equipment, and facilities would be different than if PRCC acquired the tract as a maintenance lease, as described above. However, the area of disturbance and the impacts of removing the coal would not be substantially different from the area of disturbance and the impacts of PRCC mining the tract. 2.2.2 NARO Alternative 1 South LBA Tract

Under the NARO South LBA Tract Alternative 1, the No Action Alternative, the application to lease the coal included in the NARO South LBA Tract would be rejected, the tract would not be offered for competitive sale, and the coal included in the tract would not be mined. This would not affect permitted mining activities and employment on the existing leases at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex and would not preclude an application to lease the coal included in the NARO South LBA Tract in the future. Portions of the surface of the NARO South LBA Tract could be disturbed due to overstripping to South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives allow coal to be removed from the adjacent existing leases. Approximately 14,895.5 acres of federal coal are currently leased at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex and a total of about 20,410 acres of land will be affected in mining the current leases. If the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts are not leased, PRCC estimates that the average annual production at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex after 2002 will be 75 million tons, annual projected production ranges from 8.7 million tons to 105 million tons, and employment will be approximately 1,175 persons at the maximum production rate. In order to compare the economic and environmental consequences of mining these lands versus not mining them, this EIS was prepared under the assumption that an LBA tract would not be mined in the foreseeable future if the No Action Alternative for that tract is selected. However, selection of the NARO South No Action Alternative would not preclude leasing and mining of the tract in the future, either as a maintenance tract for an existing mining operation or as a new start mine. 2.2.3 NARO South LBA Tract Alternative 2 (Preferred Alternative) Under Alternative 2 for the NARO South LBA Tract, BLM would reconfigure the tract and hold a competitive coal sale for the lands included in the reconfigured tract and issue a lease to the successful bidder. The modified tract would be subject South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS to standard and special lease stipulations developed for the PRB and this tract if it is offered for sale (Appendix D). Alternative 2 for the NARO South LBA Tract assumes that PRCC would be the successful bidder on the tract if a lease sale is held and that the tract would be mined as a maintenance lease for the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. Other assumptions are the same as for the Proposed Action. In evaluating the NARO South coal lease application, BLM identified a study area, shown in Figure 2-2a as the “area added under Alternative 2”, that included unleased federal coal adjacent to the tract as applied for that BLM could add to the tract to potentially increase competitive interest in the tract and/or to reduce the potential that some of the remaining unleased federal coal in this area would be bypassed in the future. Under Alternative 2 for the NARO South LBA Tract, the lands that BLM considered adding lie between the western edge of the tract as applied for and the BNSF & UP railroad ROW. This study area includes approximately 1,068 acres containing approximately 146 million tons of mineable coal. The BLM’s Preferred Alternative for the NARO South LBA Tract is to add a portion of the Alternative 2 study area to the tract as applied for, as shown in Figure 2-2b. Under the Preferred Alternative, the BLM would add the followings lands to the NARO South LBA Tract as applied for:

2-15

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives T.41N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 23: Lots 8(S½) and 9; 61.075 acres Section 24: Lots 1, 5(S½), 6(S½), 7(S½), 8 through 16; 493.375 acres Section 25: Lots 1 through 4, 9, 10, and 12(N½); 268.640 acres Total: 823.090 acres Section 30: Lots 5 through 12; 324.040 acres T.41N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 23: Lots 8(S½), and 9; 61.075 acres Section 24: Lots 1, 5(S½), 6(S½), 7(S½), 8 through 16; 493.375 acres Section 25: Lots 1 through 4, 9, 10, and 12(N½); 268.640 acres Total: 2,956.725 acres

Land descriptions and acreage are based on the BLM Status of Public Domain Land and Mineral Titles approved Coal Plats as of December 4, 2001. PRCC estimates that these 823.09 acres contain approximately 104.1 million tons of mineable coal. The legal description of the NARO South LBA Tract under the BLM’s Preferred Alternative is as follows: T.41N., R.70W., 6th P.M., Campbell and Converse Counties, Wyoming Section 19: Lots 6 through 11, 12(S½), 13 through 20; 584.555 acres Section 20: Lots 5(S½), 6(S½), 7(S½), 8(S½), 9 through16; 402.645 acres Section 21: Lots 5(S½), 12, and 13; 99.695 acres Section 28: Lots 3 through 6, 11, and NE¼ SW¼; 238.620 acres Section 29: Lots 1 through 12; 484.080 acres 2-16

PRCC estimates that the reconfigured tract includes approximately 345 million tons of in-place coal. Using PRCC’s projected recovery factor of 78 percent, the reconfigured tract would contain about 270 million tons of recoverable coal. PRCC estimates that the average recovery factor for this reconfigured tract would be 78 percent because portions of the 823.09 acres added in this alternative lie within the BNSF & UP railroad ROW and are therefore unsuitable for mining according to the coal leasing unsuitability criteria (43 CFR 3461). Although the coal included in these lands could not be mined, these lands have been included in this alternative tract configuration to allow maximum recovery of all the mineable coal outside of the ROW and to comply with the coal leasing regulations, which do not allow leasing of less than 10-acre aliquot parts. BLM will independently evaluate the volume and average quality of the coal resources included in each tract South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives offered for sale as part of the fair market value determination process. The fact that the coal within the ROW and partially burned area cannot all be recovered will be considered by BLM in the fair market value determination for the LBA tract. BLM’s estimate of the recoverable federal coal reserves and average quality of the coal included in each tract will be published in the sale notice for each tract that is offered for sale. Some general coal quality information in the area of the LBA tracts considered in this EIS is included in Section 3.3 of this document. 2.2.4 NARO Alternative 3 South LBA Tract western portion of the tract from consideration for leasing at this time and offer a smaller tract for competitive sale (Figure 2-2a). The coal that BLM is considering removing from the tract as applied for could be combined with the unleased federal coal between the reconfigured NARO South LBA Tract and the BNSF & UP railroad ROW to create a tract which would potentially have more competitive interest if it is leased in the future. The lands that BLM would remove from the tract are: T.41N., R.70W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 19: Lots 6 through 11 and 14 through 19; 483.74 acres Section 30: Lots 6 through 11; 243.01 acres Total: 726.75 acres

Under Alternative 3 for the NARO South LBA Tract, BLM is considering a different tract configuration. As under Alternative 2, if this tract configuration is selected BLM would hold a competitive coal sale and issue a lease to the successful bidder. The modified tract would be subject to standard and special lease stipulations developed for the PRB and this tract if it is offered for sale (Appendix D). Alternative 3 for the NARO South LBA Tract assumes that PRCC would be the successful bidder on the tract if a lease sale is held and that the tract would be mined as a maintenance lease for the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. Other assumptions would be the same as for the Proposed Action. Under this alternative for the NARO South LBA Tract, BLM would remove some of the lands applied for in the South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

PRCC estimates that these 726.75 acres contain approximately 99.7 million tons of mineable coal. The Alternative 3 reconfiguration of the NARO South LBA Tract, therefore, results in a tract comprising approximately 1,406.89 mineable acres. PRCC estimates that the reconfigured tract includes approximately 141.4 million tons of in-place coal and that about 128 million tons of that coal would be recoverable. PRCC estimates that the average recovery factor for this reconfigured tract would be 91 percent because these 726.75 acres include lands unsuitable for mining due to the presence of partially 2-17

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives burned areas where the coal is not recoverable. BLM will independently evaluate the volume and average quality of the coal resources included in each tract offered for sale as part of the fair market value determination process. The fact that the coal within the partially burned area cannot all be recovered will be considered by BLM in the fair market value determination for the LBA tract. BLM’s estimate of the mineable federal coal reserves and average quality of the coal included in each tract will be published in the sale notice for each tract that is offered for sale. Some general coal quality information in the area of the LBA tracts considered in this EIS is included in Section 3.3 of this document. 2.3 Proposed Action and Alternatives for the Little Thunder LBA Tract LBA Tract Thunder LBA Tract if it is offered for sale. The legal description of the proposed Little Thunder LBA Tract coal lease lands as applied for by ALC under the Proposed Action is as follows: T.43N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 2: Lots 5, 6, 11 through 14, 19 and 20; 320.93 acres Section 11: Lots 1, 2, 7 through 10, 15, and 16; 302.42 acres Section 12: Lots 2 (W½ and SE¼), 3 through 16; 602.60 acres Section 13: Lots 1 through 16; 648.28 acres Section 14: Lots 1, 2, 6 through 9, 14 and 15; 299.87 acres Section 24: Lots 1 through 16; 630.52 acres Section 25: Lots 1, 2, 7 through 10, 15, and 16; 315.78 acres T.44N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 35: Lots 1, 2, 7 through 10, 15, and 16; 328.92 acres Total: 3,449.32 acres

2.3.1 Little Thunder Proposed Action

Under the Proposed Action for the Little Thunder LBA Tract, the tract as applied for by ALC would be offered for lease at a separate, sealed-bid, competitive lease sale, subject to standard and special lease stipulations developed for the PRB and this tract (Appendix D). The boundaries of the tract would be consistent with the tract configuration proposed in the Little Thunder LBA Tract lease application (Figure 2-3). The Proposed Action assumes that ALC will be the successful bidder on the Little 2-18

Land descriptions and acreage are based on the BLM Status of Public Domain Land and Mineral Titles approved Coal Plats as of July 12, 2002 and September 11, 2002. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives
R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

25 26

Small Road

T. 44 N. T. 43 N.
3 2 1 6

T. 44 N. T. 43 N.

LEGEND
Black Thunder Mine Permit Boundary Little Thunder LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternatives 2 & 3, also Area Added Under BLM's Preferred Alternative

State Highway 450

7 12

North Tract Under Alternative 3 South Tract Under Alternative 3 Existing Black Thunder Mine Federal Coal Leases

Hilight Road

14 13

27 BNSF + UP Double Tracks

31
0 2500 5000 10000

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 2-3. Little Thunder LBA Alternative Tract Configurations.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2-19

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives As indicated in Chapter 1, Section 1.4 and Appendix B, some of the above described lands in the Little Thunder LBA Tract are unsuitable for mining due to the presence of the BNSF & UP railroad and Wyoming Highway 450 ROWs. Although these lands would not be mined, they are included in the tract to allow maximum recovery of all the mineable coal outside of the railroad and highway ROWs and associated buffer zones and to comply with the coal leasing regulations, which do not allow leasing of less than 10-acre aliquot parts. The tract as applied for includes approximately 3,449.32 mineable acres. TBCC estimates that it includes approximately 479.3 million tons of in-place coal, and that about 440 million tons of that coal would be recoverable, based on an assumed recovery factor of approximately 92 percent. BLM will independently evaluate the volume and average quality of the mineable coal resources included in the tract as part of the fair market value determination process. The fact that the coal within the ROWs cannot all be recovered would be considered by BLM in the fair market value determination for the LBA tract. BLM’s estimate of the mineable reserves and average quality of the coal included in the tract will be published in the sale notice if the tract is offered for sale. Some coal quality information in the area of the Little Thunder LBA Tract is included in Section 3.3 of this document. The approved Black Thunder Mine Permit 233 Term T6 includes 2-20 monitoring and mitigation measures for the Black Thunder Mine that are required by SMCRA and Wyoming State Law. If the Little Thunder LBA Tract is acquired by ALC, these monitoring and mitigation measures would be extended to cover operations on the LBA tract when the coal mining permit is amended to include the tract. This amended permit would have to be approved before mining operations could take place on the tract. These monitoring and mitigation measures are considered to be part of the Proposed Action and other action alternatives during the leasing process because they are regulatory requirements. The Little Thunder LBA Tract would be mined as an integral part of the Black Thunder Mine under the Proposed Action. The Black Thunder Mine is already operating under both an approved state mining permit and MLA mining plan. Both the approved state mining permit and MLA mining plan would require amendment to include the LBA tract. Since the Little Thunder LBA Tract would be an extension of the existing Black Thunder Mine, the facilities and infrastructure would be the same as those identified in the WDEQ/LQD Mine Permit 233 Term T6 approved June 29, 2000 and the BLM Resource Recovery and Protection Plan approved October 5, 1999 for the Black Thunder Mine. TBCC’s currently approved air quality permit from the WDEQ/AQD allows up to 100 million tons of coal per year to be mined through year 2027. The Black Thunder Mine produced 48.7 South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives million tons of coal in 1999, 60.1 million tons in 2000, 67.6 million tons in 2001, and 65.1 million tons in 2002 (Wyoming State Inspector of Mines 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002). Under the No Action Alternative, TBCC estimates that the Black Thunder Mine will produce 68.5 million tons per year for five years. Production will decrease when the West Pit of the mine reaches the existing West Black Thunder Lease boundary in 2008. The production rate will drop after 2008 because the configuration of the remaining reserves will cause the mine to relocate and retire mining equipment. Due to the mining conditions, the mine will produce an average of 23.3 million tons per year during the last 15 years. TBCC estimates that, under the No Action Alternative, the mine will produce its remaining 854.3 million tons of recoverable coal reserves over a 23-year time-period at an average annual production rate of 37.1 million tons. Under the Proposed Action, TBCC estimates that the Black Thunder mine would produce between 66 and 68.5 million tons per year for the next 12 years, then production would decrease when the mining conditions and pit configurations change once the West Pit reaches the Little Thunder Lease Boundary. Acquisition of the Little Thunder LBA Tract would allow the Black Thunder Mine to maintain peak production rates between 66 and 68.5 million tons per year for eight additional years. Under the Proposed Action, the mine would produce 1,294.3 million tons of recoverable coal South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS reserves over a 30.5-year time-period at an average annual production rate of 42.5 million tons. If ALC acquires the Little Thunder LBA Tract as applied for, they estimate that a total of 1,294.3 million tons of recoverable coal would be mined after January 1, 2003, with an estimated 440 million tons coming from the LBA tract. This estimate of recoverable reserves equates to about an eight percent loss of coal under normal mining practices. As of December 31, 2002, 765 million tons of coal have been mined from within the current permitted area of the mine. Prior to disturbance, sediment control structures would be built as needed downstream of the mine to control runoff. Additional support structures, such as roads, powerlines, substations, flood control measures, etc., would be constructed in advance of mining. Topsoil removal with heavy equipment would proceed ahead of overburden removal. Whenever possible, direct haulage to a reclamation area would be done, but due to scheduling, some topsoil would be temporarily stockpiled. As required by the reclamation plan, heavy equipment again would be used to haul and distribute the stockpiled topsoil. The Black Thunder Mine is one of several mines currently operating in the PRB where the coal seams are notably thick and the overburden is relatively thin. Mining would be 2-21

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives conducted in three separate pits identified as the West Pit, South Pit and North Pit. Overburden removal has been and would continue to be conducted using trucks and shovels, draglines, and/or direct cast blasting. Other equipment used during overburden removal and backfilling includes dozers, scrapers, excavators, front-end loaders, graders and water trucks. Most overburden and all coal is drilled and blasted to facilitate efficient excavation. The design of the Black Thunder Mine seeks to confine disturbance to the active mine blocks. As overburden is removed, most is directly placed into areas where coal has already been removed. Once the overburden has been replaced it is sampled and verified to be suitable overburden material, then graded to approximate final contour, ripped and finally topsoiled. If necessary, material that is found to be unsuitable would be adequately covered with suitable material prior to grading and topsoiling. Elevations consistent with an approved PMT plan would be established as quickly as possible. Under certain conditions, the PMT may not be immediately achievable. This occurs when there is an excess of material that may require temporary stockpiling, when there is insufficient material available from current overburden removal operations, or when future mining could redisturb an area already mined. Once a seedbed has been formed, vegetation would be reestablished that is consistent with the postmining land use. Coal would be produced from three seams, the Upper, Middle, and Lower Wyodak, at several working faces to enable blending of the coal to meet customer quality requirements, to comply with BLM lease requirements for maximum economic recovery of the coal resource, and to optimize coal removal efficiency with available equipment. Mining efficiency and air quality protection are and would continue to be facilitated by extensive use of near-pit crushers and overland conveyors. Coal would be loaded with electric-powered shovels or hydraulic excavators into off-highway haul trucks for transport to crushing facilities. Coal haul roads would be temporary structures built within the mine areas. All coal transfer location points and crushing operations are controlled by baghouse-type dust collectors or PECs. The truck dumping operations use stilling sheds to control fugitive dust and the overland conveyor is covered by a dust hood. There are two existing crushing facilities, two silos, and a slot storage facility within the permit area that provide capacity to produce at the permitted level. While sufficient capacity exists, future changes in facilities may be constructed to improve operating efficiency and air quality protection. The existing near-pit crusher/conveyor systems would probably be relocated if ALC acquires the Little Thunder LBA Tract as applied for. Current full-time employment at the Black Thunder Mine is approximately 580. If the LBA tract is acquired, TBCC anticipates that the average South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2-22

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives annual coal production would be approximately 42.5 million tons and no employment changes would be expected. 2.3.2 Little Thunder Alternative 1 LBA Tract the assumption that an LBA tract would not be mined in the foreseeable future if the No Action Alternative for that tract is selected. However, selection of the Little Thunder No Action Alternative would not preclude leasing and mining of a rejected tract in the future, either as a maintenance tract for an existing mining operation or as a new start mine. 2.3.3 Little Thunder LBA Tract Alternative 2 (Preferred Alternative) Under Alternative 2 for the Little Thunder LBA Tract, BLM would reconfigure the tract and hold a competitive coal sale for the lands included in the reconfigured tract and issue a lease to the successful bidder. The modified tract would be subject to standard and special lease stipulations developed for the PRB and this tract if it is offered for sale (Appendix D). Alternative 2 for the Little Thunder LBA Tract assumes that ALC would be the successful bidder on the tract if a lease sale is held and that the tract would be mined as a maintenance lease for the Black Thunder Mine. Other assumptions are the same as for the Proposed Action. Alternative 2 is the Preferred Alternative of the BLM for the Little Thunder LBA Tract. In evaluating the Little Thunder coal lease application, BLM identified a study area, shown in Figure 2-3, that included the tract as applied for and adjacent unleased federal coal that BLM could add to the tract to avoid creating a potential bypass situation and to maintain or increase the potential for competitive interest in 2-23

Under the Little Thunder LBA Tract Alternative 1, the No Action Alternative, the application to lease the coal included in the Little Thunder LBA Tract would be rejected, the tract would not be offered for competitive sale, and the coal included in the tract would not be mined. This would not affect permitted mining activities and employment on the existing leases at the Black Thunder Mine and would not preclude an application to lease the coal included in the Little Thunder LBA Tract in the future. Portions of the surface of the Little Thunder LBA Tract could be disturbed due to overstripping to allow coal to be removed from the adjacent existing leases. Approximately 12,772.9 acres of federal coal are currently leased at the Black Thunder Mine and a total of about 18,476 acres of land will be affected in mining the current leases. Under the No Action Alternative, TBCC estimates that the average annual production at the Black Thunder Mine after 2002 will be 37.1 million tons, and average employment will be approximately 580 persons. In order to compare the economic and environmental consequences of mining these lands versus not mining them, this EIS was prepared under South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives the remaining unleased coal in this area. The BLM’s Preferred Alternative for the Little Thunder LBA Tract is to add all of the study area lands to the tract as applied for, shown in Figure 2-3. Under the Preferred Alternative, BLM would add the following lands to the Little Thunder LBA Tract as applied for: T.43N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 1: Lot 16 (S½); 19.81 acres Section 2: Lots 7 through 10 and 15 through 18; 321.18 acres Section 11: Lots 3 through 6 and 11 through 14; 318.93 acres Section 14: NW¼ NW¼, Lots 3 through 5 and 10 through 13; 324.79 acres Section 25: Lots 3 through 6 and 11 through 14; 316.37 acres T.44N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 35: Lots 3 through 6 and 11 through 14; 333.10 acres Total: 1,634.18 acres T.44N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 35: Lots 1 through 16; 662.02 acres T.43N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 1: Lot 16(S½); 19.81 acres Section 2: Lots 5 through 20; 642.11 acres Section 11: Lots 1 through 16; 621.35 acres Section 12: Lots 2(W½, SE¼) and 3 through 16; 602.60 acres Section 13: Lots 1 through 16; 648.28 acres Section 14: NW¼ NW¼ and Lots 1 through 15; 624.66 acres Section 24: Lots 1 through 16; 630.52 acres Section 25: Lots 1 through 16; 632.15 acres Total: 5,083.50 acres

TBCC estimates that these 1,634.18 acres contain approximately 216 million tons of in-place coal. The legal description of the Little Thunder LBA Tract under the BLM’s Preferred Alternative is as follows: 2-24

The Alternative 2 reconfiguration of the Little Thunder LBA Tract, therefore, results in a tract comprising approximately 5,083.50 acres containing approximately 695.3 million tons of in-place coal. Not all of the coal included in this tract would be mineable, however. Some of the coal added by BLM under Alternative 2 is located within the BNSF & UP railroad ROW. This coal will not be mined because it has been determined to be unsuitable for mining according to the coal leasing unsuitability criteria (43 CFR 3461). South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Although the coal included in these lands within the ROW could not be mined, these lands would be included in this alternative tract configuration to allow maximum recovery of all the mineable reserves adjacent to the ROW and to comply with the coal leasing regulations, which do not allow leasing of less than 10-acre aliquot parts. TBCC estimates that approximately 113 million tons of coal would be produced from these additional 1,634.18 acres. The reconfigured tract would contain about 553 million tons of recoverable coal. BLM will independently evaluate the volume and average quality of the coal resources included in each tract offered for sale as part of the fair market value determination process. The fact that the coal within the ROW cannot all be recovered will be considered by BLM in the fair market value determination for the LBA tract. BLM’s estimate of the mineable federal coal reserves and average quality of the coal included in each tract will be published in the sale notice for each tract that is offered for sale. Some general coal quality information in the area of the LBA tracts considered in this EIS is included in Section 3.3 of this document. 2.3.4 Little Thunder Alternative 3 LBA Tract The lands that BLM is considering including in the north tract are: sale. The two tracts would each be subject to standard and special lease stipulations developed for the PRB and each tract if they are offered for sale (Appendix D). Alternative 3 for the Little Thunder LBA Tract assumes that ALC would be the successful bidder on the two tracts if lease sales are held and that the tracts would be mined as maintenance leases for the Black Thunder Mine. Other assumptions would be the same as for the Little Thunder LBA Tract Proposed Action. Under Alternative 3, BLM is considering a division of the tract described in Alternative 2 into a north tract and a south tract in order to increase competitive interest in the federal coal. The tract described in Alternative 2 would be split into two tracts roughly along State Highway 450 and the BNSF & UP railroad spur to the Jacobs Ranch and Black Thunder Mines (Figure 2-3). The two tracts would be offered for sale at separate, competitive sealed bid sales. Both the north and south tracts could be offered for sale at this time, or the south tract could be offered for sale at this time and the north tract could potentially be combined with other unleased federal coal to create a larger tract. This north tract would potentially be of competitive interest to more than one mine.

Under Alternative 3 for the Little Thunder LBA Tract, BLM is considering splitting the tract described under Alternative 2 and offering two tracts for competitive South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS 2-25

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives T.44N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 35: Lots 1 through 16; 662.02 acres T.43N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 2: Lots 5 through 14; 403.47 acres Total: 1,065.49 acres approximately 155.7 million tons of in-place coal and the south tract would include 4,018.01 acres containing approximately 539.6 million tons of in-place coal, according to information provided by the applicant. As discussed under Alternative 2, not all of the coal included in the north and south tracts would be mineable. Some of the coal included in the two tracts is located within the BNSF & UP railroad ROW. This coal would not be mined because it has been determined to be unsuitable for mining according to the coal leasing unsuitability criteria (43 CFR 3461). Although the coal included in these lands could not be mined, the lands would be included in the Alternative 3 tract configuration to allow maximum recovery of all the mineable reserves adjacent to the ROW and to comply with the coal leasing regulations, which do not allow leasing of less than 10-acre aliquot parts. TBCC estimates that approximately 111.9 million tons of coal would be produced from the 1,065.49-acre north tract and approximately 441.1 million tons of coal would be produced from the 4,018.01-acre south tract. BLM will independently evaluate the volume and average quality of the coal resources included in each tract offered for sale as part of the fair market value determination process. The fact that the coal within the ROW cannot all be recovered will be considered by BLM in the fair market value determination for the LBA tracts. BLM’s estimate of the mineable federal coal reserves and South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

The lands that BLM is considering including in the south tract are: T.43N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 1: Lot 16 (S½); 19.81 acres Section 2: Lots 15 through 20; 238.64 acres Section 11: Lots 1 through 16; 621.35 acres Section 12: Lots 2(W½, SE¼), 3 through 16; 602.60 acres Section 13: Lots 1 through 16; 648.28 acres Section 14: NW¼ NW¼, Lots 1 through 15; 624.66 acres Section 24: Lots 1 through 16; 630.52 acres Section 25: Lots 1 through 16; 632.15 acres Total: 4,018.01 acres

Under the Alternative 3 reconfiguration of the Little Thunder LBA Tract, the north tract would include 1,065.49 acres containing 2-26

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives average quality of the coal included in each tract will be published in the sale notice for each tract that is offered for sale. Some general coal quality information in the area of the LBA tracts considered in this EIS is included in Section 3.3 of this document. 2.4 Proposed Action and Alternatives for the West Roundup LBA Tract T.42N., R.70W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 6: Lots 8 through 19, 20(N½), 21(N½), 22(N½), and 23(N½); 539.28 acres Section 7: Lots 5(S½), 6(S½), 7(S½), 8(S½), 9 through 14; 303.15 acres Section 8: Lots 1(SW¼), 2(S½), 3(S½), 4(S½), 5 through 12; 384.085 acres Section 9: Lots 5(SW¼), 11, 12, and 14; 130.388 acres T.43N., R.70W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 31: Lots 13 through 20; 314.23 acres T.42N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 1: Lots 5, 6, and 11 through 13; 199.51 acres Total: 1,870.638 acres

2.4.1 West Roundup LBA Tract Proposed Action Under the Proposed Action for the West Roundup LBA Tract, the tract as applied for by TCC would be offered for lease at a separate, sealed-bid, competitive lease sale, subject to standard and special lease stipulations developed for the PRB (Appendix D). The boundaries of the tract would be consistent with the tract configuration proposed in the West Roundup LBA Tract lease application. As shown in Figure 2-4a, the West Roundup LBA Tract as applied for consists of two tracts separated by the North Rochelle Mine railroad spur and facilities and a county road (Reno Road). The Proposed Action assumes that TCC will be the successful bidder on the West Roundup LBA Tract if it is offered for sale. The legal description of the proposed West Roundup LBA Tract coal lease lands as applied for by TCC under the Proposed Action is as follows:

Land descriptions and acreage are based on the BLM Status of Public Domain Land and Mineral Titles approved Coal Plats as of February 12, 2003, May 13, 2003, and March 24, 2003. As indicated in Chapter 1, Section 1.4 and Appendix B, no lands in the West Roundup LBA Tract as applied for were found to be unsuitable for mining. The tract as applied for includes approximately 1,870.638 mineable acres. TCC estimates that it 2-27

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives
R. 71 W. R. 70 W. T. 43 N. T. 42 N.
3
BNSF & UP Double Tracks

31 36

Hilight Road

T. 43 N. T. 42 N.

Reno Road

Antelope Road

8 7

9 10

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

LEGEND
0 2500 5000 10000

North Rochelle Mine Permit Boundary West Roundup LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2

Area Added Under Alternative 3 North Rochelle Mine Federal Coal Lease WYW-127221 Modification Area Existing North Rochelle Mine Federal Coal Leases

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 2-4a. West Roundup LBA Alternative Tract Configurations.

R. 71 W. R. 70 W. T. 43 N. T. 42 N.
3
BNSF & UP Double Tracks

31 36

Hilight Road

T. 43 N. T. 42 N.

Reno Road

Antelope Road

8 7

9 10

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

LEGEND
0 2500 5000 10000

North Rochelle Mine Permit Boundary West Roundup LBA Tract as Applied for

Area Added Under BLM's Preferred Alternative Existing North Rochelle Mine Federal Coal Leases

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 2-4b. West Roundup LBA Preferred Alternative Tract Configuration.

2-28

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives includes approximately 192.6 million tons of in-place coal reserves and that about 173.3 million tons of that coal would be recoverable assuming a recovery factor of 90 percent. BLM will independently evaluate the volume and average quality of the coal resources included in the tract as part of the fair market value determination process. BLM’s estimate of the mineable reserves and average quality of the coal included in the tract will be published in the sale notice if the tract is offered for sale. Some coal quality information in the area of the West Roundup LBA Tract is included in Section 3.3 of this document. The approved North Rochelle Mine Permit 550 Term T5 includes monitoring and mitigation measures for the North Rochelle Mine that are required by SMCRA and Wyoming State Law. If the West Roundup LBA Tract is acquired by TCC, these monitoring and mitigation measures would be extended to cover operations on the LBA tract when the coal mining permit is amended to include the tract. This amended permit would have to be approved before mining operations could take place on the tract. These monitoring and mitigation measures are considered to be part of the Proposed Action and other action alternatives during the leasing process because they are regulatory requirements. The West Roundup LBA Tract would be mined as an integral part of the North Rochelle Mine under the Proposed Action. The North Rochelle South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS Mine is already operating under both an approved state mining permit and MLA mining plan. Both the approved state mining permit and MLA mining plan would require amendment to include the LBA tract. Since the West Roundup LBA Tract would be an extension of the existing North Rochelle Mine, the facilities and infrastructure would be the same as those identified in the WDEQ/LQD Mine Permit 550 Term T5 approved August 29, 2000 and the BLM Resource Recovery and Protection Plan approved July 12, 2000 for the North Rochelle Mine. TCC’s currently approved air quality permit allows up to 35 million tons of coal per year to be mined through year 2018. The North Rochelle Mine produced 8.2 million tons of coal in 1999, 17.2 million tons of coal in 2000, 23.9 million tons of coal in 2001, and 23.9 million tons of coal in 2002 (Wyoming State Inspector of Mines 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002). Under the No Action Alternative, the North Rochelle Mine would mine its remaining 259 million tons of in-place coal reserves in approximately 6.7 years at an average production rate of 35 million tons per year. Under the Proposed Action, TCC currently estimates that average annual production would be 35 million tons and the life of the mine would be extended by approximately five years. If TCC acquires the West Roundup LBA Tract as applied for, they estimate that a total of 406.3 million tons of coal would be mined after January 1, 2003, with an estimated 173.3 million tons coming from the 2-29

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives LBA tract. This estimate of recoverable reserves assumes that about 10 percent of the coal would be lost under normal mining practices, based on historical recovery factors at the North Rochelle Mine. As of December 31, 2002, 73.2 million tons of coal had been mined from within the current permitted area of the mine. Topsoil removal with heavy equipment would proceed ahead of overburden removal. Whenever possible, direct haulage to a reclamation area would be done, but due to scheduling, some topsoil would be temporarily stockpiled. As required by the reclamation plan, heavy equipment again would be used to haul and distribute the stockpiled topsoil. The North Rochelle Mine is one of several mines currently operating in the PRB where the coal seams are notably thick and the overburden is relatively thin. Overburden removal has been and would continue to be by truck/shovel operation and the combination of cast-blasting and dragline. Most overburden and all coal is drilled and blasted to facilitate efficient excavation. The design of the North Rochelle Mine seeks to confine disturbance to the active mine blocks. As overburden is removed, most is directly placed into areas where coal has already been removed. Once the overburden has been replaced it is sampled and verified to be suitable overburden material, then graded to approximate final contour, ripped and finally topsoiled. If necessary, material that is found to be 2-30 unsuitable would be adequately covered with suitable overburden material prior to grading and topsoiling. Elevations consistent with an approved PMT plan would be established as quickly as possible. Under certain conditions, the PMT may not be immediately achievable. This occurs when there is an excess of material that may require temporary stockpiling, when there is insufficient material available from current overburden removal operations, or when future mining could redisturb an area already mined. Once a seedbed has been formed, vegetation would be reestablished that is consistent with the postmining land use. Coal would be produced from two seams of the Wyodak bed, a thin, discontinuous rider seam (referred to as the “D” seam or Upper Wyodak) and a uniformly thick main seam (referred to as the “E” seam or Middle Wyodak), at several working faces to enable blending of the coal to meet customer quality requirements, to comply with BLM lease requirements for maximum economic recovery of the coal resource, and to optimize coal removal efficiency with available equipment. The “D” seam (Upper Wyodak) fluctuates greatly in thickness and quality throughout the mine area. Therefore, the recoverable portion of the “D” seam is highly variable, thus reducing the overall recovery factor for the coal reserves to approximately 90 percent. Mining efficiency and air quality protection are and would continue to be facilitated by extensive use of near-pit crushers and overland conveyors. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Coal would be loaded with electricpowered shovels or hydraulic frontend loaders into off-highway haul trucks for transport to crushing facilities. Coal haul roads, crushing facilities and conveyors would be temporary structures built within the mine area. All coal transfer location points and crushing operations are controlled by baghouse-type dust collectors, and dry mist foggers are being reviewed for permitting at several locations throughout the mine. Truck dumping operations use stilling sheds to control fugitive dust. While sufficient capacity exists, future changes in facilities may be constructed to improve operating efficiency and air quality protection. Additional near-pit crusher/conveyor systems would be constructed and moved as the mining operation progresses. A new truck dump/crusher and conveyor system was added in 2001. Current full-time employment at the North Rochelle Mine is approximately 250. If the LBA tract is acquired, TCC anticipates that the average annual coal production would be approximately 35 million tons with employment increasing to 400 persons. The West Roundup LBA Tract is adjacent to the North Rochelle Mine, but it is also located adjacent to the Black Thunder Mine, operated by TBCC. Arch Coal, Inc., the parent company of TBCC, recently purchased the North Rochelle Mine. Arch Coal has not yet identified how the mining operations at the Black Thunder and North Rochelle Mines South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS will be conducted, but the proposed rate of coal production, the mining sequence, and the mining equipment could change as a result of the merger of the two operations. However, the area of disturbance and the impacts of removing the coal would not be substantially different from the area of disturbance and the impacts of mining if the Black Thunder and North Rochelle operations did not merge. 2.4.2 West Roundup LBA Tract Alternative 1 Under the West Roundup LBA Tract Alternative 1, the No Action Alternative, the application to lease the coal included in the West Roundup LBA Tract would be rejected, the tract would not be offered for competitive sale, and the coal included in the tract would not be mined. This would not affect permitted mining activities and employment on the existing leases at the North Rochelle Mine and would not preclude an application to lease the coal included in the West Roundup LBA Tract in the future. Portions of the surface of the West Roundup LBA Tract could be disturbed due to overstripping to allow coal to be removed from the adjacent existing leases. Approximately 3,443.5 acres of federal coal are currently leased at the North Rochelle Mine and a total of about 5,288 acres of land will be affected in mining the current leases. Under the No Action Alternative, TCC estimates that the average annual production at the North Rochelle 2-31

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Mine after 2002 will be 35 million tons, and average employment will be approximately 250 persons. In order to compare the economic and environmental consequences of mining these lands versus not mining them, this EIS was prepared under the assumption that an LBA tract would not be mined in the foreseeable future if the No Action Alternative for that tract is selected. However, selection of the West Roundup No Action Alternative would not preclude leasing and mining of the tract in the future, either as a maintenance tract for an existing mining operation or as a new start mine. 2.4.3 West Roundup LBA Tract Alternative 2 Under Alternative 2 for the West Roundup LBA Tract, BLM would reconfigure the tract and hold a competitive coal sale for the lands included in the reconfigured tract and issue a lease to the successful bidder. The modified tract would be subject to standard and special lease stipulations developed for the PRB and this tract if it is offered for sale (Appendix D). Alternative 2 for the West Roundup LBA Tract assumes that TCC would be the successful bidder on the tract if a lease sale is held and that the tract would be mined as a maintenance lease for the North Rochelle Mine. Other assumptions are the same as for the Proposed Action. As applied for, the West Roundup LBA Tract consists of two noncontiguous tracts of federal coal 2-32 separated by the North Rochelle Mine railroad spur, the North Rochelle Mine facilities, and a county road known as Reno Road (Figure 1-4). Under Alternative 2 for the West Roundup LBA Tract, the size of the tract as applied for would be increased to include the area between the two tracts as applied for (Figure 2-4a). BLM is considering including this coal to decrease the potential that some or all of the federal coal in this area would be bypassed. As discussed in Section 1.4, USDA-FS has determined that lands under a USDA-FS special use permit for ancillary facilities at the North Rochelle Mine are unsuitable for mining under Unsuitability Criterion 2. The area that would be added under this alternative is included in the USDA-FS special use permit. It would not be economically feasible to move the railroad spur, county road, and mine facilities to recover all the coal at this time. However, BLM is considering including this area in the tract because it may be possible to recover portions of the coal reserves in this area when the rest of the tract is mined, if it is leased at this time. It may also be economically feasible at some point in the future to move the road and railroad spur and recover the coal if it is leased. On February 9, 2001, TCC filed an application to modify an existing federal coal lease (WYW-127221) at the North Rochelle Mine by adding 155.90 acres that lie between the existing lease and the North Rochelle railroad loop. BLM processed that lease modification application and the modification area, shown in Figure 2South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 4a, was offered for sale to TCC. TCC rejected BLM’s offer and made a counter offer, which BLM rejected. As a result, the lands included in the lease modification application were not added to federal coal lease WYW127221 as proposed, and BLM is adding them to the West Roundup LBA Tract under Alternative 2, to avoid bypassing potentially recoverable coal reserves. The lands that BLM is considering adding to the tract are: T.42N., R.70W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 4: Lots 17 and 18; 78.11 acres Section 5: Lots 17 through 20; 155.64 acres Section 6: Lots 20(S½), 21(S½), 22(S½), and 23(S½); 77.345 acres Section 7: Lots 5(N½), 6(N½), 7(N½), and 8(N½); 77.18 acres Section 8: Lots 1(N½, SE¼), 2(N½), 3(N½), and 4(N½); 87.855 acres Section 9: Lots 1 through 4, 5(N½, SE¼), 6 through 8; 305.872 acres Total: 782.002 acres tons of in-place coal. Using TCC’s projected recovery factor of 90 percent, the reconfigured tract would contain about 231.3 million tons of recoverable coal, assuming that the coal underlying the railroad spur and facilities would be economically recoverable at some point in the future. BLM will independently evaluate the volume and average quality of the coal resources included in the tract as part of the fair market value determination process. The fact that the coal underlying the railroad spur, county road, and mine facilities cannot be economically recovered at this time will be considered by BLM in the fair market value determination for the LBA tract. BLM’s estimate of the mineable reserves and average quality of the coal included in the tract will be published in the sale notice if the tract is offered for sale. Some coal quality information in the area of the West Roundup LBA Tract is included in Section 3.3 of this document. 2.4.4 West Roundup LBA Tract Alternative 3 (Preferred Alternative) Under Alternative 3 for the West Roundup LBA Tract, BLM would reconfigure the tract and hold a competitive coal sale for the lands included in the reconfigured tract and issue a lease to the successful bidder. The modified tract would be subject to standard and special lease stipulations developed for the PRB and this tract if it is offered for sale (Appendix D). Alternative 3 for the West Roundup LBA Tract assumes 2-33

TCC estimates that these 782.002 acres contain approximately 64.4 million tons of mineable coal. The Alternative 2 reconfiguration of the West Roundup LBA Tract, therefore, results in a tract comprising approximately 2,652.69 acres containing approximately 257 million South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives that TCC would be the successful bidder on the tract if a lease sale is held and that the tract would be mined as a maintenance lease for the North Rochelle Mine. Other assumptions are the same as for the Proposed Action. Under Alternative 3 for the West Roundup LBA Tract, the size of the tract as applied for would be increased. The area between the two tracts as applied for and the lease modification area would be added as under Alternative 2, to prevent some or all of this coal from potentially being bypassed in the future. As under Alternative 2, the area between the two tracts that would be added under this alternative is included in the USDA-FS special use permit, which USDA-FS has determined to be unsuitable for mining. However, it may be possible to recover portions of coal that would be added under the North Rochelle Mine railroad spur, North Rochelle Mine facilities, and Reno Road when the rest of the tract is mined. In evaluating the West Roundup coal lease application, the BLM identified a study area, shown in Figure 2-4a as the “area added under Alternative 3”, that included unleased federal coal adjacent to the tract as applied for that BLM could add to the tract to potentially maintain or increase the potential for competitive interest in the remaining unleased federal coal in this area. This study area includes approximately 1,179.28 acres containing an estimated 150 million tons of in-place coal. The BLM’s Preferred Alternative for the West Roundup LBA Tract is to add the area included in Alternative 2 and 2-34 a portion of the Alternative 3 study area to the tract as applied for. Under the Preferred Alternative, shown in Figure 2-4b, the BLM would add the following lands to the West Roundup LBA Tract as applied for: T.42N., R.70W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 4: Lots 17 and 18; 78.110 acres Section 5: Lots 17 through 20; 155.640 acres Section 6: Lots 20(S½), 21(S½), 22(S½), and 23(S½); 77.345 acres Section 7: Lots 5(N½), 6(N½), 7(N½), and 8(N½); 77.180 acres Section 8: Lots 1(N½, SE¼), 2(N½), 3(N½), and 4(N½); 87.855 acres Section 9: Lots 1 through 4, 5(E½, NW¼), 6 through 8, and 13; 346.072 acres T.42N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 1: Lots 14, 19, and 20; 119.67 acres Total: 941.872 acres

TCC estimates that these 941.872 acres contain approximately 126.8 million tons of in-place coal. The legal description of the West Roundup LBA Tract under the BLM’s Preferred Alternative is as follows:

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives T.42N., R.70W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 4: Lots 17 and 18; 78.11 acres Section 5: Lots 17 through 20; 155.64 acres Section 6: Lots 8 through 23; 616.62 acres Section 7: Lots 5 through 14; 380.33 acres Section 8: Lots 1 through 12; 471.94 acres Section 9: Lots 1 through 8 and 11 through 14; 476.46 acres T.42N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 1: Lots 5, 6, 11 through 14, 19, and 20; 319.18 acres T.43N., R.70W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 31: Lots 13 through 20; 314.23 acres Total: 2,812.51 acres recoverable at some point in the future. BLM will independently evaluate the volume and average quality of the coal resources included in the tract as part of the fair market value determination process. The fact that the coal underlying the railroad spur, county road, and mine facilities cannot be economically recovered will be considered by BLM in the fair market value determination for the LBA tract. BLM’s estimate of the recoverable reserves and average quality of the coal included in the tract will be published in the sale notice if the tract is offered for sale. Some coal quality information in the area of the West Roundup LBA Tract is included in Section 3.3 of this document. 2.5 Proposed Action and Alternatives for the West Antelope LBA Tract LBA Tract

2.5.1 West Antelope Proposed Action

The Preferred Alternative reconfiguration of the West Roundup LBA Tract, therefore, results in a tract comprising approximately 2,812.51 acres containing approximately 319.4 million tons of in-place coal. Using TCC’s projected recovery factor of 90 percent, the reconfigured tract would contain about 287.5 million tons of recoverable coal, assuming that the coal underlying the railroad spur and facilities would be economically South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Under the Proposed Action for the West Antelope LBA Tract, the tract as applied for by ACC would be offered for lease at a separate, sealed-bid, competitive lease sale, subject to standard and special lease stipulations developed for the PRB (Appendix D). The boundaries of the tract would be consistent with the tract configuration proposed in the West Antelope LBA Tract lease application (Figure 2-5). The Proposed Action assumes that ACC will be the successful bidder on the 2-35

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives
R. 71 W.
17 16 15 14
Antelo pe Ro ad

BN SF &

Campbell County Converse County 30 29 28 27 26

Double Tracks

T. 41 N. T. 40 N.

(a.k.a . Ante lope Road )

P &U SF s BN Track le Trip

Co unt yR oa d3 7

59 way High State

R. 71 W.

2500

5000

10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 2-5. West Antelope LBA Alternative Tract Configurations.

2-36

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives West Antelope LBA Tract if it is offered for sale. The legal description of the proposed West Antelope LBA Tract coal lease lands as applied for by ACC under the Proposed Action is as follows: T.40N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Converse County, Wyoming Section 3: Lots 15 through 18; 159.78 acres Section 4: Lots 5 through 20; 487.25 acres Section 5: Lots 5 through 7, 10 through 15, 19, and 20; 320.84 acres Section 9: Lot 1; 40.14 acres Section 10: Lots 3 and 4; 80.65 acres T.41N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Converse and Campbell Counties, Wyoming Section 28: Lots 1 through 16; 649.21 acres Section 29: Lots 1 through 16; 659.81 acres Section 32: Lots 1 through 3, 6 through 11, 14 through 16; 486.16 acres Section 33: Lots 1 through 16; 658.35 acres Total: 3,542.19 acres As indicated in Chapter 1, Section 1.4 and Appendix B, no lands in the West Antelope LBA Tract were found to be unsuitable for mining. ACC’s approved mining plan avoids disturbing Antelope Creek and an adjacent buffer zone, so it is assumed that any coal resources included in the above described lands that are beneath Antelope Creek would not be recovered. If coal under these lands is excluded, ACC estimates that the tract as applied for includes approximately 2,755.16 mineable acres with approximately 293.9 million tons of in-place coal, 245.6 million tons of mineable coal, and that about 228.4 million tons of that coal would be recoverable assuming a recovery factor of 93 percent. BLM will independently evaluate the volume and average quality of the coal resources included in the tract as part of the fair market value determination process. The fact that the coal underlying Antelope Creek and the adjacent buffer zone will not be mined would be considered by BLM in the fair market value determination for the LBA tract. BLM’s estimate of the recoverable reserves and average quality of the coal included in the tract will be published in the sale notice if the tract is offered for sale. Some coal quality information in the area of the West Antelope LBA Tract is included in Section 3.3 of this document. The approved Antelope Mine Permit 525 Term T6 includes monitoring and mitigation measures for the Antelope Mine that are required by SMCRA and Wyoming State Law. If the West 2-37

Land descriptions and acreage are based on the BLM Status of Public Domain Land and Mineral Titles approved Coal Plats as of December 2, 2001 and December 4, 2001.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Antelope LBA Tract is acquired by ACC, these monitoring and mitigation measures would be extended to cover operations on the LBA tract when the coal mining permit is amended to include the tract. This amended permit would have to be approved before mining operations could take place on the tract. These monitoring and mitigation measures are considered to be part of the Proposed Action and other Action Alternatives during the leasing process because they are regulatory requirements. The West Antelope LBA Tract would be mined as an integral part of the Antelope Mine under the Proposed Action. The Antelope Mine is already operating under both an approved state mining permit and MLA mining plan. Both the approved state mining permit and MLA mining plan would require amendment to include the LBA tract. Since the West Antelope LBA Tract would be an extension of the Antelope Mine, the facilities and infrastructure would be the same as those identified in the WDEQ/LQD Mine Permit 525 Term T6 approved November 3, 1998 and the BLM Resource Recovery and Protection Plan approved August 27, 2001 for the Antelope Mine. ACC’s currently approved air quality permit allows up to 32 million tons of coal per year to be mined through year 2017. The Antelope Mine produced 22.7 million tons of coal in 1999, 23 million tons of coal in 2000, 24.6 million tons of coal in 2001, and 26.8 million tons of coal in 2002 (Wyoming State Inspector of Mines 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002). Under 2-38 the No Action Alternative, the Antelope Mine would mine its remaining 320.5 million tons of recoverable coal reserves in approximately 24 years at an average annual production rate of 13.4 million tons and at a maximum production rate of 32 million tons per year. Under the Proposed Action, ACC currently estimates that average annual coal production would be 23 million tons, the maximum annual production would be 32 million tons, and the life of the mine is expected to remain at 24 years. If ACC acquires the West Antelope LBA Tract as applied for, they estimate that a total of 548.9 million tons of coal would be mined after January 1, 2003, with an estimated 228.4 million tons coming from the LBA tract. This estimate of recoverable reserves assumes that about seven percent of the coal would be lost under normal mining practices, based on historical recovery factors at the Antelope Mine. As of December 31, 2002, 195.5 million tons of coal had been mined from within the current permitted area of the mine. Topsoil removal with heavy equipment would proceed ahead of overburden removal. Whenever possible, direct haulage to a reclamation area would be done, but due to scheduling, some topsoil would be temporarily stockpiled. As required by the reclamation plan, heavy equipment again would be used to haul and distribute the stockpiled topsoil. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Overburden has been and would continue to be removed by dragline and truck and shovel operations. Most overburden and all coal is drilled and blasted to facilitate efficient excavation. The design of the Antelope Mine seeks to confine disturbance to the active mine blocks. As overburden is removed, most would be directly placed into areas where coal has already been removed. Once the overburden has been replaced it is sampled and verified to be suitable overburden material, then graded to approximate final contour, ripped and finally topsoiled. If necessary, material that is found to be unsuitable would be adequately covered with suitable overburden material prior to grading and topsoiling. Elevations consistent with an approved PMT plan would be established as quickly as possible. Under certain conditions, the PMT may not be immediately achievable. This occurs when there is an excess of material that may require temporary stockpiling, when there is insufficient material available from current overburden removal operations, or when future mining could redisturb an area already mined. Once a seedbed has been formed, vegetation would be reestablished that is consistent with the postmining land use. Coal would be produced from as many as four seams of the primary Anderson and Canyon beds at several working faces to enable blending of the coal to meet customer quality requirements, to comply with BLM lease requirements for maximum economic recovery of the coal South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS resource, and to optimize coal removal efficiency with available equipment. Mining efficiency and air quality protection are and would continue to be facilitated by extensive use of near-pit crushers and overland conveyors from the crushers to the storage and loadout facilities. Coal would be loaded with electric-powered shovels or hydraulic excavators into off-highway haul trucks for transport to crushing facilities. Coal haul roads, crushing facilities and conveyors would be temporary structures built within the mine area. All coal transfer location points and crushing operations are controlled by baghouse-type dust collectors or PECs. The truck dumping operations use stilling sheds to control fugitive dust and the overland conveyors are covered by dust hoods. While sufficient capacity exists, future changes in facilities may be constructed to improve operating efficiency and air quality protection. The conveyor systems would be extended to reach each of the various mine areas if ACC acquires the West Antelope LBA Tract. Current full-time employment at the Antelope Mine is approximately 265. If the LBA tract is acquired, ACC anticipates that the average annual coal production would be approximately 23 million tons, and no additional employment would be expected. 2.5.2 West Antelope Alternative 1 LBA Tract

Under the West Antelope LBA Tract Alternative 1, the No Action 2-39

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Alternative, the application to lease the coal included in the West Antelope LBA Tract would be rejected, the tract would not be offered for competitive sale, and the coal included in the tract would not be mined. This would not affect permitted mining activities and employment on the existing leases at the Antelope Mine and would not preclude an application to lease the coal included in the West Antelope LBA Tract in the future. Portions of the surface of the West Antelope LBA Tract could be disturbed due to overstripping to allow coal to be removed from the adjacent existing leases. Approximately 8,019.2 acres of federal coal are currently leased at the Antelope Mine and a total of about 8,821 acres of land will be affected in mining the current leases. Under the No Action Alternative, ACC estimates that the average annual production at the Antelope Mine after 2002 will be 13.4 million tons, and average employment will be approximately 265 persons. In order to compare the economic and environmental consequences of mining these lands versus not mining them, this EIS was prepared under the assumption that an LBA tract would not be mined in the foreseeable future if the No Action Alternative for that tract is selected. However, selection of the West Antelope No Action Alternative would not preclude leasing and mining of the tract in the future, either as a maintenance tract for an existing mining operation or as a new start mine. 2-40 2.5.3 West Antelope Alternative 2 LBA Tract

Under Alternative 2 for the West Antelope LBA Tract, BLM would reconfigure the tract and hold a competitive coal sale for the lands included in the reconfigured tract and issue a lease to the successful bidder. The modified tract would be subject to standard and special lease stipulations developed for the PRB and that tract if it is offered for sale (Appendix D). Alternative 2 for the West Antelope LBA Tract assumes that ACC would be the successful bidder on the tract if a lease sale is held and that the tract would be mined as a maintenance lease for the Antelope Mine. Other assumptions are the same as for the Proposed Action. BLM is considering an alternate tract configuration for the West Antelope LBA Tract in order to avoid creating a potential bypass situation (Figure 25). Adding the area between the West Antelope LBA Tract as applied for and the existing Horse Creek lease (WYW 141435, issued effective December 1, 2000) would enlarge the original configuration of the West Antelope LBA Tract. The lands that BLM is considering adding to the tract are: T.41N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 22: Lots 2 and 16; 85.20 acres Section 27: Lots 6 through 11; 250.51 acres Total: 335.71 acres

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives The increase to the West Antelope LBA Tract would be 335.71 acres containing approximately 27.9 million tons of in-place coal. The Alternative 2 reconfiguration, therefore, results in a tract comprising approximately 3,877.90 acres containing approximately 321.8 million tons of in-place coal. After eliminating coal that would not be mined beneath Antelope Creek and the adjacent buffer zone, ACC estimates that the reconfigured tract includes approximately 3,091 mineable acres with approximately 273.4 million tons of mineable coal. Using ACC’s projected recovery factor of 93 percent, the reconfigured tract would contain about 254.3 million tons of recoverable coal. BLM will independently evaluate the volume and average quality of the coal resources included in the tract as part of the fair market value determination process. The fact that the coal underlying Antelope Creek and the adjacent buffer zone will not be mined would be considered by BLM in the fair market value determination for the LBA tract. BLM’s estimate of the mineable reserves and average quality of the coal included in the tract will be published in the sale notice if the tract is offered for sale. Some coal quality information in the area of the West Antelope LBA Tract is included in Section 3.3 of this document. 2.5.4 West Antelope LBA Tract Alternative 3 (Preferred Alternative) Under Alternative 3 for the West Antelope LBA Tract, BLM is South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS considering a different tract configuration. As under Alternative 2, if this tract configuration is selected BLM would hold a competitive coal sale and issue a lease to the successful bidder. The modified tract would be subject to standard and special lease stipulations developed for the PRB and that tract if it is offered for sale (Appendix D). Alternative 3 for the West Antelope LBA Tract assumes that ACC would be the successful bidder on the tract if a lease sale is held and that the tract would be mined as a maintenance lease for the Antelope Mine. Other assumptions would be the same as for the Proposed Action. Alternative 3 is the BLM’s Preferred Alternative for the West Antelope LBA Tract. Under this alternative for the West Antelope LBA Tract, BLM is considering removing some of the lands applied for in the northern portion of the West Antelope LBA Tract from consideration for leasing at this time and offering a smaller tract for competitive sale (Figure 2-5). The coal that BLM is considering removing from the tract as applied for could be combined with the unleased federal coal in this area to create a tract which could potentially have more competitive interest if it is leased in the future. The lands that BLM is considering removing from the tract are: T.41N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming Section 28: Lots 1 through 8; 332.50 acres 2-41

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Section 29: Lots 1 through 8, 12, and 13; 410.56 acres Total: 733.06 acres The Alternative 3 reconfiguration of the West Antelope LBA Tract, therefore, results in a tract comprising approximately 2,809.13 acres containing approximately 202.3 million tons of in-place coal, according to information provided by the applicant. After eliminating coal that would not be mined beneath Antelope Creek and the adjacent buffer zone, ACC estimates that the reconfigured tract includes approximately 2,022.1 mineable acres with approximately 183.2 million tons of mineable coal. Using ACC’s projected recovery factor of 93 percent, the reconfigured tract would contain about 170.4 million tons of recoverable coal. BLM will independently evaluate the volume and average quality of the coal resources included in each tract offered for sale as part of the fair market value determination process. The fact that the coal underlying Antelope Creek and the adjacent buffer zone will not be mined will be considered by BLM in the fair market value determination for the LBA tract. BLM’s estimate of the mineable federal coal reserves and average quality of the coal included in each tract will be published in the sale notice for each tract that is offered for sale. Some general coal quality information in the area of the LBA tracts considered in this EIS is included in Section 3.3 of this document.

ACC estimates that these 733.06 acres contain approximately 91.6 million tons of in-place coal. The legal description of the West Antelope LBA Tract under the BLM’s Preferred Alternative is as follows: T.40N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Converse County, Wyoming Section 3: Lots 15 through 18; 159.78 acres Section 4: Lots 5 through 20; 487.25 acres Section 5: Lots 5 through 7, 10 through 15, 19, and 20; 320.84 acres Section 9: Lot 1; 40.14 acres Section 10: Lots 3 and 4; 80.65 acres T.41N., R.71W., 6th P.M., Converse County, Wyoming Section 28: Lots 9 through 16; 326.71 acres Section 29: Lots 9 through 11, 14 through 16; 249.25 acres Section 32: Lots 1 through 3, 6 through 11, 14 through 16; 486.16 acres Section 33: Lots 1 through 16; 658.35 acres Total: 2-42 2,809.13 acres

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 2.6 2.6.1 Alternatives Considered but Not Analyzed in Detail Alternative 4 would construct facilities capable of producing 30 million tons per year to take advantage of the economies of scale offered by the coal deposits in the PRB and that 20 to 30 years of coal reserves would be needed to justify the expense of building the facilities described above. Given these assumptions, it is questionable whether most of the tracts under the Proposed Action or Alternatives 2 or 3 potentially include sufficient coal resources to support a new mine. The potential difficulty in obtaining an air quality permit is another issue which could discourage new mine starts in the PRB. A new mine would create a new source of air quality impacts. As discussed in Chapter 3, the WDEQ/AQD administers a permitting program to assist the agency in managing the State's air resources. Under this program, anyone planning to construct, modify, or use a facility capable of emitting designated pollutants into the atmosphere must obtain an air quality permit to construct. Coal mines fall into this category. In order to obtain a construction permit, an operator may be required to demonstrate that the proposed activities will not increase air pollutant levels above annual standards established by the Wyoming Air Quality Standards and Regulations (WDEQ/AQD 2000). Due to the current levels of mineral development (coal and oil and gas) in the Wyoming PRB, the Wyoming air quality standards have been exceeded several times recently in the southern PRB. Therefore, it may be difficult for 2-43

Under this alternative, as under the Proposed Action and Alternatives 2 and 3, the BLM would hold a separate, competitive, sealed-bid sale for the lands included in one or more of the LBA tracts. Alternative 4 assumes, however, that the successful qualified bidder would be someone other than the applicant and that this bidder would plan to open a new mine to develop the coal resources in one or more of the LBA tracts (NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope). A company or companies acquiring this coal for one or more new standalone mines would require considerable initial capital expenses, including the construction of new surface facilities (i.e., offices, shops, warehouses, coal processing facilities, coal loadout facilities, and rail spur), extensive baseline data collection, and development of new mining and reclamation plans. In addition, a company or companies acquiring this coal for one or more new start mines would have to compete for customers with established mines in a competitive market. BLM currently estimates that a tract would potentially need to include as much as 500 to 600 million tons of coal in order to attract a buyer interested in opening a new mine in the Wyoming PRB. This is based on the assumptions that an operator South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives an operator planning on opening a new mine to demonstrate that new operations would not result in air pollution levels that are above annual Wyoming standards. In view of the issues discussed above, development of new mines on one or more of the LBA tracts included in this EIS is considered unlikely and this alternative is not analyzed in detail. The environmental impacts of developing one or more new mines to recover the coal resources in one or more of these LBA tracts would be greater than under the Proposed Action, the No Action Alternative, or Alternatives 2 or 3 because of the need for new facilities, new rail lines, new employment, and the creation of additional sources of particulates (dust). In the event that one or more lease sales are held and the applicants are not the successful bidders, the successful bidder or bidders would be required to submit detailed mining and reclamation plans for approval before any of the tracts could be mined, and this NEPA analysis would be reviewed and supplemented as necessary prior to approval of those mining and reclamation plans. 2.6.2 Alternative 5 coal from the PRB have generally been decreasing in recent years. If coal lease sales are delayed until prices increase, the bonus and royalty payments to the government might be higher. Under this alternative, it is assumed that one or more of the tracts could be developed later as maintenance tracts or new start mines, depending on how long the sales were delayed. CBM wells presently exist or are proposed on oil and gas leases inside or adjacent to the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts as proposed. If one or more of the LBA tracts included in this EIS are leased, mining cannot occur until the lessees have approved mining and reclamation permits and MLA mining plans, which generally takes several years. This would allow time for a large portion of the CBM resources to be recovered from the tracts. There are two major sources of revenue to state and federal governments from the leasing and mining of federal coal: 1) the competitive bonus bid paid at the time the coal is leased, and 2) federal and state royalties and taxes collected when the coal is sold. This alternative could potentially increase the fair market value of the coal resources in one or more of the LBA tracts, which could increase the bonus bid when the coal is leased. The price paid for coal from northeastern Wyoming decreased by more than $1.00 per ton from 1992 to 2000, while production of low sulfur PRB coal increased annually. Prices South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Under Alternative 5, the BLM would delay the sale of one or more of the LBA tracts as applied for. Delaying the sale of one or more of the tracts would allow CBM resources to be more completely recovered prior to mining. Also, the prices received for 2-44

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives for PRB coal increased slightly in 2000 and 2001, and are projected to remain stable or increase slightly from 2002 through 2008 (WSGS 2003a). There is no assurance that delaying one or more of the sales would result in a higher coal price or a higher bonus bid. The fair market value of these tracts and the resulting bonus payment to the government could increase if one or more lease sales are postponed and if PRB coal prices increase, but the postponement would not necessarily lead to higher royalty or tax income to the state or federal governments. Royalty and tax payments increase automatically when coal prices increase because they are collected at the time the coal is sold, but they cannot be collected until the coal is leased and permitted and that takes several years. If leasing is delayed, then by the time the coal is mined, the higher coal prices may or may not persist. If the higher coal prices do persist, they may enable the coal lessee to negotiate longer term contracts at higher prices, which would result in longer term, higher royalty and tax revenues. On the other hand, if the existing mining operations run out of coal reserves before prices rise, they may have to shut down their operations before additional coal can be leased and permitted for mining. In that case, the fair market value of the coal may actually decrease because the added expense of reopening a mine or starting a new mine would have to be factored into the fair market value. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS Other considerations include the value of leaving the mineable coal for future development versus the value of making low-sulfur coal available now, in anticipation of cleaner fuel sources being developed in the future. Continued leasing of PRB coal enables coal-fired power plants to meet Clean Air Act requirements without constructing new plants, revamping existing plants, or switching to existing alternative fuels, which would probably significantly increase power costs for individuals and businesses. If cleaner fuel sources are developed in the future, they could be phased in with less economic impact to the public. A range of the potential future economic benefits of delaying leasing until coal prices rise could be quantified in an economic analysis, but the benefits would have to be discounted to the present, which would make them similar to the Proposed Action and Action Alternatives. The environmental impacts of mining the coal at a later time as part of one or more existing mines would be expected to be similar and about equal to the Proposed Action, Alternative 2, or Alternative 3. If new mine starts are required to recover the coal in these tracts, the environmental impacts would be expected to be greater than if the tracts were mined as extensions of existing mines.

2-45

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 2.7 Comparison of Alternatives The locations of the Proposed Action and Alternatives 2 and 3 for the NARO North and NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts are shown on Figures 2-1 through 2-5, respectively. A summary comparison of projected coal production, surface disturbance, mine life, and federal and state revenues for the Proposed Action and Alternatives 1, 2, and 3 for NARO North and NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts are the presented in Tables 2-1 through 2-4, respectively. Table 2-5 presents a comparative summary of the direct and indirect environmental impacts of implementing each alternative as compared to the No Action Alternative for all five LBA tracts. The No Action Alternative assumes completion of currently permitted mining at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex for comparison to the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts, the currently permitted mining at the Black Thunder Mine for comparison to the Little Thunder LBA Tract, the currently permitted mining at the North Rochelle Mine for comparison to the West Roundup LBA Tract, and the currently permitted mining at the Antelope Mine for comparison to the West Antelope LBA Tract. Table 2-6 presents a comparative summary of cumulative environmental impacts of implementing each alternative for all five LBA tracts. The environmental consequences of the Proposed Action 2-46 and alternatives for each of the five LBA tracts are analyzed in Chapter 4. These summary impact tables are derived from the following explanation of impacts and magnitude. NEPA requires all agencies of the federal government to include, in every recommendation or report on proposals for legislation and other major federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, a detailed statement by the responsible official on: (i) the environmental impact of the Proposed Action, (ii) any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented, (iii) alternatives to the Proposed Action, (iv) the relationship between local short-term uses of man=s environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity, and (v) any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved in the Proposed Action should it be implemented (42 USC ' 4332[C]). Impacts can be beneficial or adverse, and they can be a primary result of an action (direct) or a secondary result (indirect). They can be permanent, long-term (persisting beyond the end of mine life and reclamation) or short-term (persisting during mining and reclamation and South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2-1. Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts and North Antelope/Rochelle Complex.
No Action Alternative (Existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex) 877.0 mmt 833.2 mmt 718 mmt 14,895.50 ac 20,410 ac 27,187 ac 75 mmt 105 mmt 11.0 yrs 1,175 $ 916.5 million $ 686.8 million Added by Proposed Action 564.0 mmt 506.9 mmt 4,503.02 ac 6,700 ac 21,035 ac 15 mmt 0 mmt 5.0 yrs 10 $ 557.6 million $ 421.8 million Added by Alternative 2 710.0 mmt 613.9 mmt 5,571.19 ac 7,945 ac 21,835 ac 15 mmt 0 mmt 6.0 yrs 10 $ 675.3 million $ 514.4 million Added by BLM’s Preferred Alternative 668.1 mmt 577.3 mmt 5,326.11 7,700 ac 21,835 ac 15 mmt 0 mmt 5.5 yrs 10 $ 635.0 million $ 483.7 million Added by Alternative 3 464.4 mmt 434.9 mmt 3,776.27 ac 4,863 ac 21,035 ac 15 mmt 0 mmt 4.0 yrs 10 $ 478.4 million $ 359.4 million

Item In-Place Coal (as of 1/1/03) Recoverable Coal (as of 1/1/03)1 Coal Mined Through 2002 Lease Area2 Total Area to be Disturbed2 Permit Area2 Average Annual Post-2002 Coal Production Maximum Annual Post-2002 Coal Production (years 2004-2006) Remaining Life of Mine (post-2002) Average No. of Employees (at maximum production rate) Total Projected State Revenues (post-2002)3 Total Projected Federal Revenues (post-2002)4
1

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2-47

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives

Table 2-2. Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for Little Thunder LBA Tract and Black Thunder Mine.
No Action Alternative (Existing Black Thunder Mine) 899.3 mmt 854.3 mmt 765 mmt 12,772.90 ac 18,476 ac 21,238.0 ac 37.1 mmt 23.0 yrs 580 $ 939.7 million $ 704.2 million 3,449.32 ac 5,424 ac 7,678.0 ac 5.4 mmt 7.5 yrs 0 $ 484.0 million $ 364.8 million 5,083.50 ac 6,577 ac 7,678.0 ac 5.4 mmt 10.1 yrs 0 $ 608.3 million $ 470.6 million 1,065.49 ac 1,382 ac 1,612.4 ac 5.4 mmt 0 yrs 0 $ 123.1 million $ 97.2 million 4,018.01 ac 5,195 ac 6,065.6 ac 5.4 mmt 7.5 yrs 0 $ 485.2 million $ 373.4 million Added by Proposed Action 479.3 mmt 440.0 mmt Added by Alternative 2 (BLM’s Preferred Alternative) 695.3 mmt 553.0 mmt Added by Alternative 3 (North Tract) 155.7 mmt 111.9 mmt Added by Alternative 3 (South Tract) 539.6 mmt 441.1 mmt

2-48

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2-3. Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for West Roundup LBA Tract and North Rochelle Mine.
No Action Alternative (Existing North Rochelle Mine) 259.0 mmt 233.0 mmt 73.2 mmt 3,443.50 ac Disturbed2 5,288 ac 7,042.0 ac 35 mmt 6.7 yrs 250 $ 256.3 million $ 193.9 million 1,870.65 ac 3,161 ac 3,228.5 ac 0 mmt 5.0 yrs 150 $ 190.6 million $ 144.2 million 2,652.69 ac 3,161 ac 3,228.5 ac 0 mmt 6.6 yrs 150 $ 254.4 million $ 192.4 million 3,049.93 ac 4,105 ac 3,228.5 ac 0 mmt 8.8 yrs 150 $ 339.1 million $ 256.5 million 2,812.51 ac 3,865 ac 3,228.5 ac 0 mmt 8.2 yrs 150 $ 316.3 million $ 239.2 million Added by Proposed Action 192.6 mmt 173.3 mmt Added by BLM’s Preferred Alternative 319.4 mmt 287.5 mmt

Item In-Place Coal (as of 1/1/03) Recoverable Coal (as of 1/1/03)1 Coal Mined Through 2002 Lease Area2 Total Area to be Permit Area2 Average Annual Post-2002 Coal Production Remaining Life of Mine (post-2002) Average No. of Employees Total Projected State Revenues (post-2002)3 Total Projected Federal Revenues (post-2002)4
1 2

Added by Alternative 2 257.0 mmt 231.3 mmt

Added by Alternative 3 342.6 mmt 308.3 mmt

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2-49

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2-4. Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for West Antelope LBA Tract and Antelope Mine.
No Action Alternative (Existing Antelope Mine) 524.7 mmt 344.6 mmt 320.5 mmt 195.5 mmt 8,019.20 ac Disturbed2 8,821.1 ac 10,848.6 ac 13.4 mmt 24 yrs 265 $ 379.1 million $ 288.6 million 3,542.19 ac 3,200.0 ac 4,328.4 ac 9.6 mmt 0 yr 0 $ 251.2 million $ 195.2 million 3,877.90 ac 3,500.0 ac 4,328.4 ac 10.6 mmt 0 yr 0 $ 279.7 million $ 216.7 million 2,809.13 ac 2,467.0 ac 3,448.4 ac 7.1 mmt 0 yr 0 $ 187.4 million $ 143.4 million Added by Proposed Action 293.9 mmt 245.6 mmt 228.4 mmt Added by Alternative 2 321.8 mmt 273.4 mmt 254.3 mmt Added by Alternative 3 (BLM’s Preferred Alternative) 202.3 mmt 183.2 mmt 170.4 mmt

Item In-Place Coal (as of 1/1/03) Mineable Coal (as of 1/1/03) Recoverable Coal (as of 1/1/03)1 Coal Mined Through 2002 Lease Area2 Total Area To Be Permit Area2 Average Annual Post-2002 Coal Production Remaining Life of Mine (post-2002) Average No. of Employees Total Projected State Revenues (post-2002)3 Total Projected Federal Revenues (post-2002)4
1 2

2-50

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2-5. Summary Comparison of Magnitude1 and Duration of Direct and Indirect Impacts for the Proposed Action, Alternative 2, Alternative 3, and the No Action Alternative for the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts2.
MAGNITUDE AND DURATION OF IMPACT NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE PROPOSED ACTION, ALTERNATIVE 2, & ALTERNATIVE 3

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE RESOURCE NAME
TOPOGRAPHY & PHYSIOGRAPHY (Applicable to all five tracts) TOPOGRAPHIC MODERATION could result in: Microhabitat reduction Habitat diversity reduction Reduction in water runoff and peak flows Increased precipitation infiltration Wildlife carrying capacity reduction Reduction in erosion Enhanced vegetative productivity Potential acceleration of groundwater recharge

Moderate, long term on existing mine areas Moderate, long term on existing mine areas Moderate, beneficial, long term on existing mine areas Moderate, beneficial, long term on existing mine areas Moderate, long term on existing mine areas Moderate, beneficial, long term on existing mine areas Moderate, beneficial, long term on existing mine areas Moderate, beneficial, long term on existing mine areas

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas

GEOLOGY AND MINERALS (Applicable to all five tracts) SURFACE COAL MINING OPERATIONS would result in: Removal of coal Removal and replacement of topsoil and overburden Physical characteristic alterations in geology Loss of CBM though venting and/or depletion of hydrostatic pressure Loss of access for sub-coal oil and gas development and production SOILS (Applicable to all five tracts) CHANGES IN PHYSICAL PROPERTIES would include: Increased near-surface bulk density and decreased soil infiltration rate More uniformity in soil type, thickness, and texture Decreased soil loss due to topographic modification

Moderate, permanent on existing mine areas Moderate, long term on existing mine areas Moderate, permanent on existing mine areas Moderate to substantial, permanent on existing mine areas Moderate, short term on existing mine areas

Same Same Same Same

as as as as

No No No No

Action Action Action Action

on on on on

expanded expanded expanded expanded

mine mine mine mine

areas areas areas areas

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas

Moderate, long term on existing mine areas Moderate, beneficial, long term on existing mine areas Moderate, beneficial, long term on existing mine areas

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas

1 2

Refer to Sections 4.0 and 4.1 for a discussion on magnitude of impacts. All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2-51

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2-5. Summary Comparison of Magnitude1 and Duration of Direct and Indirect Impacts for the Proposed Action, Alternative 2, Alternative 3, and the No Action Alternative for the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts2 (Continued).
MAGNITUDE AND DURATION OF IMPACT PROPOSED ACTION, ALTERNATIVE 2, NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE & ALTERNATIVE 3

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE RESOURCE NAME
SOILS (Continued) (Applicable to all five tracts) CHANGES IN CHEMICAL PROPERTIES would include: More uniform soil nutrient distribution CHANGES IN BIOLOGICAL PROPERTIES would include: Organic matter reduction Microorganism population reduction Reduction in organic matter in soils stockpiled before placement AIR QUALITY (Applicable to all five tracts) IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH MINING OPERATIONS would include: Elevated concentrations of particulate matter Elevated concentrations of gaseous emissions

Moderate, beneficial, long term on existing mine areas Moderate, long term on existing mine areas Moderate, long term on existing mine areas Moderate, short term on existing mine areas

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas

Moderate, short term on existing mines and surrounding areas Moderate, short term on existing mines and surrounding areas

Same as No Action on expanded mines and surrounding areas Same as No Action on expanded mines and surrounding areas

WATER RESOURCES (Applicable to all five tracts) SURFACE WATER CHANGES IN RUNOFF CHARACTERISTICS AND SEDIMENT DISCHARGE would include: Diversion and disruption of surface drainage systems Increased runoff and erosion rates on disturbed lands Increased infiltration on reclaimed lands due to topographic moderation Increased runoff on reclaimed lands due to loss of soil structure Changes in peak flows downstream of mine permit area through use of sediment control structures
1 2

Moderate, short term on existing mine areas Moderate, short term on existing mine areas Moderate, beneficial, long term on existing mine areas Moderate, long term on existing mine areas Moderate, long term for existing approved mining operations

Refer to Sections 4.0 and 4.1 for a discussion on magnitude of impacts. All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise.

2-52

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2-5. Summary Comparison of Magnitude1 and Duration of Direct and Indirect Impacts for the Proposed Action, Alternative 2, Alternative 3, and the No Action Alternative for the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts2 (Continued).
MAGNITUDE AND DURATION OF IMPACT PROPOSED ACTION, ALTERNATIVE 2, NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE & ALTERNATIVE 3

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE RESOURCE NAME
WATER RESOURCES (Continued) (Applicable to all five tracts) GROUNDWATER IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH MINING OPERATIONS would include: Removal of coal and overburden aquifers Replacement of existing coal and overburden with unconsolidated backfill material Depressed water levels in overburden and coal aquifers adjacent to mines Change in hydraulic properties in backfilled areas Change in groundwater quality in backfilled areas Decrease in water supply for groundwater-right holders within the five-foot drawdown area for each mine ALLUVIAL VALLEY FLOORS (Applicable to all five tracts) While final determinations have not been made by WDEQ/LQD, it is believed that there are no AVFs significant to agriculture on the proposed lease tracts Removal and restoration of AVFs determined not to be significant to agriculture WETLANDS (Applicable to all five tracts) Removal of jurisdictional wetlands

Negligible, short term on existing mine areas Negligible, long term on existing mine areas Moderate, short term on existing mines and surrounding areas Negligible, long term on existing mine areas Moderate, long term on existing mine areas Moderate, long term on existing mines and surrounding areas

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action surrounding areas Same as No Action Same as No Action Same as No Action surrounding areas on expanded mines and on expanded mine areas on expanded mine areas on expanded mines and

No impact on existing mine areas

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas

Moderate, short term on existing leases

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas

Removal of non-jurisdictional wetlands

Moderate, short term on existing leases; jurisdictional wetlands would be replaced as required under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act Moderate, short term to long term on existing leases; non-jurisdictional wetlands would be replaced as required by the surface land owner, USDA-FS, or WDEQ/LQD

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas

1 2

Refer to Sections 4.0 and 4.1 for a discussion on magnitude of impacts. All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2-53

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2-5. Summary Comparison of Magnitude1 and Duration of Direct and Indirect Impacts for the Proposed Action, Alternative 2, Alternative 3, and the No Action Alternative for the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts2 (Continued).
MAGNITUDE AND DURATION OF IMPACT NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE PROPOSED ACTION, ALTERNATIVE 2, & ALTERNATIVE 3

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE RESOURCE NAME
VEGETATION (Applicable to all five tracts) PROGRESSIVE REMOVAL OF NATIVE VEGETATION during mining would result in: Increased erosion Wildlife and livestock habitat loss AFTER RECLAMATION the following could result: Changes in vegetation patterns Reduction in vegetation diversity Reduction in shrub density Wildlife habitat carrying capacity loss WILDLIFE (Applicable to all five tracts) DURING MINING the following could occur: Wildlife displacement and increased competition on adjacent undisturbed or reclaimed lands Restriction of wildlife movement, especially big game Increased mortality rate to small mammals Temporary displacement of small and medium-sized mammals Disturbance of active sage grouse leks Disturbance of inactive sage grouse leks

Moderate, short term on existing mine areas Moderate, short term on existing mine areas

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas

Negligible, long term on existing mine areas Negligible, long term on existing mine areas Negligible, long term on existing mine areas Moderate, long term on existing mine areas

Same Same Same Same

as as as as

No No No No

Action Action Action Action

on on on on

expanded expanded expanded expanded

mine mine mine mine

areas areas areas areas

Disturbance of sage grouse nesting habitat Abandonment of raptor nests Foraging habitat reduction for raptors Loss of nesting and foraging habitat for Migratory Birds of Management Concern Reduction in waterfowl resting and feeding habitat Reduction in habitat for aquatic species Wildlife habitat loss Road kills by mine-related traffic Reduction in habitat carrying capacity and habitat diversity on reclaimed lands

Moderate, short term on existing mines and adjacent areas Moderate, short term on existing mine areas Moderate, short term on existing mine areas Moderate, short term on existing mine areas Moderate, short term on existing lease for North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Moderate, short term on existing leases for North Antelope/Rochelle Complex and Black Thunder Mine Moderate, short term on existing mine areas Negligible, short term on existing mine areas Negligible, short term on existing mine areas Negligible, short term on existing mine areas Negligible, short term on existing mine areas Negligible, short term on existing mine areas Negligible, short term on existing mine areas Negligible, short term on existing mine areas Moderate, long term on existing mine areas

Same as No Action on expanded mines and adjacent areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas No impact on expanded mine areas No impact on expanded mine areas

Same Same Same Same Same Same Same Same Same

as as as as as as as as as

No No No No No No No No No

Action Action Action Action Action Action Action Action Action

on on on on on on on on on

expanded expanded expanded expanded expanded expanded expanded expanded expanded

mine mine mine mine mine mine mine mine mine

areas areas areas areas areas areas areas areas areas

1 2

Refer to Sections 4.0 and 4.1 for a discussion on magnitude of impacts. All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise.

2-54

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2-5. Summary Comparison of Magnitude1 and Duration of Direct and Indirect Impacts for the Proposed Action, Alternative 2, Alternative 3, and the No Action Alternative for the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts2 (Continued).
MAGNITUDE AND DURATION OF IMPACT NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE PROPOSED ACTION, ALTERNATIVE 2, & ALTERNATIVE 3

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE RESOURCE NAME
THREATENED, ENDANGERED, PROPOSED, AND CANDIDATE SPECIES (NARO North-See Appendix G) Black-footed ferrets Bald eagle Ute Ladies’-tresses Mountain plover Black-tailed prairie dog (NARO South-See Appendix G) Black-footed ferrets Bald eagle Ute Ladies’-tresses Mountain plover Black-tailed prairie dog (Little Thunder-See Appendix H) Black-footed ferrets Bald eagle Ute Ladies’-tresses Mountain plover Black-tailed prairie dog (West Roundup-See Appendix I) Black-footed ferrets Bald eagle Ute Ladies’-tresses Mountain plover Black-tailed prairie dog

As determined by previous consultation with USFWS for all species

No effect May affect, not likely to adversely affect May affect, not likely to adversely affect May affect, not likely to jeopardize No effect

As determined by previous consultation with USFWS for all species

No effect May affect, not likely to adversely affect May affect, not likely to adversely affect May affect, not likely to jeopardize Would affect individuals and populations

As determined by previous consultation with USFWS for all species

No effect May affect, not likely to adversely affect May affect, not likely to adversely affect May affect, not likely to jeopardize Would affect individuals and populations

As determined by previous consultation with USFWS for all species

No effect May affect, not likely to adversely affect May affect, not likely to adversely affect May affect, not likely to jeopardize No effect under Proposed Action; would affect individuals and populations under Alternatives 2 & 3

(West Antelope-See Appendix J) Black-footed ferrets Bald eagle Ute Ladies’-tresses Mountain plover Black-tailed prairie dog
1 2

As determined by previous consultation with USFWS for all species

No effect May affect, not likely to adversely affect May affect, not likely to adversely affect May affect, not likely to jeopardize Would affect individuals and populations

Refer to Sections 4.0 and 4.1 for a discussion on magnitude of impacts. All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2-55

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2-5. Summary Comparison of Magnitude1 and Duration of Direct and Indirect Impacts for the Proposed Action, Alternative 2, Alternative 3, and the No Action Alternative for the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts2 (Continued).
MAGNITUDE AND DURATION OF IMPACT PROPOSED ACTION, ALTERNATIVE 2, NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE & ALTERNATIVE 3

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE RESOURCE NAME
LAND USE AND RECREATION (Applicable to all five tracts) ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ON LAND USE would be: Reduction of livestock grazing Loss of wildlife habitat Loss of access for sub-coal oil and gas development Loss of CBM reserves through venting and/or reduction in hydrostatic pressure Removal of existing oil and gas production facilities Loss of access to public land available for recreation activities CULTURAL RESOURCES (NARO North and NARO South) 75 sites not eligible or recommended not eligible for NRHP 4 eligible for NRHP

Moderate, Moderate, Moderate, Moderate,

long term on existing mine areas long term on existing mine areas short term on existing mine areas permanent on existing mine areas

Same Same Same Same

as as as as

No No No No

Action Action Action Action

on on on on

expanded expanded expanded expanded

mine mine mine mine

areas areas areas areas

Moderate, short term on existing mine areas Moderate, short term on existing mine areas

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas

Impacts to eligible or unevaluated sites are not permitted; any site eligible for the NRHP would be avoided or mitigated through data recovery

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas

(Little Thunder) 34 sites not eligible or recommended not eligible for NRHP None eligible for NRHP

Impacts to eligible or unevaluated sites are not permitted; any site eligible for the NRHP would be avoided or mitigated through data recovery

Same as No Action on expanded mine area

(West Roundup) 30 sites not eligible or recommended not eligible for NRHP None eligible for NRHP

Impacts to eligible or unevaluated sites are not permitted; any site eligible for the NRHP would be avoided or mitigated through data recovery

Same as No Action on expanded mine area

(West Antelope) 49 sites not eligible or recommended not eligible for NRHP 4 eligible for NRHP

Impacts to eligible or unevaluated sites are not permitted; any site eligible for the NRHP would be avoided or mitigated through data recovery

Same as No Action on expanded mine area

(Applicable to all five tracts) Potential increase in vandalism Potential increase in unauthorized collecting
1 2

No impacts on existing mine areas No impacts on existing mine areas

Negligible on expanded mine areas Negligible on expanded mine areas

Refer to Sections 4.0 and 4.1 for a discussion on magnitude of impacts. All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise.

2-56

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2-5. Summary Comparison of Magnitude1 and Duration of Direct and Indirect Impacts for the Proposed Action, Alternative 2, Alternative 3, and the No Action Alternative for the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts2 (Continued).
MAGNITUDE AND DURATION OF IMPACT PROPOSED ACTION, ALTERNATIVE 2, NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE & ALTERNATIVE 3
No impact identified on existing mine areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE RESOURCE NAME
NATIVE AMERICAN CONCERNS (Applicable to all five tracts) PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES (Applicable to all five tracts) Overburden removal could expose fossils for scientific examination VISUAL RESOURCES (Applicable to all five tracts) EVIDENT IMPACTS DURING MINING would include: Alteration of landscape by mining facilities and operations IMPACTS FOLLOWING RECLAMATION would include: Smoother sloped terrain Reduction in sagebrush density

Disturbance of USDA-FS classified Class 3 and Class 5 formations on existing mine areas

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas

Moderate, short term on existing mine areas

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas

Negligible, long term on existing mine areas Negligible, short to long term on existing mine areas

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas

NOISE (NARO North and NARO South) INCREASED NOISE LEVELS could affect: Occupied dwellings within one mile

Moderate to substantial, short term on existing mine area

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas

(Little Thunder) INCREASED NOISE LEVELS could affect: Occupied dwellings within one mile

Moderate to substantial, short term on existing mine area

Same as No Action on expanded mine area

(West Roundup) INCREASED NOISE LEVELS could affect: Occupied dwellings within one mile (West Antelope) INCREASED NOISE LEVELS could affect: Occupied dwellings within one mile

None for existing mine area

Same as No Action on expanded mine area

None for existing mine area

Same as No Action on expanded mine area

1 2

Refer to Sections 4.0 and 4.1 for a discussion on magnitude of impacts. All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2-57

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2-5. Summary Comparison of Magnitude1 and Duration of Direct and Indirect Impacts for the Proposed Action, Alternative 2, Alternative 3, and the No Action Alternative for the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts2 (Continued).
MAGNITUDE AND DURATION OF IMPACT PROPOSED ACTION, ALTERNATIVE 2, NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE & ALTERNATIVE 3

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE RESOURCE NAME
NOISE (Continued) (Applicable to all five tracts) INCREASED NOISE LEVELS could affect: Wildlife in immediate vicinity TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES (NARO North and NARO South) Use of railroads to ship coal Employee and service contractor use of highways to and from mine sites (Little Thunder) Use of railroad to ship coal Employee and service contractor use of highways to and from mine sites (West Roundup) Use of railroads to ship coal Employee and service contractor use of highways to and from mine sites (West Antelope) Use of railroads to ship coal Employee and service contractor use of highways to and from mine sites (Applicable to all five tracts) Relocation of pipelines Relocation of utility lines

Negligible, short term on existing mine areas

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas

Moderate, for duration of existing approved mining operations Moderate, for duration of existing approved mining operations

Same as No Action for additional 4 to 6 years Same as No Action for additional 4 to 6 years

Moderate, for duration of existing approved mining operations Moderate for duration of existing approved mining operations

Same as No Action for additional 0.3 to 10.1 years Same as No Action for additional 0.3 to 10.1 years

Moderate for duration of existing approved mining operations Moderate, for duration of existing approved mining operations

Same as No Action for additional 5.0 to 8.2 years Same as No Action for additional 5.0 to 8.2 years

Moderate, for duration of existing approved mining operations Moderate, for duration of existing approved mining operations

Same as No Action on expanded mine area Same as No Action on expanded mine area

Negligible, short term on expanded mine areas Short term on expanded mine areas

Same as No Action on expanded mine area Same as No Action on expanded mine area

1 2

Refer to Sections 4.0 and 4.1 for a discussion on magnitude of impacts. All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise.

2-58

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2-5. Summary Comparison of Magnitude1 and Duration of Direct and Indirect Impacts for the Proposed Action, Alternative 2, Alternative 3, and the No Action Alternative for the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts2 (Continued).
MAGNITUDE AND DURATION OF IMPACT NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE PROPOSED ACTION, ALTERNATIVE 2, & ALTERNATIVE 3

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE RESOURCE NAME
SOCIOECONOMICS (NARO North and NARO South) EFFECTS DURING MINING would include: Employment (Little Thunder and West Antelope) EFFECTS DURING MINING would include: Employment

Moderate, beneficial short term for existing approved mining operations

10 potential additional jobs on expanded mine area

Moderate, beneficial short term for existing approved mining operations

(West Roundup) EFFECTS DURING MINING would include: Employment (Applicable to all five tracts) EFFECTS DURING MINING would include: Revenues from royalties and taxes to the state and local government Revenues from royalties and taxes to the federal government Economic development Population increases in Campbell and Converse Counties and resulting housing and infrastructure needs
1 2

Same as No Action on expanded mine area, no additional jobs on expanded mine area are anticipated

Moderate, beneficial short term for existing approved mining operations

150 potential additional jobs on expanded mine area

Moderate, beneficial short term on existing mine areas Moderate, beneficial short term on existing mine areas Moderate, beneficial short term on existing mine areas No new impact related to existing mine areas

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action on expanded mine areas Same as No Action on Expanded mine areas

Refer to Sections 4.0 and 4.1 for a discussion on magnitude of impacts. All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2-59

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2-6. Summary Comparison of Magnitude and Duration of Cumulative Impacts1, 2.
DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE RESOURCE NAME TOPOGRAPHY & PHYSIOGRAPHY Topographic moderation following coal removal and reclamation on federal coal leases. Overlapping impacts to topography caused by surface coal mining and CBM development on and adjacent to surface coal mines. GEOLOGY AND MINERALS Recovery of coal would result in: Overburden and coal removal and replacement of overburden and topsoil on federal coal leases. Loss of CBM resource through venting and/or depletion of hydrostatic pressure. Loss of access for oil and gas development on federal coal leases. SOILS Disturbance of soil and associated physical and chemical changes to soil resource on federal coal leases. MAGNITUDE TYPE AND DURATION OF IMPACT PROPOSED ACTION, ALTERNATIVE 2, & ALTERNATIVE 3 Same as No Action on approximately 2.2 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties. Same as No Action on expanded coal lease area.

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE Moderate, long term impacts on approximately 1.9 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties. Negligible, short term on area leased for federal coal.

Moderate, long term to permanent impacts on approximately 1.9 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties. Moderate to substantial on shallowest coal reserves located near Wyodak coal outcrop area. Moderate, short term on approximately 1.9 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties. Moderate, long term impacts related to coal removal from approximately 1.9 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties combined with more widespread, less intensive impacts related to CBM development and power plant and railroad construction.

Same as No Action on 2.2 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties. Same as No Action on additional 16,000 acres of coal reserves. Same as no Action on approximately 2.2 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties. Same as No Action related to coal removal from approximately 2.2 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties combined with more widespread, less intensive impacts related to CBM development and power plant and railroad construction.

1 2

Refer to Section 4.5 for a discussion of cumulative impacts. All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise.

2-60

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2-6. Summary Comparison of Magnitude and Duration of Cumulative Impacts1, 2 (Continued).
DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE RESOURCE NAME AIR QUALITY Cumulative impacts associated with mining operations and Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS Alternative 1 and Montana Statewide Oil and Gas EIS Alternative E would include: Cumulative near-field concentrations of criteria pollutants. Cumulative far-field concentrations of NO2 annual. MAGNITUDE TYPE AND DURATION OF IMPACT PROPOSED ACTION, ALTERNATIVE 2, & NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ALTERNATIVE 3

Above PSD Class II increment for PM10 24-hour. Concentrations of other pollutants below increments. Above PSD Class I increment in Northern Cheyenne Reservation. Concentrations in other areas are below increments. Above PSD Class I increment in Northern Cheyenne Reservation and Washakie Wilderness. Concentrations in other areas are below increments. Potential impacts range from three days above 1.0 dV at Red Rock Lakes Wilderness to 32 days above 1.0 dV at Wind Cave National Park. Potential maximum deciview change is 29.0 dV at U.L. Bend Wilderness. Potential impacts are 180.0 percent of the level of acceptable change (LAC) in Upper Frozen Lake and 10.4 percent of the LAC in Florence Lake. Impacts at other lakes are below the LAC.

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas.

Cumulative far-field concentrations of PM10 24-hour.

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas.

Cumulative visibility impacts in mandatory Class I areas.

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas.

Acidification of sensitive lakes.

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas.

1 2

Refer to Section 4.5 for a discussion of cumulative impacts. All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2-61

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2-6. Summary Comparison of Magnitude and Duration of Cumulative Impacts1, 2 (Continued).
DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE RESOURCE NAME WATER RESOURCES SURFACE WATER Mining disturbance of Cheyenne River drainage basin. Offsetting changes in surface flow amounts due to overlapping development of coal and CBM resource. GROUNDWATER Overlapping drawdown in the coal and alluvial aquifers between surface coal mines. Overlapping drawdown in the coal aquifer caused by surface mining and CBM development. Water-level decline in the sub-coal aquifers as a result of all development. Change in groundwater quality as a result of all development. ALLUVIAL VALLEY FLOORS MAGNITUDE TYPE AND DURATION OF IMPACT PROPOSED ACTION, ALTERNATIVE 2, & ALTERNATIVE 3

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

Disruption and diversions affecting approximately 4.0 percent of drainage basin during mining and reclamation. Negligible, short term, potentially beneficial on existing mine areas. Moderate, long term for existing mine areas. Additive, long term in area immediately west of surface coal mines. No cumulative impacts anticipated. No cumulative impacts anticipated. No cumulative impacts anticipated on existing mine areas, AVFs disturbed by mining would be replaced. Incremental, not additive, short term on existing leases, jurisdictional wetlands would be replaced as required under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.

Same as No Action affecting approximately 6.0 percent of drainage basin during mining and reclamation. Same as No Action on expanded mine areas.

Same as No Action for expanded mine areas. Same as No Action for expanded mine areas. Same as No Action for expanded mine areas. Same as No Action on expanded mine areas. Same as No Action on expanded mine areas.

WETLANDS Removal of jurisdictional wetlands.

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas.

1 2

Refer to Section 4.5 for a discussion of cumulative impacts. All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise.

2-62

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2-6. Summary Comparison of Magnitude and Duration of Cumulative Impacts1, 2 (Continued).
DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE RESOURCE NAME WETLANDS (continued) Removal of non-jurisdictional wetlands. MAGNITUDE TYPE AND DURATION OF IMPACT PROPOSED ACTION, ALTERNATIVE 2, & ALTERNATIVE 3 Same as No Action on expanded mine areas.

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE Incremental, not additive, short term to long term on existing leases, non-jurisdictional wetlands would be replaced as required by the surface landowner, USDA-FS, or WDEQ/LQD. Moderate, short to long term impacts related to coal removal from approximately 1.9 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties and replacement with approved seed mixtures combined with less concentrated impacts related to CBM development and power plant and railroad construction. Moderate, short to long term impacts related to coal removal from approximately 1.9 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties combined with less concentrated impacts related to CBM development and power plant and railroad construction. Habitat for these species is limited in the surface coal mining area. Minor, short to long term impacts related to coal removal from approximately 1.9 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties combined with less concentrated impacts related to CBM development and power plant and railroad construction.

VEGETATION Removal and replacement of native vegetation/ Changes in vegetation patterns and diversity/ Wildlife habitat carrying capacity loss/ Potential for invasion by weedy non-native species.

Same as No Action related to coal removal from approximately 2.2 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties combined with less concentrated impacts related to CBM development and power plant and railroad construction.

WILDLIFE Disturbance of yearlong and winter/yearlong pronghorn habitat/ Disturbance of mule deer and white-tailed deer winter and winter/yearlong habitat/ Reduction in raptor nesting and foraging habitat/ Disturbance of sage grouse leks and nesting habitat. Disturbance of elk habitat/ Disturbance of nesting and foraging habitat for Migratory Birds of Management Concern.

Same as No Action related to coal removal from approximately 2.2 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties.

1 2

Refer to Section 4.5 for a discussion of cumulative impacts. All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2-63

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2-6. Summary Comparison of Magnitude and Duration of Cumulative Impacts1, 2 (Continued).
DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE RESOURCE NAME WILDLIFE (continued) Disturbance of waterfowl habitat/ Disturbance of habitat for aquatic species. MAGNITUDE TYPE AND DURATION OF IMPACT PROPOSED ACTION, ALTERNATIVE 2, & ALTERNATIVE 3 Same as No Action related to coal removal from approximately 2.2 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties.

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE Habitat for these species is limited in the surface coal mining area. Minor, short to long term impacts related to coal removal from approximately 1.9 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties combined with more widespread impacts related to CBM development and power plant and railroad construction. Moderate, long term impacts related to coal removal from approximately 1.9 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties combined with less concentrated impacts related to CBM development and power plant and railroad construction.

Reduction in wildlife habitat diversity following reclamation/ Reduction in carrying capacity for some species following reclamation.

Same as No Action related to coal removal from approximately 2.2 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties.

THREATENED, ENDANGERED, PROPOSED, AND CANDIDATE SPECIES See Appendices G through J.

Individuals of some T&E species will potentially be directly affected by mining operations on the existing leases, impacts may overlap with other developments on adjacent lands. Moderate, short to long term impacts related to coal removal from approximately 1.9 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties combined with less concentrated impacts related to CBM development and power plant and railroad construction.

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas.

LAND USE AND RECREATION Loss of agricultural production/ Reduction of wildlife habitat.

Same as No Action related to coal removal from approximately 2.2 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties.

1 2

Refer to Section 4.5 for a discussion of cumulative impacts. All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise

2-64

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2-6. Summary Comparison of Magnitude and Duration of Cumulative Impacts1, 2 (Continued).
DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE RESOURCE NAME LAND USE AND RECREATION (continued) Disruption of oil and gas development/production and removal of existing oil and gas production facilities. Loss of access to lands used for recreation, particularly hunting. CULTURAL RESOURCES Increased vandalism related to increase population and access/ Unintentional disturbance of cultural sites. MAGNITUDE TYPE AND DURATION OF IMPACT PROPOSED ACTION, ALTERNATIVE 2, & ALTERNATIVE 3

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

Moderate to substantial, short term on existing mine areas. Moderate, short term on existing mine areas.

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas.

Moderate, permanent losses related to coal removal from approximately 1.9 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties combined with less concentrated impacts related to CBM development and power plant and railroad construction. Cultural sites eligible for the NRHP would be mitigated on mine areas. Ineligible sites may be destroyed. No impact identified on existing mine areas. Moderate, permanent losses related to coal removal from approximately 1.9 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties combined with less concentrated impacts related to CBM development and power plant and railroad construction. Cultural sites eligible for the NRHP would be mitigated on mine areas. Ineligible sites may be destroyed.

Same as No Action related to coal removal from approximately 2.2 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties.

NATIVE AMERICAN CONCERNS PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES Loss of plant, invertebrate and vertebrate fossil material due to surface-disturbing activities, unauthorized collection, and vandalism.

Same as No Action on expanded mine areas. Same as No Action on related to coal removal from approximately 2.2 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties.

1 2

Refer to Section 4.5 for a discussion of cumulative impacts. All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2-65

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2-6. Summary Comparison of Magnitude and Duration of Cumulative Impacts1, 2 (Continued).
DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE RESOURCE NAME VISUAL RESOURCES Impacts on visual resources. MAGNITUDE TYPE AND DURATION OF IMPACT PROPOSED ACTION, ALTERNATIVE 2, & ALTERNATIVE 3 Same as No Action related to coal removal from approximately 2.2 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties.

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE Moderate, short term related to coal removal from approximately 1.9 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties combined with less concentrated impacts related to CBM development and power plant and railroad construction. No cumulative impacts anticipated. Moderate, short term related to coal removal from approximately 1.9 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties combined with impacts related to CBM development and power plant and railroad construction. Significant, short term, beneficial related to coal removal from approximately 1.9 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties combined with impacts related to CBM development and power plant and railroad construction. Moderate, short term, beneficial related to coal removal from approximately 1.9 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties combined with impacts related to CBM development and power plant and railroad construction.

NOISE TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES Continued use of existing transportation facilities and construction of new facilities.

Same as No Action. Same as No Action related to coal removal from approximately 2.2 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties.

SOCIOECONOMICS Revenues from royalties and taxes to the state and local government.

Same as No Action related to coal removal from approximately 2.2 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties.

Revenues from royalties and taxes to the federal government.

Same as No Action related to coal removal from approximately 2.2 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties.

1 2

Refer to Section 4.5 for a discussion of cumulative impacts. All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise.

2-66

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives Table 2-6. Summary Comparison of Magnitude and Duration of Cumulative Impacts1, 2 (Continued).
DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE RESOURCE NAME SOCIOECONOMICS (continued) Employment MAGNITUDE TYPE AND DURATION OF IMPACT PROPOSED ACTION, ALTERNATIVE 2, & ALTERNATIVE 3 Same as No Action related to coal removal from approximately 2.2 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties.

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE Moderate, short term, beneficial related to coal removal from approximately 1.9 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties combined with impacts related to CBM development and power plant and railroad construction. Moderate, short term, related to coal removal from approximately 1.9 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties combined with impacts related to CBM development and power plant and railroad construction.

Population increases in Campbell and Converse Counties and resulting housing and infrastructure needs.

Same as No Action for coal removal from approximately 2.2 percent of Campbell and Converse Counties.

1 2

Refer to Section 4.5 for a discussion of cumulative impacts. All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

2-67

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives through the time the reclamation bond is released). Impacts also vary in terms of significance. The basis for conclusions regarding significance are the criteria set forth by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1508.27) and the professional judgment of the specialists doing the analyses. Impact significance may range from negligible to substantial; impacts can be significant during mining but be reduced to insignificance following completion of reclamation.

2-68

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment 3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT This chapter describes the existing conditions of the physical, biological, cultural, and socioeconomic resources in the General Analysis Area that includes all five of the five LBA1 tracts. The resources that are addressed here were identified during the scoping process or interdisciplinary team review as having the potential to be affected. Figure 3-1 shows the General Analysis Area for most environmental resources. Additional, more detailed sitespecific information about the affected environment for the study area identified for each LBA tract is contained in a separate document entitled Supplementary Information on the Affected Environment in the General Analysis Area for the South Powder River Basin Coal Lease Applications EIS, which is available on request. the amended mine permit area, to include the new federal coal lease. Critical elements of the human environment (BLM 1988) that could potentially be affected by the Proposed Actions or action alternatives include air quality, cultural resources, Native American religious concerns, T&E species, hazardous or solid wastes, water quality, wetlands/riparian zones, invasive non-native species, and environmental justice. Five other critical elements (areas of critical environmental concern, prime or unique farmlands, floodplains, wild and scenic rivers, and wilderness) are not present in the project area and are not addressed further. In addition to the critical elements that are potentially present in the General Analysis Area, this EIS discusses the status and potential effects of mining each LBA tract on topography and physiography, geology and mineral resources, soils, water quantity, alluvial valley floors, vegetation, wildlife, land use and recreation, paleontological resources, visual resources, noise, transportation resources, and socioeconomics. 3.1 General Setting The General Analysis Area is located in the PRB, a part of the Northern Great Plains that includes most of northeastern Wyoming. Vegetation is primarily sagebrush and mixed grass prairie. The climate is semi-arid, with an average annual precipitation at Wright (Figure 1-1) of just over 11 inches (Martner 1986). June (2.35 inches) and May (2.04 inches) are the 3-1

The study area for each tract includes the tract as applied for, the adjacent lands that BLM is considering adding to each tract, and the anticipated permit amendment study area for each applicant mine. The anticipated permit amendment study area is defined as those lands adjacent to and outside of an applicant mine’s current permit area that the applicant anticipates would be contained within
1

Refer to page xii for a list of abbreviations and acronyms used in this document.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment
R. 71 W. T. 44 N.
Hilight Road

R. 70 W.

R.69W. T. 44 N.

LEGEND
Existing Lease Boundary

Small Road

Jacobs Ranch Mine
State Highway 450

Little Thunder LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternatives 2 & 3 North Tract Under Alternative 3 South Tract Under Alternative 3 Anticipated Permit Amendment Study Area

LITTLE THUNDER LBA
T. 43 N.
Hilight Road

Black Thunder Mine

Sta te

High way 450

T. 43 N.

Road

Cre ek

T. 42 N.

BNSF + UP Double Tracks

Antelope Road

rds wa Ed

Road

WEST Road Reno ROUNDUP LBA

l hoo Sc

North Rochelle Mine
T. 42 N.

NARO NORTH LBA
Antelope
ad Ro

Piney Canyon (Mackey) Road

North Antelope/ Rochelle Complex

NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2
T. 41 N.

T. 41 N.

Area Removed Under Alternative 3 Anticipated Permit Amendment Study Area

WEST ANTELOPE LBA
Campbell County Converse County

Antelope Mine

NARO SOUTH LBA
T. 40 N.

West Antelope LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2 Area Removed Under Alternative 3 Anticipated Permit Amendment Study Area

R. 71 W.

BNS F

) 37 oad P oad eR +U lop ty R nte oun A C .a. (a.k

Tri ple

Tracks

T. 40 N.

Figure 3-1. General Analysis Area.

3-2

te Sta

59 ay hw Hig

SCALE: 1"= 3 MILES R. 70 W.

R.69W.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment wettest months, and February (0.29 inch) is the driest. Snowfall averages 25.1 inches per year, with most occurring in March (5.0 inches) and December (4.5 inches). Potential evapotranspiration, at approximately 31 inches (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 1969), exceeds annual precipitation. The average daily mean temperature is 44.2 degrees F. The highest recorded temperature was 103 degrees F and the lowest was minus 34 degrees F. July is the warmest month, with a mean daily temperature of 70 degrees F, and January is the coldest (20.5 degrees F). The frost-free period is 100-125 days. In the General Analysis Area, the regional wind speeds average from nine to 13 mph with local variations in speed and direction due to differences in topography. Wind speeds are highest in the winter and spring and are predominantly from the northwest or southeast. Wind velocity tends to increase during the day and decrease during the night. Winter gusts often reach 30-40 mph. During periods of strong wind, dust may impact air quality across the region. There are an average of 15 air-stagnation events annually in the PRB with an average duration of two days each (BLM 1974). 3.2 Topography and Physiography The General Analysis Area is a high plains area within the eastern portion of the PRB. The PRB is bounded by the Black Hills on the east; the Big Horn Mountains on the west; the Hartville Uplift, Casper-Arch, and South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS Laramie Mountains on the south; and the Miles City Arch and the Yellowstone River on the north. Landforms of the area consist of a dissected rolling upland plain with low relief, broken by low red-capped buttes, mesas, hills, and ridges. Playas are common in the basin, as are buttes and plateaus capped by clinker or sandstone. Elevations in the PRB range from less than 2,500 ft to greater than 6,000 ft above sea level. The major river valleys have wide, flat floors and broad floodplains. The drainages dissecting the area are incised, typically are ephemeral or intermittent, and do not provide year-round water sources. The General Analysis Area and its tributaries are drained by the Cheyenne River. Elevations range from about 4,500 ft to 5,000 ft above sea level. Slopes in the General Analysis Area range from flat to greater than 50 percent. In the individual LBA tracts, the average slopes range from one to five percent. 3.3 Geology Stratigraphic units in the General Analysis Area that would be impacted if the tracts under consideration for leasing are mined include, in descending order, recent (Holocene age) alluvial and eolian deposits, the Eocene age Wasatch Formation (the overburden), and the Paleocene age Fort Union Formation (which contains the target coal beds). Variations between the LBA tracts occur primarily in the thickness of the mineable coal seams, the thickness of overburden, the parting 3-3

3.0 Affected Environment thickness(es) between the various seams comprising the Wyodak coal seam and the surface topography. Figure 3-2 is a chart showing the stratigraphic relationships of the surface and subsurface geologic units in the General Analysis Area. Surficial deposits in the General Analysis Area include alluvial and eolian deposits, clinker, and weathered Wasatch and Fort Union Formations. Although clinker is present throughout the General Analysis Area, the NARO South LBA Tract is the only LBA tract analyzed in this EIS that contains appreciable amounts of clinker. There are thin alluvial deposits along ephemeral streams and closed basin drainage channels. These alluvial deposits typically consist primarily of poorly to well-sorted, irregularly bedded to laminated, unconsolidated sand, silt, and clay with minor intervals of fine gravel. The valley floors of Porcupine Creek and Antelope Creek contain appreciable amounts of alluvium both in width and depth. The alluvial deposits in Porcupine Creek and Antelope Creek contain much more coarse-grained material (sands and gravels) than the ephemeral tributaries that drain most of the General Analysis Area. The Eocene Wasatch Formation forms most of the overburden on top of the recoverable coal seams in the General Analysis Area. It consists of interbedded lenticular sandstones, siltstones, shales, and thin discontinuous coals. There is no distinct boundary between the Wasatch Formation and the underlying Paleocene Fort Union 3-4 Formation. From a practical standpoint, however, the top of the mineable coal zone is considered as the contact between the two formations. Overburden thicknesses in the tracts under consideration for leasing range from around 110 ft to more than 300 ft. The overburden is relatively thin in the NARO South and West Antelope LBA Tracts and relatively thicker in the NARO North, Little Thunder, and West Roundup LBA Tracts. The Fort Union Formation consists primarily of shales, mudstones, siltstones, lenticular sandstones, and coal. It is divided into three members: Tongue River (which contains the target coal seams), Lebo, and Tullock, in descending order (Figure 3-2). The Tongue River Member of the Fort Union Formation consists of interbedded claystone, silty shale, carbonaceous shale, and coal, with lesser amounts of fine-grained sandstone and siltstone. Within the General Analysis Area there are up to four mineable coal seams. The nomenclature of these seams varies from mine operator to mine operator. The U.S. Geological Survey (Flores et al. 1999) refers to the thick mineable coals in the Gillette coal field as the WyodakAnderson coal zone of the Tongue River Member of the Fort Union Formation. Locally these beds are referred to as Wyodak, WyodakAnderson, Anderson, and Canyon. The number of mineable coal seams varies from tract to tract. There is South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment

Geologic Unit RECENT ALLUVIUM
HOLOCENE

Hydrologic Characteristics
Typically fine grained and poorly sorted in ephemeral drainages with occasional very thin, clean interbedded sand lenses. More laterally extensive, thicker, and coarsegrained along intermittent Antelope Creek and ephemeral to intermittent Porcupine Creek. Excessive dissolved solids generally make these aquifers unsuitable for domestic, agricultural and livestock usage. Low infiltration capacity in ephemeral draws unless covered by sandy eolian blanket. Low to moderate infiltration along Antelope Creek and Porcupine Creek.

CLINKER
HOLOCENE TO PLEISTOCENE

Baked and fused bedrock resulting from burning coal seams which ignite on the outcrop from lightning, manmade fires or spontaneous combustion. The reddish clinker (locally called scoria, red dog, etc.) formed by melting and partial fusing of overburden above the burning coal. The baked rock varies greatly in the degree of alteration; some is dense and glassy while some is vesicular and porous. It is commonly used as a road construction material and is an aquifer wherever saturated. Lenticular fine sands interbedded in predominantly very fine grained siltstone and claystone may yield low to moderate quantities of poor to good quality water. The discontinuous nature and irregular geometry of these sand bodies result in low overall permeabilities and very slow groundwater movement in the overburden on a regional scale. Water quality in the Wasatch formation generally does not meet Wyoming Class I drinking water standards due to the dissolved mineral content. Some wells do, however, produce water of considerably better quality which does meet the Class I standard. The coal serves as a regional groundwater aquifer and exhibits highly variable aquifer properties. Permeability and porosity associated with the coal arise almost entirely from fractures. Coal water typically does not meet Class I or Class II (irrigation) use standards. In most cases, water from coal wells is suitable for livestock use. The coal water is used throughout the region as a source of stock water and occasionally for domestic use.

WASATCH FORMATION
EOCENE

TONGUE RIVER MEMBER

W
C

FORT UNION FORMATION

PALEOCENE

LEBO MEMBER

The Lebo member, also referred to as “The Lebo Confining Layer” or “Lebo Shale” has a mean thickness of 711 feet in the PRB and a thickness of about 400 feet in the vicinity of Gillette (Lewis and Hotchkiss 1981). The Lebo typically yields small quantities of poor quality groundwater. Where sand content is locally large, caused by channel or deltaic deposits, the Lebo may yield as much as 10 gpm (Lewis and Hotchkiss 1981).

TULLOCK MEMBER

The Tullock member has a mean thickness of 785 feet in the PRB and a mean sand content of 53 percent which indicates that the unit generally functions well as a regional aquifer. Yields of 15 gpm are common but vary locally and may be as much as 40 gpm. Records from the SEO indicate that maximum yields of approximately 300 gpm have been achieved from this aquifer. Water quality in the Tullock Member often meets Class I standards. The extensive sandstone units in the Tullock Member are commonly developed regionally for domestic and industrial uses. The City of Gillette is currently using eight wells completed in this zone to meet part of its municipal water requirements. Sandstone and interbedded sandy shales and claystone provide yields generally of less than 20 gpm. Higher yields are sometimes achieved where sand thicknesses are greatest. Water quality is typically fair to good. Sandstone and sandy shales yield up to 200 gpm, however, yields are frequently significantly less. The water quality of the Fox Hills is generally good with TDS concentrations commonly less than 1000 mg/l. This unit is comprised predominantly of marine shales with only occasional local thin sandstone lenses. Maximum yields are minor and overall the unit is not water bearing. Water obtained from this unit is poor with high concentrations of sodium and sulfate as the predominant ions in solution.

UPPER CRETACEOUS

LANCE FORMATION FOX HILLS SANDSTONE

PIERRE SHALE

W = WYODAK COAL;

A = ANDERSON COAL; C = CANYON COAL

Figure 3-2. Stratigraphic Relationships and Hydrologic Characteristics of Upper Cretaceous, Lower Tertiary, and Recent Geologic Units, PRB, Wyoming. (Compiled from Hodson et al. 1973 and Lewis and Hotchkiss 1981). South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS 3-5

3.0 Affected Environment one mineable seam in the West Roundup LBA Tract (Wyodak); two mineable coal seams in the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts (referred to by the operator as the Wyodak-Anderson 1 and 2); three mineable coal seams in the Little Thunder LBA Tract (referred to by the operator as the Upper, Middle, and Lower Wyodak); and four mineable seams in the West Antelope LBA Tract (referred to by the operator as the Anderson, Lower Anderson, Canyon/Upper Canyon, and Lower Canyon). Interburden between the coal seams varies from 0 to around 100 ft. The Fort Union coal seams are subbituminous and are generally lowsulfur, low-ash coals. Typically, the coal being mined has a higher heating value and lower sulfur content south of Gillette than north of Gillette. In the tracts under consideration for leasing, the heating value of the coal seams is expected to range from 7,850 to 9,130 Btu/lb. The ash content in the coal seams is expected to vary from 4 to 14 percent, the sulfur content from 0.1 to 0.6 percent, the fixed carbon from 30 to 41 percent, and the moisture content from 22 to 29 percent. The Lebo Shale and Tullock Members of the Fort Union Formation underlie the Tongue River Member (Figure 32). They consist primarily of sandstone, siltstone, mudstone, shale, and coal. In general, the Tullock Member contains more sand than the Lebo Shale Member. 3.3.1 Mineral Resources The PRB contains large reserves of fossil fuels including oil, natural gas (from conventional reservoirs and from coal beds), and coal, all of which are currently being produced. In addition, uranium, bentonite, and scoria are mined in the PRB (WSGS 2003b). Coal There are 15 coal mines lying along a north/south line that parallels Highway 59, starting north of Gillette, Wyoming and extending south for about 75 miles (Figure 1-1). These mines are located where the Wyodak coal is at its shallowest depths, i.e., nearest the outcrop. A 16th mine, the Dave Johnston Mine, located near Glenrock, Wyoming about 30 miles southwest of the Antelope Mine, has shut down coal mining operations. Oil and Gas Oil and conventional (i.e., non-CBM) gas have been produced in the PRB for more than 100 years from reservoir beds that range in age from Pennsylvanian to Oligocene (De Bruin 1996). There are approximately 500 fields that produce oil and/or natural gas. The estimated mean amounts of undiscovered hydrocarbons in the basin are 1.94 billion barrels of recoverable oil and 1.60 trillion ft3 of recoverable, non-CBM gas (USGS 1995). Depth to gas and oil-bearing strata are generally between 4,000 ft and 13,500 ft, but some wells are as shallow as 250 ft.

3-6

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment The LBA tracts overlie geologic structures that contain producible quantities of oil and gas. A portion of the Little Thunder LBA Tract is over the Hilight Oil and Gas Field, which was discovered in 1969. The main zone of production at the Hilight Field is the Early Cretaceous Muddy Sandstone which lies approximately 9,000 ft below the surface in this area. The western edge of the West Roundup LBA Tract overlies a portion of the House Creek Oil and Gas Field, which produces from the Parkman Sandstone of the Upper Cretaceous Mesaverde Group. The Parkman Sandstone is approximately 6,400 ft below the surface in the vicinity of the West Roundup LBA Tract. The western portion of the NARO South LBA Tract overlies both the Porcupine and House Creek Oil and Gas Fields. The Porcupine Field produces from the Upper Cretaceous Parkman, Sussex, and Turner Sandstones and the Niobrara Shale, also Upper Cretaceous in age. The Porcupine Field also produces from the Lower Cretaceous Muddy and Dakota Sandstones (De Bruin 1999). See Section 3.11 for further discussion of producing wells and their associated facilities. Coal Bed Methane The generation of methane gas from coal beds occurs as a natural process. Methane generated in the coal may be trapped there by overburden pressure, by the pressure of water in the coal, or by impermeable layers immediately above the coal. Deeper coal beds have higher pressures and generally South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS trap more gas. Under favorable geologic conditions, methane can be trapped at shallow depths in and above coal beds, and this seems to be the case in the PRB. Without the existence of conditions which act to trap the gas in shallow coals or in adjacent sandstones, the gas escapes to the atmosphere. It is likely that an appreciable quantity of methane generated by the coal beds in the PRB has gradually escaped into the atmosphere because of the relatively shallow coal burial depths. However, a large amount remains in the coal. One study estimates that there are approximately 38.2 trillion ft3 of CBM gas in place in coal beds that are thicker than 20 ft and deeper than 200 ft. This study estimates that there are 25.6 trillion ft3 of recoverable CBM reserves (Finley and Goolsby 2000). Historically, methane has been reported flowing from shallow water wells and coal exploration holes in parts of the PRB. According to De Bruin and Jones (1989), most of the documented historical occurrences have been in the northern PRB. Olive (1957) references a water well in T.54N., R.74W. that began producing gas for domestic use in 1916. CBM has been commercially produced in the PRB since 1989 when production began at the Rawhide Butte Field, west of the Eagle Butte Mine. CBM exploration and development is currently ongoing throughout the PRB in Wyoming. The predominant CBM production to date has occurred from coal beds of the Wyodak - Anderson zone in seams 3-7

3.0 Affected Environment known as the Anderson, Canyon, Wyodak, Big George, and other locally-used names. These are the same (or equivalent) seams that are being mined along the eastern margin of the basin by the mines that are included in this analysis. CBM is being produced from other, deeper seams locally throughout the PRB. The only CBM well completions within the General Analysis Area to date have been within the Wyodak Anderson coal seams. Coal mining does not directly affect production of CBM from coal seams below the Wyodak-Anderson, however, it does delay any proposed CBM development in the deeper seams in order to avoid interference with mining. The presence of splits in the coal seams affects potential CBM development. Current CBM well completion practices within the PRB generally preclude completion of two seams separated by thick shales within a single wellbore. As a result, in the areas where the coal seams are split, two wells would be required to produce essentially the same reserve that would be produced from a single well in a single contiguous seam. Since the early 1990s, the BLM has completed numerous EAs and three EISs analyzing CBM projects. The most recent of these is the Final Environmental Impact Statement and Proposed Plan Amendment for the Powder River Basin Oil and Gas Project, referred to as the Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas EIS (BLM 2003a). That EIS covers almost 12,500 square miles, encompasses almost the entire 3-8 PRB in all or parts of Campbell, Converse, Johnson, and Sheridan Counties, and covers both private and public (state and federal) lands. It analyzes the potential impacts of CBM development in the Wyoming PRB. The analysis in the Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS assumes that approximately 39,400 new CBM wells would be drilled, completed, and produced over the next ten years, in addition to the more than 12,000 CBM wells that had been drilled or are permitted for drilling when the EIS was prepared. The EIS also analyzes the impacts of developing 3,200 new conventional oil and gas wells, constructing, operating, and reclaiming various ancillary facilities needed to support the new wells, including roads, pipelines for gathering gas and produced water, electrical utilities, and compressors by the end of 2011 (BLM 2003a). When the Draft SPRB Coal EIS was prepared, only the Little Thunder LBA Tract included CBM wells that were producing. As of October 2003, producing CBM wells were also present on the West Roundup and NARO North LBA Tracts, under the Proposed Action and/or Preferred Alternatives for those tracts. There is CBM drilling and production activity in the area of the NARO South and West Antelope LBA Tracts, but no wells are currently producing in the area included under the Proposed Action or Preferred Alternatives for these tracts. Approved spacing for CBM wells is one well per 80 acres or eight wells per section. A maximum of 243 CBM wells could be drilled on all of the LBA tracts under the largest South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment alternative tract configurations being analyzed in this EIS. The ownership of oil and gas resources in the LBA tracts and the existing oil and gas (conventional and CBM) drilling in the area are discussed in Section 3.11 of this EIS. Bentonite Layers of bentonite (decomposed volcanic ash) of varying thickness are present throughout the PRB. Some of the thicker layers are mined where they are near the surface, mostly around the edges of the basin. Bentonite has a large capacity to absorb water, and because of this characteristic it is used in a number of processes and products, including cat litter and drilling mud. No mineable bentonite reserves have been identified on any of the proposed LBA tracts. Uranium There are substantial uranium resources in southwestern Campbell and northwestern Converse Counties. Uranium exploration and mining were very active in the 1950s, when numerous claims were filed in the PRB. A decreased demand combined with increased foreign supply reduced uranium mining activities in the early 1980s. There are currently two insitu uranium recovery sites in the PRB (WSGS 2003b). Production at a third ended in 2000. No known uranium reserves exist on the LBA tracts. Scoria Scoria or clinker is present in the General Analysis Area and has been and continues to be a major source of aggregate for road construction in the area. Only the NARO South LBA Tract contains scoria. No scoria from the NARO South LBA Tract has ever been sold for use as an aggregate for road construction or any other uses. A search of the BLM mining claim index revealed that no mining claims are presently located within the General Analysis Area. 3.4 Soils Numerous baseline soil surveys associated with surface mining operations and oil field development have been conducted in the General Analysis Area. Soil surveys of Campbell and Converse Counties, Wyoming, including the General Analysis Area, have also been conducted by the NRCS. Each of the LBA study areas is comprised of the LBA tract as applied for, BLM’s alternative tract configurations, and the applicant mine’s anticipated permit amendment study area. Soils within the LBA study areas were identified by series, which consist of soils that have similar horizons in their profile. Horizons are soil layers having similar color, texture, structure, reaction, consistency, mineral and chemical composition, and arrangement in the profile. Soils vary depending upon where and how they were formed. Major factors South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS 3-9

3.0 Affected Environment involved in the formation of soils include whether or not the material was transported and how the material was weathered during transportation. Three primary transportation processes causing three different soil types were noted: 1) those soils developed predominantly in alluvial or colluvial fan deposits, 2) those soils developed predominantly in residuum on uplands, and 3) those soils developed predominantly in eolian sand deposits. The major soil series encountered within the General Analysis Area were grouped according to the primary transportation processes and are listed as follows: Soils developed predominantly in alluvial or colluvial fan deposits Arvada Absted Bahl Bankard Bidman Bone Briggsdale Cambria Clarkelen Decolney Dillingson Draknab Felix Forkwood Fort Collins Glenberg Heldt Haverdad Haverson Hiland Hilight Kishona Lawver Lithic Usti Lohmiller Openay Parmleed Pugsley Rauzi River Wash Savageton Shingle Silhouette Taluce Teckla Turnercrest Ulm Wags Zigweid Soils developed predominantly in residuum on uplands Bowbac Cushman Gateson Gullied land Hiland Hilight Keeline Parmleed Razor Renohill Samday Shingle Savageton Samsil Sear Taluce Tassel Terro Thedalund Theedle Tullock Turnercrest Ustic Torrifluvent Wags

Soils developed predominantly in aeolian sand deposits Delconey Dwyer Embry Maysdorf Nomil Orpha Pugsley Rauzi Turnercrest Vonalee

The baseline soil studies of the LBA study areas indicate that the amount of suitable topsoil which would be available for redistribution on all disturbed acres during reclamation would vary from an average depth of 1.5 ft to an average depth of 3.3 ft. 3.5 Air Quality and Climate The air quality of any region is controlled primarily by the magnitude and distribution of pollutant emissions and the regional climate. The transport of pollutants from specific source areas is strongly affected by local topography. In the mountainous western United States, topography is particularly important in channeling pollutants along South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-10

3.0 Affected Environment valleys, creating upslope and downslope circulations that may entrain airborne pollutants, and blocking the flow of pollutants toward certain areas. In general, local effects are superimposed on the general synoptic weather regime and are most important when the large-scale wind flow is weak. 3.5.1 Topography Wyoming can be characterized as having a combination of both highland and mid-latitude semiarid climates. The dominant factors that affect the climate of the area are elevation, local relief, and the mountain barrier effect. This barrier effect can produce marked temperature and precipitation differences between windward and leeward slopes. Generally, temperatures decrease and precipitation increases with increasing elevation. The General Analysis Area, shown in Figure 3-1, is located in the southern portion of the PRB, a part of the Northern Great Plains that includes most of northeastern Wyoming. The topography is primarily rolling plains and tablelands of moderate relief (with occasional valleys, canyons, and buttes). Elevations range from about 4,500 ft to 5,000 ft above sea level. 3.5.2 Climate and Meteorology The general climate is typical of a semi-arid high plains environment with relatively large seasonal and diurnal variations in temperature and seasonal variation in precipitation. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS The climate in the General Analysis Area is semi-arid, with an average annual precipitation at Wright of just over 11 inches (Martner 1986). Snowfall averages 25.1 inches per year, with most occurring in March and December. Evaporation exceeds annual precipitation, with relatively short warm summers and longer cold winters. The average daily mean temperature is 44.2 degrees F. The highest recorded temperature within the General Analysis Area was 103 degrees F and the lowest was minus 34 degrees F. July is the warmest month, with a mean daily temperature of 70 degrees F, and January is the coldest (20.5 degrees F). The frost-free period is 100-125 days. Winds are greatly affected by local topographic features. In the General Analysis Area, the regional wind speeds average from nine to 13 mph with local variations in speed and direction due to differences in topography. Winds are predominantly from the northwest or southeast and tend to be strongest in the winter and spring and calmer in the summer. Wind velocity tends to increase during the day and decrease during the night. The air quality and meteorological sampling locations and associated wind rose diagrams for the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex and Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mines are shown in Figures 3-3 through 3-6. 3.5.3 Regulatory Framework Air quality and pollutant emissions to the air are regulated under both 3-11

3.0 Affected Environment
R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
15 BNSF + UP Double Tracks 14
Antelope Road

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.
17 16 15 14 13 18

19 24 20 NA-6 (mid-2000 to present) TSP Sampler (NA-6A) PM 10Samplers (NA-6B)

Piney Canyon (Mackey) Road

T. 42 34 N. T. 41 3 N.

NARO NORTH
2 1

T. 42 N. T. 41 N.

NA-6 (through mid-2000) TSP Sampler (NA-6A) PM 10Samplers (NA-6B) 5 6

Meteolorogic Station

Antelo pe Road

NARO SOUTH

13 18 RO-1 TSP Sampler (RO-1A) PM10 Samplers (RO-1B)

NA-5 TSP Sampler (NA-5A, NA-5B) 24 PM 10Samplers (NA-5C) 22 23

26 27 Campbell County Converse County

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.
N

LEGEND
North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Permit Boundary TSP and PM 10 Air Quality Sampling Locations Meteorological Station NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2 Area Removed Under Alternative 3
0 5000 10000 20000

KEY 0 4.0 8.0 12.0 18.0 MPH 24.0 & > S

Windrose Year: 2000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 3-3. Wind Rose, Air Quality and Meteorological Stations at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex.

3-12

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment
R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
29 28 27
Small Road 26

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.
29 28 27 26 25 30

T. 44 N. T. 43 N.

PM 10 Sampler 31-1
32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31

T. 44 N. T. 43 N.

4
State Highway 450

TSP Sampler 7-1 (removed 1999) 8

Hilight Road

17 14 13 18 16 Official Meteorologic Station 15 14 13 18

22 BNSF + UP Double Tracks

22 PM 10 Sampler 26-5

PM Sampler 26-4 10
State High way 450 30

TSP Samplers 26-2 27 28

26 Real Time Meteorologic Station 35

T. 43 32 N. T. 42 5 N.

4
Edwards Road

1
Reno Road

ol ho Sc

NO2 Sampler
9

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.

LEGEND
Black Thunder Mine Permit Boundary TSP and PM 10Air Quality Sampling Locations NO 2 Sampling Location Meteorological Station Little Thunder LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternatives 2 & 3 North Tract Under Alternative 3 South Tract Under Alternative 3
0 5000 10000 20000

Cre ek

KEY 0 4.0 7.4 12.1 MPH 19.0 25.8 & > S

Windrose Year: 2000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 3-4. Wind Rose, Air Quality and Meteorological Stations at the Black Thunder Mine.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-13

Roa d

36 PM Sampler 36-2

T. 43 N. T. 42 N.

3.0 Affected Environment
15

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
14 13 18 17 16 15 14

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.
13 18

Hilight Road

19 24 State High way 450 25 30

T. 43 N. T. 42 N.

Roa d

T.
34 35 36 31 32 33 43

Cre ek

2
Reno Road

ol ho Sc

Edwards Road

T. 42 N.

10
BNSF + UP Double Tracks

12 Antelope Road

Meteorologic Station 7 12 TSP Samplers A & B PM 10Sampler B
18

TSP Samplers E & F PM 10Sampler G
24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21

Piney Canyon (Mackey) Road

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.
N

LEGEND
North Rochelle Mine Permit Boundary TSP and PM 10 Air Quality Sampling Locations Meteorological Station West Roundup LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2 Area Added Under Alternative 3 North Rochelle Mine Federal Coal Lease WYW-127221 Modification Area
0 5000 10000 20000

KEY 0 4.0 7.5 12.1 19.0 MPH 25.8 & > S

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Windrose 10/1/00-9/30/01

Figure 3-5. Wind Rose, Air Quality and Meteorological Stations at the North Rochelle Mine.

3-14

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment
BNSF & UP Double Tracks

Antelope Road

R. 72 W. R. 71 W.
2 1 6 5 4

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
1 6 5 4 3

Campbell County Converse County 26 25

T. 41 35 N. T. 40 N.
2

Meteorologic 2 3 Station

Air Monitoring Site 851 TSP Samplers 6A & 6B PM 10 Sampler 6PM10 4 5

T. 41 N. T. 40 N.

59 way High State

Air Monitoring Site 850 TSP Sampler 5 8 7

Air Monitoring Site 819 TSP Sampler 3
22 7 d3 ) Roa oad y unt eR Co elop Ant .a. (a.k

Air Monitoring Site 881 PM 10 Sampler 4PM10 13 18

R. 72 W. R. 71 W.

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
N

LEGEND
Antelope Mine Permit Boundary TSP and PM 10 Air Quality Sampling Locations Meteorological Station West Antelope LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2 Area Removed Under Alternative 3
0 5000 10000 20000

KEY 0 4.0 7.4 12.0 19.0 MPH 24.8 & > S

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Windrose Year: 2000

Figure 3-6. Wind Rose, Air Quality and Meteorological Stations at the Antelope Mine.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-15

3.0 Affected Environment federal laws and regulations (CAA) and WAQSR administered by the WDEQ/AQD. A fundamental requirement of both federal and state regulations is that ambient concentrations for specific criteria pollutants not exceed allowable levels, referred to as the Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS). These standards have been established by the U.S. EPA and the WDEQ at levels deemed necessary to preclude adverse impacts on human health and welfare. The National AAQS (or NAAQS) set nationwide thresholds for maximum acceptable concentrations of various pollutants. The Wyoming AAQS (or WAAQS) must be at least as stringent as NAAQS. Selected Wyoming and national ambient air standards are shown in Table 3-1. The NAAQS and WAAQS set the absolute upper limits for specific air pollutant concentrations at all locations where the public has access. The assumed background pollutant concentrations included in Table 3-1 were derived by Argonne National Laboratory based on a review of available monitoring data measured throughout northeastern Wyoming and southeastern Montana. The assumed background pollutant concentrations are below applicable NAAQS and WAAQS for all criteria pollutants and averaging times. Pursuant to the CAA, the EPA has developed classifications for distinct geographic regions known as air basins and for major MSAs. Under these classifications, for each federal criteria pollutant, each air basin (or 3-16 portion of a basin or MSA) is classified as in “attainment” if the area has “attained” compliance with (that is, not exceeded) the adopted NAAQS for that pollutant, or is classified as “non-attainment” if the levels of ambient air pollution exceed the NAAQS for that pollutant. Areas for which sufficient ambient monitoring data are not available are designated as “unclassified” for those particular pollutants. States designate areas within their borders as being in “attainment” or “nonattainment” with the AAQS. Existing air quality throughout most of the PRB in Wyoming is in attainment with all ambient air quality standards, as demonstrated by the relatively low concentration levels presented in Table 3-1. However, the Sheridan, Wyoming area has been designated as a non-attainment area (PM10 – moderate) where the applicable standards have been violated in the past. Future development projects that have the potential to emit more than 250 tpy of any criteria pollutant (or certain listed sources that have the potential to emit more than 100 tpy) would be required to undergo a regulatory PSD Increment Consumption analysis under the federal New Source Review permitting regulations. Development projects subject to the PSD regulations must also demonstrate the use of BACT and show that the combined impacts of all PSD sources will not exceed the allowable incremental air quality impacts for NO2, PM10, or SO2. The PSD increments are shown in Table 3-1. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment

Table 3-1.

Assumed Background Air Pollutant Concentrations, Applicable Ambient Table Air Quality Standards, and PSD Increment Values (in g/m3).
Background Concentration 3,5003 1,500 16.54 825 1305 235 157 --365 80 1,300 260 60 150 50 65 15 150 50 65 15 65 15 150 50 1,300 ----235 157 235 157 86 86 36 427 177 197 7.67 100 100 100 2.5 ----25 5 2 8 4 ----Primary NAAQS2 40,000 10,000 Secondary NAAQS2 40,000 10,000 Wyoming Standards 40,000 10,000 PSD Class I Increments ----PSD Class II Increments ----25 ----512 91 20 30 17 -----

Pollutant Carbon monoxide Annual 1-hour 8-hour 3-hour 24-hour Annual 24-hour Annual 24-hour Annual

Averaging Time1 1-hour 8-hour

Nitrogen dioxide

Ozone

Sulfur dioxide

PM10

PM2.5

Annual standards are not to be exceeded; short-term standards are not to be exceeded more than once per year. Primary standards are designed to protect public health; secondary standards are designed to protect public welfare. 3 Amoco Ryckman Creek collected for an eight month period during 1978-1979, summarized in the Riley Ridge (BLM 1983). 4 Data collected in Gillette, Wyoming (1996 - 1997). 5 Data collected in Pinedale, Wyoming (1992 - 1994). 6 Data collected in Devil’s Tower, Wyoming (1983). 7 Data collected in Gillette, Wyoming (1999). Source: (Argonne 2002)

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-17

3.0 Affected Environment Existing surface coal mining operations in the PRB, including the General Analysis Area, are not subject to PSD regulations for two reasons. Surface coal mines are not on the EPA list of 28 major emitting facilities for PSD regulation and point-source emissions from individual mines do not exceed the PSD emissions threshold. A new mine would be classified as a major source and subject to PSD review if potential emissions of any regulated pollutant equal or exceed 250 tpy. Fugitive emissions are not included in the definition of potential emissions except for certain specified source types [40 CFR 52.21, (b)(1)(iii)]. Mining related fugitive emissions are exempt from the applicability determination. The WDEQ/AQD administers a permitting program to assist the agency in managing the State's air resources. Under this program, anyone planning to construct, modify, or use a facility capable of emitting designated pollutants into the atmosphere must obtain an air quality permit to construct. Coal mines fall into this category. In addition to the designations relative to attainment of the NAAQS, the CAA requires the EPA to place each airshed within the U.S. into one of three PSD area classifications. PSD Class I is the most restrictive air quality category. It was created by Congress to prevent further deterioration of air quality in National Parks and Wilderness Areas of a given size which were in existence prior to 1977 or those additional areas which 3-18 have since been designated Class I under federal regulations (40 CFR 52.21). All remaining areas outside of the designated Class I boundaries were designated Class II areas, which allow a relatively greater deterioration of air quality over that in existence in 1977, although still within the NAAQS. No Class III areas, which would allow air quality to degrade to the NAAQS, have been designated. The federal land managers have also identified certain federal assets with Class II status as “sensitive” Class II areas for which air quality and/or visibility are valued resources. The federal CAA also provides specific visibility protection of mandatory federal Class I areas. Mandatory Federal Class I areas were designated by the U.S. Congress on August 7, 1977, and include wilderness areas greater than 5,000 acres in size and national parks greater than 6,000 acres in size. Table 3-2 is a list of mandatory federal Class I areas, tribal Class I areas, and federal Class II areas in the region and their distance from the General Analysis Area. Wind Cave National Park, Badlands Wilderness Area, and the Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation are the closest mandatory federal Class I areas. Table 3-2 also lists other areas which are more distant but were included in the cumulative air quality impact analysis discussed in Section 4.5.4. As shown in Table 3-1, the allowable incremental impacts for NO2, PM10, and SO2 within PSD Class I areas are very limited. Most of the PRB in Wyoming is designated as PSD Class II with less stringent requirements. Even though the development South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment Table 3-2. Approximate Distances and Directions from the General Analysis Area to PSD Class I and Class II Sensitive Receptor Areas. Distance Mandatory Area Badlands Wilderness 130 Bridger Wilderness Area 215 Fitzpatrick Wilderness Area 220 Gates of the Mountain Wilderness Area 235 Grand Teton National Park 275 North Absaroka Wilderness Area 225 Red Rocks Lake Wilderness Area 355 Scapegoat Wilderness Area 445 Teton Wilderness Area 230 Theodore Roosevelt National Park (North Unit) 290 Theodore Roosevelt National Park (South Unit) 245 U.L. Bend Wilderness Area 305 Washakie Wilderness Area 195 Wind Cave National Park 95 Yellowstone National Park 255 Tribal Federal PSD Class I Fort Peck Indian Reservation 330 Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation 125 Federal PSD Class II Absaroka-Beartooth Wilderness Area 245 Agate Fossil Beds National Monument 110 Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area 155 Black Elk Wilderness Area 80 Cloud Peak Wilderness Area 85 Crow Indian Reservation 115 Devils Towner National Monument 65 Fort Belknap Indian Reservation 350 Fort Laramie National Historic Site 90 Jewel Cave National Monument 70 Mount Rushmore National Memorial 90 Popo Agie Wilderness Area 205 Soldier Creek Wilderness Area 130
1

Receptor Area Area1

Direction to E W W WNW W WNW WNW NW W NNE NNE NNW W E WNW N NNW WNW ESE NW ENE WNW NW NNE NNW SSE E ENE WSW ESE

The U.S. Congress designated the Wilderness Area portion of Badlands National Park as a mandatory Federal PSD Class I area. The remainder of Badlands National Park is a PSD Class II area.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-19

3.0 Affected Environment activities being considered in this EIS would occur within areas designated PSD Class II, the potential impacts are not allowed to cause incremental effects greater than the stringent Class I thresholds to occur inside any distant PSD Class I area. 3.5.4 Existing Air Quality WDEQ/AQD detects changes in air quality through monitoring and maintains an extensive network of air quality monitors throughout the state. Particulate matter is most commonly measured as particles finer The than 10 microns or PM10. eastern side of the PRB has one of the most extensive networks of monitors for PM10 in the nation due to the density of coal mines (Figure 3-7). In addition, there are also monitors in Sheridan and Gillette, and the WDEQ/AQD installed monitors at Arvada and Wright, Wyoming in November 2002. WDEQ/AQD uses monitoring stations located throughout the state to anticipate issues related to air quality. These monitoring stations are located to measure ambient air quality and not located to measure impacts from a specific source. Monitors located to measure impacts from a specific source may also be used for trends. These data are used to pro-actively arrest or reverse trends towards air quality problems. When WDEQ became aware that particulate readings in the PRB were increasing due to increased CBM activity and exacerbated by prolonged drought, the WDEQ approached the counties, coal mines, and CBM 3-20 industry. A coalition involving the counties, coal companies, and CBM operators have made significant efforts towards minimizing dust from roads. Measures taken have ranged from the implementation of speed limits to paving of heavily traveled roads. Monitoring is also used to measure compliance. Where monitoring shows a violation of any standard, the WDEQ can take a range of enforcement actions to remedy the situation. Where a standard is exceeded specific to an operation, the enforcement action is specific to the facility. For many facilities, neither the cause nor the solution is simple. The agency normally uses a negotiated settlement in those instances. WDEQ has also sited two visibility monitoring stations in the PRB. One of these sites is 32 miles north of Gillette and includes a Nephelometer, a Transmissometer, an Aerosol Monitor (IMPROVE Protocol), instruments to measure meteorological parameters (temperature, RH, wind speed, wind direction), a digital camera, instruments to measure Ozone and instruments to measure Oxides of Nitrogen (NO, NO2, NOx). The other visibility monitoring station is located 14 miles west of Buffalo and includes a Nephelometer, a Transmissometer, an Aerosol Monitor (IMPROVE Protocol), instruments to measure meteorological parameters (temperature, RH, wind speed, wind direction), and a digital camera.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment

SHERIDAN

BUFFALO GILLETTE

CASPER

DOUGLAS

LEGEND
PM 10 Monitoring Station, Active in 2002 Source:
0 12.5 25 50

U.S. EPA Office of Air and Radiation, AIRS Database and WDEQ/AQD

GRAPHIC SCALE (MILES)

Figure 3-7. Active PM 10Monitoring Stations in Northeastern Wyoming.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-21

3.0 Affected Environment Other air quality monitoring programs that are in place in the PRB include WDEQ NO2 monitoring along the east side of the Basin, WARMS monitoring of sulfur and nitrogen concentrations near Buffalo, Sheridan, and Newcastle, and NADP monitoring of precipitation chemistry in Newcastle. Air quality conditions in rural areas are likely to be very good, as characterized by limited air pollution emission sources (few industrial facilities and residential emissions in the relatively small communities and isolated ranches) and good atmospheric dispersion conditions, resulting in relatively low air pollutant concentrations. Occasional high concentrations of CO and particulate matter may occur in more urbanized areas (for example, Buffalo, Gillette, and Sheridan) and around industrial facilities, especially under stable atmospheric conditions common during winter. The major types of emissions that come from surface coal mining activities are in the form of fugitive dust and tailpipe emissions from large mining equipment. Activities such as blasting, loading and hauling of overburden and coal, and the large areas of disturbed land all produce fugitive dust. Stationary or point sources are associated with coal crushing, storage, and handling facilities. In general, particulate matter (PM10) is the major significant pollutant from coal mine point sources. Blasting is responsible for another type of emission from surface coal mining. Overburden blasting sometimes produces gaseous, orangecolored clouds that contain NO2. Exposure to NO2 may have adverse health effects, as discussed in Section 4.1.4. NO2 is one of several products resulting from the incomplete combustion of explosives used in the blasting process. Wyoming=s ambient air standards for NO2 are shown in Table 3-1. Other existing air pollutant emission sources within the region include: • exhaust emissions (primarily CO and NOx) from existing natural gas fired compressor engines used in production of natural gas and CBM; gasoline and diesel vehicle tailpipe emissions of combustion pollutants (VOCs, CO, NOx, PM10, PM2.5, and SO2); dust (particulate matter) generated by vehicle travel on unpaved roads, windblown dust from neighboring areas, and road sanding during the winter months; transport of air pollutants from emission sources located outside the region; emissions from railroad locomotives used to haul coal (primarily NO2 and PM10); and SO2 and NOx from power plants. The closest coal-fired power plants are the Dave Johnston plant, located about 45 miles southwest of the General Analysis Area, and the Wyodak, Wygen, and Neil Simpson

•

• • •

3-22

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment plants, located about 35 miles north of the General Analysis Area. 3.5.5 Historical Ambient Air Quality: Particulates Until 1989, the federally regulated particulate matter pollutant was measured as TSP. This measurement included all suspendable dust (generally less than 100 microns in diameter). In 1989, the federally regulated particulate matter pollutant was changed from a TSP based standard to a PM10 based standard. PM10 is particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns or less that can potentially penetrate into the lungs and cause health problems. Wyoming added PM10 based standards to match the federal standards in 1989 and retained the TSP standards as state standards until March 2000. Wyoming’s ambient air standards for PM10 are shown in Table 3-1. Wyoming adopted a PM2.5 standard in March 2000. However, the State of Wyoming will not enforce the above standard until EPA has completed its review of the PM2.5 standard and has determined to retain and enforce the standard as promulgated on July 18, 1997. 3.5.5.1 Regional WDEQ/AQD requires the collection of information documenting the quality of the air resource at each of the SPRB mines. Each mine monitored air quality for a 24-hour period every six days at multiple monitoring sites through the end of 2001. All PM10 South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS monitors are now required by WDEQ/AQD to sample air quality for a 24-hour period every three days beginning in 2002. Data for TSP dates back to 1980 with data for PM10 dating back to 1989. This has resulted in over 55,000 TSP and 14,000 PM10 samples had been collected through 2002, which makes the eastern PRB one of the most densely monitored areas in the world (Figure 3-7). Table 3-3 uses the annual arithmetic average of all sites to summarize these data from 1980 through 2002. As indicated in Table 3-3, the longterm trend in particulate emissions remained relatively flat through 1998. TSP concentration from 1980 through 1998 averaged 33.1 µg/m3, ranging between 27.8 µg/m3 and 39.4 µg/m3. There were increases in 1988 and 1996, which may have been the result of fires in the region during those years. PM10 concentration from 1989 through 1998 averaged 15.4 µg/m3, ranging between 12.9 µg/m3 and 16.5 µg/m3. This time period (1980-1998) was associated with significant growth in the surface coal mining industry. Coal production increased from about 59 mmtpy to over 308 mmtpy (an increase of over 249 mmtpy), and associated overburden production increased from 105 mmbcy to over 710 mmbcy per year (a 605 mmbcy per year increase). From 1990 through 2002 the average annual increase in coal production was 7.0 percent, while annual overburden production increased an average of 13.9 percent over the same time 3-23

3.0 Affected Environment Table 3-3. Summary of WDEQ/AQD Reports on Air Quality Monitoring in Wyoming's PRB, 1980-2002.
Number of Mines Operating/ Monitoring TSP/ Monitoring PM101 10/14/0 11/13/0 11/14/0 13/14/1 14/16/1 16/17/0 16/17/0 16/17/0 16/17/0 15/17/3 17/17/5 17/17/5 17/17/7 17/17/8 17/18/8 16/18/8 17/18/8 16/17/10 16/17/12 15/17/12 15/15/12 12/11/12 13/11/13

Year 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
1

Coal Produced (mmtpy) 58.7 71.0 76.1 84.9 105.3 113.0 111.2 120.7 138.8 147.5 160.7 171.4 166.1 188.8 213.6 242.6 257.0 259.7 308.6 317.1 322.5 354.1 359.7

Yards Moved (mmbcy) 105.3 133.4 141.1 150.9 169.5 203.4 165.7 174.6 209.7 215.6 223.5 245.9 296.0 389.5 483.9 512.7 605.4 622.0 710.7 758.0 845.3 927.1 1,032.1

Number of TSP/PM10 Monitoring Sites2 34/0 35/0 40/0 41/1 42/1 49/0 45/0 43/0 43/0 40/3 47/5 46/6 41/7 40/11 44/11 41/12 41/12 39/15 36/17 36/18 31/17 29/29 23/38

TSP Average (µg/m3) 35.5 39.4 31.2 32.6 33.9 32.3 29.3 31.7 37.7 32.1 34.3 32.7 31.7 27.8 31.7 29.6 35.4 33.3 33.9 55.3 56.1 57.5 56.0

PM10 Average (µg/m3) na3 na na 11.2 11.1 na na na na 15.9 14.8 16.5 15.9 14.5 15.5 12.9 16.0 15.9 15.9 21.6 23.4 27.2 23.3

2 3

Mines include Buckskin, Rawhide, Eagle Butte, Dry Fork, Fort Union, Clovis Point, Wyodak, Caballo, Belle Ayr, Caballo Rojo, Cordero, Coal Creek, Jacobs Ranch, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, North Antelope, Rochelle, and Antelope. Some sites include more than one sampler, so the number of samplers is greater than the number of sites. Not applicable because no monitoring for PM10 was done. 1980 through 1996 emissions and production data from April 1997 report prepared by WMA for WDEQ/AQD. 1997 through 2002 emissions data from EPA AIRData database. 1997 through 2002 emissions and production data from WDEQ/AQD.

Sources:

3-24

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment period. The larger annual increase in overburden production is probably due to the fact that the mines are gradually moving into deeper coals as the shallower reserves are mined out. The relatively flat trend in particulate emissions from 1980 through 1998 is due in large part to the Wyoming Air Quality Program that requires BACT at all permitted facilities. BACT control measures include watering and chemical treatment of roads, limiting the amount of area disturbed, temporary revegetation of disturbed areas to reduce wind erosion, and timely final reclamation. The average annual TSP concentration increased from 33.9 µg/m3 in 1998 to 55.3 µg/m3 in 1999 and 57.5 µg/m3 in 2001. The 2002 average annual TSP concentration was 56.0 µg/m3. The average annual PM10 concentration increased from 15.9 µg/m3 in 1998 to 21.6 µg/m3 in 1999 and 27.2 µg/m3 through 2001. In 2002, the average annual concentration was at 23.3 µg/m3. There have been no major fires in the region during this time. The increases in coal production over those four years (3.8 percent per year and 12.8 mmtpy over the four-year period) and associated overburden production (9.8 percent per year and 72 mmbcy over the four-year period) were not larger than the four-year increases during some of the previous 18 years, but the particulate concentration increase was much larger than in previous years. The potential causes of and development of effective measures to limit the increasing particulate levels that have South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS been documented through monitoring in this area since the mid-1990s are of concern to air quality regulators and to oil and gas and coal operators in this area. 3.5.5.2 Site Specific Within the General Analysis Area, historical particulate matter ambient air quality data generally show the same results as described above for the PRB as a whole. Each of the four mines included in this analysis has a meteorological station and a number of particulate emission monitoring samplers (Figures 3-3 through 3-6). Progression of mining operations require that the location and number of particulate monitors be adjusted accordingly in order to best document the ambient air quality at each respective mine. Figure 3-8 presents the average annual TSP and PM10 measured at these samplers within the General Analysis Area from 1995 through 2002. In 2000, there were 13 TSP monitoring samplers at these four mines and in 2002, three of the four mines were still monitoring TSP at seven samplers. In 2000, there were 11 PM10 monitoring samplers and in 2002, there were 12 PM10 samplers at these four SPRB mines. Cumulative coal and overburden production for the four SPRB mines included in this analysis for these years are also shown on Figure 3-8. As discussed above, coal and overburden production for the SPRB mines have steadily increased since 1980.

3-25

3.0 Affected Environment

TSP vs. PRODUCTION Coal Production (million tons) and Overburden Removal (million cubic yards) 600 540 480 420 360 300 240 180 120 60 0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Production Year 2000 2001* 2002* 130 120 TSP (Percent of Standard) PM10 (Percent of Standard) 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30

Coal Production Overburden Removal * TSP not monitored by all mines in the General Analysis Area

Percent of Average Annual 3 Particulate Standard of 60 g/m

PM10 vs. PRODUCTION Coal Production (million tons) and Overburden Removal (million cubic yards) 600 540 480 420 360 300 240 180 120 60 0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Production Year 2000 2001 2002 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Coal Production Overburden Removal

Percent of Average Annual 3 Particulate Standard of 50 g/m

Figure 3-8. Cumulative Coal Production and Overburden Removal vs. Ambient Particulates for the SPRB General Analysis Area (1995 through 2002).

3-26

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment As discussed above, TSP was the federally regulated pollutant until 1989 and was retained as a state regulated pollutant until 2000. PM10 became a federal standard in 1989 and was also adopted by the State of Wyoming. There were no violations of the TSP standard at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, or Antelope Mines when TSP was the federally regulated pollutant. After 1989, and until recently, TSP measurements were used as a surrogate for PM10 in lieu of having to replace and/or colocate an existing TSP sampler with a new PM10 sampler. There were no violations of the PM10 standards anywhere in the PRB prior to April 2001. Between April 2001 and June 2003, there were 21 monitored exceedances of the 24hour PM10 standard at four mines in the Wyoming PRB. Two of the applicant mines for LBA tracts being considered for leasing in this EIS (North Rochelle and Black Thunder) were responsible for 19 of the 21 violations. 3.5.5.3 Control Measures Control of particulate emissions at the SPRB mines is accomplished with a variety of measures. Emissions at coal crushing, storage, and handling facilities (point sources) are controlled with baghouse dust collection systems, PECs, or atomizers/foggers. These are all considered BACT controls by WDEQ/AQD. Fugitive emissions are also controlled with a variety of measures that the South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS agency considers BACT. Typically, mine access roads have been paved and water trucks are used to apply water and chemical dust suppressants on all haul roads used by trucks and/or scrapers. Haul truck speed limits are imposed to further help to reduce fugitive emissions from roads. Material drop heights for shovels and draglines (bucket to truck bed or backfill) are limited to the minimum necessary to conduct the mining operations. Timely permanent and temporary revegetation of disturbed areas is utilized to minimize wind erosion. Fugitive emissions from the coal truck dumps are controlled with stilling sheds. WDEQ/AQD has increased monitoring frequency requirements and required installation of continuous monitors at all PRB coal mines. The North Rochelle Mine, Black Thunder Mine, and Jacobs Ranch Mine have installed continuous PM10 samplers at six air quality sample sites which are connected to the companies’ computer network so that anyone on the system can see the latest sampler loadings. Mine personnel monitor the information and are instructed to notify engineering and/or operations staff when particulate concentrations rise above a trigger level, so that operations can be undertaken to reduce the concentrations. PRCC has installed three continuous PM10 monitors at North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. The WDEQ/AQD is continually reviewing the data and considering 3-27

3.0 Affected Environment regulatory options, which may include enforcement actions such as Notices of Violation resulting in a consent decree and/or modified permit conditions. WDEQ/AQD is also coordinating with EPA to develop additional monitoring requirements in CBM development areas, high PM10 mitigation action plans in permits, and additional mitigation measures under the SIP. The coal mines in this area are actively participating in a dust control coalition formed to help address dust from more than 20 miles of regional county roads. The coalition includes the Campbell County Commission and several regional CBM and oil producing companies as well as the coal mine operators. The coalition has utilized chemical treatments to control dust as well as closing roads where appropriate or necessary and rebuilding existing roads to higher specifications. In 2003, PRCC, with the approval of the USDA-FS and Campbell County, is scheduled to implement a plan to close approximately 5.3 miles of Piney Canyon Road and upgrade approximately 2.5 miles of the Payne Road by surfacing it with a permanent treatment proven to reduce dust emissions. Some of the mines have participated in this effort to control fugitive emissions from unpaved county roads. Other operational control measures that WDEQ/AQD may require at specific mines when exceedances occur include, but are not limited to, 3-28 watering of inactive areas and problem areas; relocation of overburden truck-dumping operations; deferring blasting; curtailing topsoil stripping, reclamation dozer operations, and/or production operations; requiring windrows in areas stripped of topsoil; requiring treatment of windrow areas with chemical dust suppressants; inter-seeding of topsoil stockpiles; and soil stabilization. The mines are experimenting with dust control treatments, including magnesium chloride, surfactants, and petroleumbased products. In addition, WDEQ/AQD may require additional monitoring, action levels based on continuous monitoring, expedited reporting of monitored exceedances, detailed reporting of contributing factors (e.g., meteorological conditions, control steps implemented) for monitored exceedances, and continual evaluation of activity plans when exceedances are monitored at surface coal mines. 3.5.6 Historical Ambient Air Quality: NO2 3.5.6.1 Regional NO2 was monitored from 1975 through 1983 in Gillette and from March 1996 through April 1997 at four locations in the PRB. One of these locations is in the General Analysis Area. Table 3-4 summarizes the results of that monitoring. Beginning in 2001, the coal industry in cooperation with WDEQ/AQD installed a network of NO2 monitors in the PRB. The 2001 and 2002 data South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment Table 3-4. Annual Ambient NO2 Concentration Black Thunder Gillette, WY Mine Percent of Percent of 1 Standard1 Standard 6* 4* 4* 11* 11 12 14 11 17 16 16 22 22 1* 5* Data. Belle Ayr Mine Percent of Standard1

Site Year 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 19832 19963
1 2

Bill, WY Percent of Standard1

Based on arithmetic averaging of data. Monitoring discontinued December 1983, reactivated March 1996 to April 1997. 3 Arithmetic average – actual sampling ran from March 1996 to April 1997. * Inadequate number of samples for a valid annual average. Source: (McVehil-Monnett 1997)

from this regional network summarized in Table 3-5.

are

Annual NO2 levels measured in the March 1996 to April 1997 timeframe were below applicable standards. The highest reading was 22 µg/m3 as compared to the 100 µg/m3 standard. All 2001 annual mean NO2 concentrations are well below the 100 µg/m3 standard. 3.5.6.2 Site Specific As discussed above, NO2 monitoring results are available from several sites in the General Analysis Area. The Gillette monitoring site is located approximately 38 miles north, the South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Belle Ayr Mine site is located approximately 23.5 miles north, the Black Thunder Mine site is located within the General Analysis Area, and the Bill site is located approximately 18 miles south. Control Measures All four mines included in this analysis have implemented programs designed to control/limit public exposure to the intermittent, shortterm NO2 releases associated with blasting and they all comply with the blasting plan publication/notification requirements associated with the Permits to Mine issued by WDEQ/LQD. 3-29

3.0 Affected Environment Table 3-5.
Monitor Antelope Mine Belle Ayr Mine Black Thunder Mine TBNG
*

2001 and 2002 Annual Mean NO2 Concentration Data.
2001 Mean NO2 Concentration ( g/m3)1, 2 7 14 5* 6** 2002 Mean NO2 Concentration ( g/m3)3, 4 6 14 6 5

Data for the third quarter is questionable and therefore is not used in the determination of the annual mean for the site. ** Data for May through December 2001. Monitor was not operational until May 2, 2001. 1 Mine Data (WDEQ/AQD 2002) 2 TBNG Site (ARS 2002) 3 Mine Data (WDEQ/AQD 2003a) 4 TBNG Site (ARS 2003)

There have been no reported events of public exposure to NO2 from blasting activities at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, the North Rochelle Mine, or the Antelope Mine. These mines have instituted voluntary measures to be implemented when large blasts are planned. These voluntary measures include: • phone notification of neighbors and workers in the general area of the mine prior to large blasts; monitoring of weather and atmospheric conditions prior to the decision to detonate a large blast; minimizing blast size to the extent possible; and posting of signs on major public roads that enter the general mine area and on all locked gates accessing the active mine area.

Black Thunder Mine received several reports of public exposure to NO2 from blasting prior to 2001. Measures to prevent future such incidences have been instituted at the Black Thunder Mine when large overburden blasts are planned. These measures, which are a permit requirement, include: • • notification of neighbors and workers in the general area of the mine prior to the blast; blast detonation between 12:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. whenever possible to avoid temperature inversions and minimize inconvenience to neighbors; monitoring of weather and atmospheric conditions prior to the decision to detonate a blast; posting of signs on major public roads that enter the general mine area and on all locked gates accessing the active mine area; and

•

• •

3-30

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment • closing public roads when appropriate to protect the public. agency’s policy and are not legally enforceable standards. 3.5.7.1 Visibility Mine operators in the eastern PRB, including the General Analysis Area, have also been working with blasting agent manufacturers to reduce NOx emissions through changing the size of the blasts and the use of different blasting agents, mixtures, and additives. Operators have tried adding substances like microspheres and rice hulls, using different blends of ANFO and slurries and gels, using electronic detonation systems that can vary shot timing, different shot hole patterns, and using plastic liners within the shot holes. No one single procedure or variation has proven consistently successful due to the numerous factors that are believed to contribute to the production of NO2. The most successful control measure has been reducing the size of the cast blasting shots. (Doug Emme 2003; Rick Chancellor 2003). All of the mines in the General Analysis Area have also participated in the installation and operation of the regional NO2 monitoring network discussed earlier. 3.5.7 Air Quality Related Values Visibility and Acidification of Lakes AQRVs, including the potential air pollutant effects on visibility and the acidification of lakes and streams, are applied to PSD Class I and sensitive Class II areas. The land management agency responsible for the Class I area sets an LAC for each AQRV. The AQRVs reflect the land management Potential impacts to visibility were considered at 29 PSD Class I and sensitive Class II areas in the vicinity of the General Analysis Area. Table 3-2 shows the nearest distances from the sensitive receptor areas to the General Analysis Area. Visibility can be defined as the distance one can see and the ability to perceive color, contrast, and detail. Fine particulate matter (PM2.5) is the main cause of visibility impairment. Visual range, one of several ways to express visibility, is the furthest distance a person can see a landscape feature. Presently, the visibility conditions monitored in the Bridger Wilderness Area are among the best in the U.S. Visibility impairment is expressed in terms of deciview (dv). The dv index was developed as a linear perceived visual change (Pitchford and Malm 1994), and is the unit of measure used in the EPA=s Regional Haze Rule to achieve the National Visibility Goal. A change in visibility of 1.0 dv represents a “just noticeable change” by an average person under most circumstances. Increasing dv values represent proportionately larger perceived visibility impairment. Figure 3-9 shows annual averages for the 20 percent best, worst, and average visibility days at Badlands and Bridger Wilderness Areas from 1989 to 2001 (IMPROVE 2002).

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-31

3.0 Affected Environment

Visibility in Badlands National Park 20 18 16 14 Visibility (dv) 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 IMPROVE Station: BADL 20% Cleanest Average 20% Haziest 1999 2000 2001

Visibility in Bridger Wilderness 20 18 16 14 Visibility (dv) 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 IMPROVE Station: BRID 20% Cleanest Average 20% Haziest 1999 2000 2001

Figure 3-9. Visibility in the Badlands and Bridger Wilderness Areas.

3-32

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment 3.5.7.2 Acidification of Lakes The acidification of lakes and streams is caused by atmospheric deposition of pollutants (acid rain). Lake acidification is expressed as the change in ANC measured in microequivalents per liter (µeq/L), the lake’s capacity to resist acidification from acid rain. Table 3-6 shows the existing ANC monitored in some mountain lakes and their distance from the General Analysis Area. 3.6 Water Resources 3.6.1 Groundwater The General Analysis Area contains three water-bearing geologic units that could be disturbed by mining. In descending order, these units are the recent alluvium, Wasatch Formation overburden, and the Wyodak coal seam or its local equivalent. The underlying, sub-coal Fort Union Formation and the Fox Hills Sandstone of the Lance Formation are utilized for water supply by coal mines within the General Analysis Area, but these units are not physically disturbed by mining activities. Site-specific data have been collected by PRCC, TBCC, TCC, and ACC to characterize baseline hydrologic conditions in each of the respective LBA tracts. Figure 3-2 presents the hydrostratigraphic units underlying the General Analysis Area. The four mines included in this analysis have a total of 64 monitoring wells within or near the five LBA tracts. These include 10 monitoring wells in the alluvium, 12 monitoring wells in the Wasatch Formation South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS overburden, 32 monitoring wells in the coal, and 10 monitoring wells in the underburden. Recent Alluvium With the exception of Porcupine Creek (NARO North LBA Tract) and Antelope Creek (West Antelope LBA Tract), which both contain alluvial aquifers composed of coarse-grained sand and fine gravels, the drainages in the LBA tracts are generally dry draws. The alluvial and colluvial deposits associated with these draws are generally thin and not laterally extensive enough to be considered an aquifer. Wasatch Formation Within the PRB the Wasatch Formation consists of interbedded sandstones, siltstones, and shale with occasional discontinuous coal stringers and clinker deposits. This description basically holds true for all of the LBA tracts and their alternatives contained within the General Analysis Area. Saturated strata within the Wasatch are limited in areal extent and are typically thin, lenticular sandstones. The hydraulic connection between sandstone lenses is tenuous due to intervening shale aquitards; thus, groundwater movement through the Wasatch Formation overburden is limited. The sandstone and thin coal stringers, where saturated, will yield water to wells, and this water is primarily used for stock watering. Because the saturated sandstone and coal units within the Wasatch Formation are not

3-33

3.0 Affected Environment Table 3-6. Wilderness Area Bridger Existing Acid Neutralizing Capacity in Sensitive Lakes. 10 percent most Sensitive ANC (µeq/L) 69.0 61.0 68.0 5.81 55.3 32.7 61.4 55.5 Distance from General Analysis Area (miles) 220 210 225 230 120 105 220 210

Lake Black Joe Deep Hobbs Upper Frozen

Cloud Peak Fitzpatrick Popo Agie
1

Emerald Florence Ross Lower Saddlebag

The background ANC is based on only six samples taken between 1997 and 2001. Source: Argonne (2002)

continuous, the Wasatch is not considered to be a regional aquifer. Another geologic unit which may be considered a part of the Wasatch Formation is scoria, also called clinker or burn. It consists of sediments which were baked, fused, and melted in place when the underlying coal burned spontaneously. These burned sediments collapsed into the void left by the burned coal. Scoria deposits can be a very permeable aquifer and can extend laterally for miles in the eastern PRB. The occurrence of scoria is site specific; the NARO South LBA Tract is the only tract in the General Analysis Area containing any appreciable amount of scoria. The hydrologic function of scoria in the general area is to provide infiltration of precipitation and recharge to laterally contiguous overburden and Wyodak coal.

Recharge to the Wasatch Formation is from the infiltration of precipitation and lateral movement of water from adjacent clinker bodies. Regionally, groundwater is discharged from the Wasatch Formation by evaporation and transpiration, by pumping wells, and by seepage into the alluvium along stream drainages. For the Wasatch Formation as a whole, the discontinuous nature of the water bearing units results in low overall hydraulic conductivity and low groundwater flow rates. Because of the varied nature of the aquifer units within the Wasatch, hydraulic properties are variable as well. Water quality in the Wasatch Formation is extremely variable, with TDS concentrations ranging from 360 mg/L to 7,360 mg/L in the General Analysis Area.

3-34

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment Wyodak Coal Within the General Analysis Area the Wyodak coal seam is most often divided by partings that separate it into two or more units. The separate units are typically given local names which vary from mine to mine. (e.g., Upper and Lower Wyodak). A general discussion of the coal seam aquifer is presented as follows. Due to its continuity, the Wyodak coal seam is considered a regional aquifer within the PRB. Hydraulic conductivity within the Wyodak coal seam is highly variable and is reflective of the amount of fracturing the coal has undergone, as unfractured coal is virtually impermeable. The yield of groundwater to wells and mine pits is smallest where the permeability of the coal is derived primarily from localized unloading fractures. These fractures, which are the most common, are created by the expansion of the coal as the weight of overlying sediments is slowly removed by erosion. The highest permeability is imparted to the coal by tectonic fractures. These are through-going fractures of areal importance created during deformation of the south Powder River structural basin. The presence of these fractures can be recognized by their linear expression at the ground surface, controlling the orientation of stream drainages and topographic depressions. Due to their pronounced surface expression, these tectonic fractures are often referred to as “lineaments”. Coal permeability along lineaments can be increased by orders of magnitude over South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS that in the coal unloading only. fractured by

The chemistry of groundwater in the coal is variable within the General Analysis Area. In general, it is a sodium-bicarbonate type with TDS concentrations increasing in a downdip direction. Within the General Analysis Area, TDS concentrations of groundwater in the coal range from 382 mg/L to 4,840 mg/L. Prior to mining, the direction of groundwater flow within the coal aquifer was generally from recharge areas near the outcrop and burn zone into the basin, following the dip of the coal. Site-specific water-level data collected from monitoring wells by mining companies and presented in the GAGMO 20-year report (HydroEngineering 2001) and GAGMO reports published in previous years indicate that the groundwater flow directions have been influenced by mining activities. Near active mining areas, groundwater flow within the coal aquifer is typically toward the mine pits. Subcoal Fort Union Formation The subcoal Fort Union Formation can be divided into three hydrologic units: the Tongue River aquifer, the Lebo Member, and the Tullock aquifer (Law 1976). The hydrologic units below the Wyodak coal are not directly disturbed by mining, but many mines use them for water supply wells. In a few cases there have been drawdowns in the subcoal aquifer due to leakage into mine pits, 3-35

3.0 Affected Environment dewatering, and CBM development (BLM 2001b). The Tongue River aquifer consists of lenticular finegrained shale and sandstone. The Lebo Member, also referred to as “the Lebo confining layer”, is typically more fine-grained than the other two members and generally retards the movement of water (Lewis and Hotchkiss 1981). The Tullock aquifer consists of discontinuous lenses of sandstone separated by interbedded shale and siltstone. Transmissivity is equal to an aquifer’s hydraulic conductivity or permeability times its thickness and is commonly used when discussing the hydraulic properties of the subcoal Fort Union Formation, where wells are completed by exposing many discrete sand lenses to the well bore. Transmissivities are generally higher in the deeper Tullock aquifer than in the Tongue River or Lebo, and many mines in the PRB have water-supply wells completed in this interval (Martin et al. 1988). The average transmissivity for this member as reported by OSM (1984) is 290 ft2/day. All five of the mines located within the General Analysis Area use deep wells completed in the subcoal Fort Union Formation for water supply. Fort Union water supply wells in the General Analysis Area generally range from 600 to 2,000 ft in depth. The water quality of the subcoal Fort Union Formation is generally good. TDS concentrations measured in various subcoal Fort Union Formation water supply wells in the General Analysis Area range from 230 mg/L to 520 mg/L. Water from the subcoal 3-36 Fort Union Formation is of the sodium- bicarbonate type. This water is generally suitable for domestic use and may be suitable for livestock and wildlife watering, as well as irrigation, depending upon TDS concentrations and site-specific SAR values. Lance and Fox Hills Formations Underlying the Fort Union Formation is the Lance Formation of Cretaceous age. At the base of the Lance Formation is the Fox Hills Sandstone. The Lance Formation and Fox Hills Sandstone are used for water supply by PRCC at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. The North Antelope/Rochelle Complex water supply well is 5,400 ft deep and capable of producing about 400 gpm. Water from this well is of the sodiumbicarbonate type with a TDS concentration of approximately 1,200 mg/L. This water is suitable for livestock and wildlife watering. 3.6.2 Surface Water From north to south, the General Analysis Area is drained by North Prong Little Thunder Creek, Little Thunder Creek, Porcupine Creek, Spring Creek, and Antelope Creek (Figure 3-10). North Prong Little Thunder Creek is a tributary of Little Thunder Creek, which is a tributary of Black Thunder Creek. Porcupine Creek and Spring Creek are tributaries of Antelope Creek. Both Black Thunder Creek and Antelope Creek are tributaries of the Cheyenne River.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

T. 46 N. R. 72 W. R. 71 W. R. 70 W. R. 69 W. R. 68 W. R. 67 W. R. 66 W. R. 65 W. Campbell County Weston County
r ive eR ch ur Fo lle Be
59

R. 73 W.

T. 46 N.

T. 45 N.
116

Hay Cre ek

T. 45 N.

T. 44 N.
ng ro h P Nort

WRIGHT
Lit tle
Thu nde r Cre ek

T. 44 N. Jacobs Ranch Mine

Converse County

Niobrara County

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS
450

T. 43 N. Little Thunder LBA
Little Th under C reek

T. 43 N.
ek Cre ole ep dg Lo

387

Black Thunder Mine North Rochelle Mine

Figure 3-10. Surface Drainage in the General Analysis Area.
West Roundup LBA NARO North LBA NARO South LBA
e pin rcu ek Po Cre
Bla ck Th un de rC ree k

T. 42 N.
ek Cre ring Sp

T. 42 N.

North Antelope/ Rochelle Complex

iver ne R yen Che

T. 41 N. Campbell County West Antelope LBA Antelope Mine

Weston County
Ant elop eC reek

T. 41 N. Niobrara County

Converse County

Antelope Creek

T. 40 N.

r ive eR enn ey Ch

T. 40 N.

3.0 Affected Environment

T. 39 N. R. 72 W. R. 71 W.

Fork Dry

er Riv ne en ey Ch

SCALE: 1"= 7 MILES
R. 70 W. R. 69 W. R. 68 W. R. 67 W. R. 66 W. R. 65 W.

T. 39 N.

3-37

R. 73 W.

3.0 Affected Environment The Little Thunder and West Roundup LBA Tracts are located in the headwater area of Little Thunder Creek. Surface water flow in the streams within these two tracts (Little Thunder Creek, North Prong Little Thunder Creek, Dry Fork Little Thunder Creek, Trussler Creek, and Olson Draw) has historically been ephemeral (i.e., they flow only in direct response to rainfall or snowmelt). Porcupine Creek and its tributaries, Boss Draw and Corder Creek, drain the NARO North LBA Tract. Porcupine Creek is a meandering, ephemeral to intermittent stream. The NARO South and West Antelope LBA Tracts are in the Antelope Creek watershed. Streams in this area include Antelope Creek, Spring Creek, and several unnamed tributaries to Antelope Creek. Antelope Creek is an intermittent stream that, prior to mining, received a small degree of baseflow from coal seams. Water quality in each of these streams is highly dependent on flow. Typically, high flows are low in TDS and low flows are higher in TDS. The ephemeral nature of the majority of these streams results in a paucity of surface water quality data. Antelope Creek does, however, have regular flow, and as a result, ACC has extensive flow and quality records. 3.6.3 Water Rights Water rights in Wyoming are administered by Wyoming SEO. Water rights are granted for both 3-38 groundwater and surface water appropriations. Prior to development of water resources associated with energy development, water appropriations (either groundwater or surface water) in the southern PRB were typically for livestock use. Currently, the majority of the water rights in the General Analysis Area are held by mining companies and methane development companies. Records of the SEO have been searched for groundwater rights within a three-mile radius of each LBA tract as applied for under the Proposed Action and Action Alternatives. This information is required for WDEQ permitting. The results of the most recent searches are provided below for each tract. A listing of the non-coal mine related groundwater rights within a threemile radius of each tract is presented in Appendix F. For the NARO North LBA Tract, SEO data indicate that, as of July 2003, there are 452 permitted water wells within three miles of the tract, of which 324 are owned by coal mining companies. The other 128 wells, which include 65 wells permitted for uses related to CBM development, are permitted for the following uses: • • • • • • • • 33 CBM development only 31 livestock only 21 livestock and CBM development 17 monitoring and miscellaneous 10 miscellaneous and CBM development 7 monitoring only 4 livestock and domestic 2 livestock, miscellaneous, and CBM development

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment • • • 1 domestic only 1 dewatering and development 1 miscellaneous only CBM • • • • • 6 CBM development and miscellaneous 3 monitoring and miscellaneous 2 CBM development and livestock and miscellaneous 2 domestic only 1 monitoring, livestock, and miscellaneous

For the NARO South LBA Tract, SEO data indicate that, as of July 2003, there are 433 permitted water wells within three miles of the tract, of which 338 are owned by coal mining companies. The 95 other wells, which include 57 wells permitted for uses related to CBM development, are apportioned into the following use categories: • • • • • • • • • 39 CBM development only 29 livestock only 17 livestock and CBM development 4 livestock and domestic 2 miscellaneous only 1 livestock, miscellaneous, and CBM development 1 livestock and irrigation 1 livestock and miscellaneous 1 industrial only

SEO data indicate that, as of July 2003, there are 488 permitted water wells within three miles of West Roundup LBA Tract, of which 260 are owned by coal mining companies. The other 228 wells, which include 156 wells permitted for uses related to CBM development, are permitted for the following uses: • • • • • • • • • • 113 CBM development only 35 livestock only 31 CBM development and livestock 31 monitoring only 9 monitoring and miscellaneous 3 industrial only 2 CBM development and livestock and miscellaneous 2 livestock and domestic 1 domestic only 1 miscellaneous only

SEO data indicate that, as of July 2003, there are 735 permitted water wells within three miles of the Little Thunder LBA Tract, of which 197 are owned by coal mining companies. The other 538 wells, which include 457 wells permitted for uses related to CBM development, are permitted for: • • • • • 282 CBM development only 167 CBM development and livestock 57 livestock only 9 livestock and domestic 9 monitoring only

SEO data indicate there are 427 permitted water wells within three miles of West Antelope LBA Tract, of which 207 are owned by coal mining companies. Permitted uses of the other 220 wells, which include 156 wells permitted for uses related to CBM development, are summarized as follows: • 141 CBM development only 3-39

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment • • • • • • • • • • 32 livestock only 23 CBM development and livestock 8 domestic and livestock 6 monitoring and miscellaneous 4 miscellaneous only 2 livestock and miscellaneous 1 livestock and reservoir supply 1 livestock, CBM development, and miscellaneous 1 domestic only 1 industrial only For the Little Thunder LBA Tract, SEO records indicate that as of July 2003, there are 14 permitted surface water rights within the search area, of which coal mining companies hold six. The other eight surface water rights are for livestock watering. For the West Roundup LBA Tract, SEO records indicate that as of July 2003, there are 20 permitted surface water rights within the search area, of which coal mining companies hold 14. The other six surface water rights are for livestock watering, irrigation, and domestic use. For the West Antelope LBA Tract, SEO records indicate that as of July 2003, there are 33 permitted surface water rights within the search area, of which coal mining companies hold 23. The other 10 surface water rights are for livestock watering, wetlands, and temporary industrial use. 3.7 Alluvial Valley Floors WDEQ regulations define AVFs as unconsolidated stream laid deposits where water availability is sufficient for subirrigation or flood irrigation agricultural activities. Prior to leasing and mining, AVFs must be identified because SMCRA restricts mining activities which affect AVFs that are determined to be significant to agriculture. Impacts to designated AVFs are generally not permitted if the AVF is determined to be significant to agriculture. If the AVF is determined not to be significant to agriculture, or if the permit to affect the AVF was issued prior to the effective date of SMCRA, the AVF can South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

SEO records have been searched for surface water rights within a half-mile radius upstream and a three-mile radius downstream of each LBA tract as applied for and the largest respective alternative tract configuration. Like the groundwater rights, this information is also required for WDEQ permitting. The results of the most recent searches are provided below for each tract. A listing of the non-coal mine related surface water rights is presented in Appendix F. For the NARO North LBA Tract, SEO records indicate that as of July 2003, there are 92 permitted surface water rights within the search area, of which coal mining companies hold 76. The other 16 surface water rights are for livestock watering. For the NARO South LBA Tract, SEO records indicate that as of July 2003, there are 14 permitted surface water rights within the search area, of which coal mining companies hold five. The other nine surface water rights are for livestock watering, irrigation, and wetlands.

3-40

3.0 Affected Environment be disturbed during mining but must be restored as part of the reclamation process. The determination of significance to agriculture is made by WDEQ/LQD, and it is based on specific calculations related to the production of crops or forage on the AVF and the size of the existing agricultural operations on the land of which the AVF is a part. For any designated AVF, regardless of its significance to agriculture, it must be demonstrated that the essential hydrologic functions of the valley will be protected. Guidelines established by OSM and WDEQ/LQD for the identification of AVFs require detailed studies of geomorphology, soils, hydrology, vegetation, and land use. These technical disciplines are applied as limiting criteria along three paths to identify 1) the possibility for artificial flood irrigation, 2) past and/or present flood irrigation, and 3) apparent subirrigated areas and the possibility for natural flood irrigation. Areas passing the limiting criteria are subjected to an assessment of their practical use for agriculture. Investigations have been conducted by PRCC, TBCC, TCC, and ACC to determine the presence of AVFs within and surrounding the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mines, respectively. AVF investigations conducted within the General Analysis Area have identified AVFs that occur along Porcupine Creek, Antelope Creek, Little Thunder Creek, and North South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS Prong Little Thunder Creek downstream of the LBA tracts (see Figure 3-10 for the general location of surface water features in the General Analysis Area). One 250-acre floodirrigated hay meadow near the confluence of Porcupine Creek and Antelope Creek has been determined to be significant to agriculture. This hay meadow is the only flood-irrigated land identified in the SPRB General Analysis Area. No other declared AVFs or potential AVFs identified in the General Analysis Area have been determined by the WDEQ/LQD to be significant to agriculture. The NARO North LBA Tract has been declared non-AVF by WDEQ/LQD. Portions of Porcupine Creek and its tributaries, Boss Draw and Corder Creek, cross the NARO North LBA Tract (Figure 3-10), but WDEQ/LQD has determined that no AVF lands are present within these drainages. The declared AVF on Porcupine Creek is located several miles downstream of the NARO North LBA Tract. The NARO South LBA Tract has not yet been formally evaluated for the presence of AVFs. No unconsolidated stream laid deposits are found within the NARO South LBA Tract; therefore, it is unlikely that an AVF declaration would be made. Approximately 2.5 acres of the 250acre flood-irrigated AVF that has been determined to be significant to agriculture are in the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex’s current permit area, within the mine’s railroad spur. This AVF does lie within the North Antelope/Rochelle 3-41

3.0 Affected Environment Complex’s anticipated permit amendment study area. A total of approximately 100 acres of declared AVF occur within the mine’s railroad spur along Porcupine and Antelope Creeks, east-southeast of the NARO South LBA Tract. This AVF is outside the area of anticipated coal removal for the NARO South LBA Tract. Special measures have been designated to ensure that the mine operation will not interrupt or preclude farming on the floodirrigated lands, and Porcupine Creek downstream from the mine’s facilities will not be affected by mining. The Little Thunder LBA Tract has been declared non-AVF by WDEQ/LQD. Portions of Little Thunder Creek and North Prong Little Thunder Creek cross the Little Thunder LBA Tract (Figure 3-10). WDEQ/LQD has declared 143 acres along the lower reach of Little Thunder Creek and 194 acres along the lower reach of North Prong Little Thunder Creek as AVFs. The declared AVFs are located several miles downstream from the Little Thunder LBA Tract and will not be affected by the planned mining and reclamation within the tract. The West Roundup LBA Tract has not yet been formally evaluated for the presence of AVFs. A portion of Olson Draw, a tributary of Trussler Creek, which is a tributary of the Little Thunder Creek, is located on the West Roundup LBA Tract (Figure 310). Based on previous non-AVF declarations made on Olson Draw downstream of the West Roundup LBA Tract, it is unlikely that this 3-42 channel would receive an AVF declaration upstream on the LBA tract where the drainage is smaller and AVF characteristics are negligible. The West Antelope LBA Tract has not yet been formally evaluated for the presence of AVFs. Antelope Creek, within and extending two miles upstream from the existing Antelope Mine permit boundary, including a portion of the West Antelope LBA Tract (Figure 3-10), has been investigated for the presence of an AVF (ACC 1998). A portion of Antelope Creek within the current permit area has been designated by WDEQ/LQD as “possible subirrigated AVF of minor importance to agriculture”. ACC’s approved mining plan avoids disturbing Antelope Creek and an adjacent buffer zone. Portions of Spring Creek within the West Antelope LBA Tract are potential AVF due to the presence of stream laid deposits that are subirrigated; however, historical efforts at flood irrigation within the Spring Creek valley have not been successful. Site-specific studies will be part of the mine permitting process if lease sales are held and the LBA tracts are proposed for mining. Declarations of the presence or absence of AVFs, their significance to agriculture, and the appropriate perimeters will then be made by the WDEQ/LQD. It is reasonable to assume that if the WDEQ/LQD determines AVFs are present within any of the LBA tracts that are leased, mining would be permitted because all of the proposed

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment lease areas consist entirely undeveloped rangeland. 3.8 Wetlands Waters of the U.S. is a collective term for all areas subject to regulation by the COE under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Waters of the U.S. include special aquatic sites, wetlands, and jurisdictional wetlands. Special aquatic sites are large or small geographic areas that possess special ecological characteristics of productivity, habitat, wildlife protection or other important and easily disrupted ecological values (40 CFR 230.3). Wetlands are a type of special aquatic site that includes “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas” (33 CFR 328.3(a)(7)(b)). Jurisdictional wetlands are defined as those wetlands which are within the extent of COE regulatory review. They must contain three components: hydric soils, a dominance of hydrophytic plants, and wetland hydrology. As the result of a recent Supreme Court ruling (Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, January 9, 2001) nonnavigable, isolated intrastate wetlands (e.g., playas) and other waters of the U.S. are not considered jurisdictional. Navigable, nonisolated wetlands and other waters of South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS of the U.S. are still considered jurisdictional by the COE. Many wetland scientists consider areas that contain only one of the three criteria listed above as functional wetlands. The USFWS used this categorization in producing the NWI maps. These maps were produced using aerial photo interpretation, with limited field verification. Several types of wetland systems are present within the General Analysis Area. These wetland systems are limited in size; however, the vegetation in these environments is highly productive and diverse, and provides habitat for many wildlife species. Further, the systems as a whole play important roles in controlling flood waters, recharging groundwater, and filtering pollutants (Niering 1985). Wetlands can occur in a variety of forms within the General Analysis Area. Riverine wetlands, defined by their close association with perennial streams, occur sporadically along drainages within the General Analysis Area. These areas are supported not only by the groundwater associated with the drainages, but also by periodic flooding events. Common species in these settings can include willows (Salix spp.), scouring rush (Equisetum spp.), sedges (Carex spp.), and rushes (Juncus spp.) (USDA-FS 1987a). Depressional areas that are naturally subirrigated support palustrine wetlands. These wetlands are 3-43

3.0 Affected Environment commonly referred to as wet meadows and support a variety of lush plant life. Common species are sedges, rushes, cordgrass (Spartina spp.), mint (Mentha spp.), and buttercup (Ranunculus spp.). Depressional areas that hold water may support lacustrine wetlands. When natural, these wetland areas are called playa lakes; however, man made structures such as stock ponds also may support these systems. Cattails (Typha spp.) and bulrush (Scirpus spp.) are the most common species in these systems, although lady’s thumb (Polygonum spp.), verbena (Verbena spp.), and milkweed (Asclepias spp.) also may occur (USDA-FS 1987a). Jurisdictional wetland inventories were completed in 1996, 1997, and 2000 by PRCC on the lands included in the NARO North and South LBA Tracts as applied for and under all alternatives, as well as the area PRCC identified as their anticipated permit amendment study area. Within just the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts, the area added under Alternative 2, and the anticipated disturbance area, there are an estimated 46.9 acres of waters of the U.S., based on 2002 NWI data. Jurisdictional wetlands comprise about 18.4 acres and nonjurisdictional wetlands, consisting of playas, comprise 28.5 acres of the anticipated disturbance area for both tracts. Jurisdictional wetland inventories were completed in 2001 by TBCC on lands included in the Little Thunder LBA Tract as applied for and under all alternatives, as well as the area 3-44 TBCC identified as their anticipated permit amendment study area. Based on those inventories, the Little Thunder LBA Tract and the area added by Alternative 2 include 25.36 acres of waters of the U.S., comprised of 8.59 acres of jurisdictional waters of the U.S., of which 5.19 acres are jurisdictional wetlands consisting of ephemeral riverine systems. The tract includes an additional 16.77 acres of non-jurisdictional waters of the U.S., primarily isolated stockponds, playas, and ephemeral riverine systems. Jurisdictional wetland inventories were completed in 2002 by TCC on lands included in the West Roundup LBA Tract as applied for and under all alternatives, as well as the area identified by TCC as their anticipated permit amendment study area. The entire wetland study area includes 28.85 acres of waters of the U.S., with 6.8 acres of jurisdictional wetlands consisting primarily of aquatic beds and open water from stock ponds. The tract includes 20.21 acres of nonjurisdictional wetlands, primarily playas and ephemeral riverine drainages. Jurisdictional wetland inventories were completed in 2002 by ACC on lands contained within the West Antelope LBA Tract as applied for and under all alternatives as well as the area that would be disturbed by mining as part of the existing mine operations. The entire wetland study area includes 33.52 acres of waters of the U.S., with 31.77 acres of jurisdictional wetlands consisting of aquatic beds, open water from South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment stockponds, and intermittent stream beds. No non-jurisdictional wetlands were identified in the wetland study area. The presence of jurisdictional wetlands on a mine property does not preclude mining. Jurisdictional wetlands must be identified and special permitting procedures are required to assure that after mining there will be no net loss of wetlands. A wetland delineation must be completed according to approved procedures (COE 1987) and submitted to the COE for verification as to the amounts and types of jurisdictional wetlands present. Formal wetland delineations have been confirmed by COE for some of the wetlands included in the proposed LBA tracts, but wetland inventories covering portions of the LBA tracts have not yet been submitted to COE for verification. These wetland inventories will be submitted to COE for verification as part of the mine and reclamation permit process. In Wyoming, once the delineation has been verified, it is made a part of the mine permit document. The reclamation plan is then revised to incorporate at least equal types and number of jurisdictional wetlands. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act does not cover non-jurisdictional or functional wetlands; however, Executive Order 11990 requires that all federal agencies protect all wetlands. Nonjurisdictional and functional wetlands are restored as required by WDEQ/LQD (depending on the values associated with the wetland features), by the surface managing agency (on South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS public land), or by the private landowner. There are public lands administered by USDA-FS included in the NARO North, Little Thunder, and West Roundup LBA Tracts. 3.9 Vegetation Numerous baseline vegetation surveys associated with surface mining operations have been conducted within the General Analysis Area. Vegetation surveys of the General Analysis Area have been conducted by Intermountain Resources of Laramie, Wyoming, BKS Environmental Associates, Inc. of Gillette, Wyoming, and Ecologic of Bakersfield, California. Each of the LBA study areas is comprised of the LBA tract as applied for, BLM’s alternative tract configuration, and the applicant mine’s anticipated permit amendment study area. The vegetation of the General Analysis Area consists of species common to eastern Wyoming. The following vegetation types were identified within the General Analysis Area: • • • • • • • • • • • • • Agriculture Alkali Bottomland Grass Alkali Shrubland Big Sagebrush Draw Big Sagebrush Upland Big Sagebrush Shrubland Big Sagebrush Grassland Birdsfoot Sagebrush Upland Blue Grama Upland Blue Grama Roughland Breaks Grassland Cropland Cultivated Pastureland 3-45

3.0 Affected Environment • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Densely Vegetated Playa Disturbed Lands Grassy Bottom Greasewood Grassland Greasewood Lowland Meadow Grassland Mixed Grass Prairie Mixed Sandy Upland Pastureland Hayland Playa Barrens Playa Grassland Reclaimed Lands Reservoir/Stockpond Riparian Rough Breaks Shrublands Salt Grassland Sandy Saline Meadow Scoria Grassland Silver Sagebrush Lowland Silver Sagebrush Sparsely Vegetated Playa Spicebush Playa Spikerush Playa Streamside Meadow Treated Grazing Land Upland Grassland Wet Meadow/Water/Riparian silver sagebrush, and greasewood. Spicebush, foxtail barley, and inland saltgrass occur near and around playas. Within the bottomlands and riparian areas are mixtures of western wheatgrass, Kentucky bluegrass, and sedges. Cottonwood trees varying in density and extent occur within some of the larger stream valleys. Blue grama, big sagebrush, and bluebunch wheatgrass occur on the ridges and rougher areas. The occurrence and relative distribution of the dominant vegetation types is shown in Table 37. 3.9.1 Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Plant Species, USDA-FS Region 2 Sensitive Species, and BLM Sensitive Species Refer to Appendices G through K. 3.10 Wildlife Background information on wildlife in the General Analysis Area was drawn from several sources, including: • • • FEIS for the North Jacobs Ranch Coal Lease Application (BLM 2001b); FEIS for the Horse Creek Coal Lease Application (BLM 2000a); FEIS for the Powder River Coal and Thundercloud Coal Lease Applications (BLM 1998); FEIS for the North Rochelle Coal Lease Application (BLM 1997b); FEA for the Antelope Coal Lease Application (BLM 1995);

The vegetation of the General Analysis Area varies from sagebrush and grassland-dominated uplands to the heavily vegetated riparian areas and stream terraces. The predominant vegetation types, in terms of total acres or occurrence, are the sagebrush and grassland types, which occur on approximately 65 percent of the lands inventoried in the General Analysis Area. Other common plant species on the level uplands include western wheatgrass, needleandthread grass, and plains pricklypear. On the stream terraces, common species include blue grama, 3-46

• •

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment Table 3-7. Grassland Big Sagebrush Breaks Grassland Playa Barrens Disturbed Areas Meadows/Riparian Greasewood Pasture/Hayland Saline Grasslands Agriculture Birdsfoot Sagebrush Silver Sagebrush Playa Grasslands Reservoirs/Stockponds Reclaimed Land Total • • • • FEIS for the West Black Thunder Coal Lease Application (BLM 1992a); Wyoming Natural Diversity Database (University of Wyoming 2001); WGFD and USFWS records; and personal contacts with WGFD and USFWS biologists. Dominant Vegetation Types in the General Analysis Area. Acreage 14,674 14,075 3,894 2,119 1,907 1,828 1,530 1,190 1,135 649 280 256 252 154 40 43,983 Percentage 33.40 32.00 8.90 4.80 4.30 4.20 3.50 2.70 2.60 1.50 0.64 0.60 0.76 0.40 0.09 100.00

Vegetation Types

Site-specific data for the proposed lease areas were also obtained from WDEQ/LQD permit applications and annual wildlife reports for the applicant mines. Baseline and annual monitoring surveys cover large perimeters around each mine’s current permit areas. Consequently, a majority of the LBA tracts as applied for under the Proposed Actions, BLM’s alternative tract South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

configurations, and the applicant mines’ anticipated permit amendment study areas have been surveyed during baseline and annual wildlife surveys for the Jacobs Ranch, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, and Antelope Mines. In addition, PRCC conducted wildlife baseline investigations in 2000 on the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts as proposed, the area added by Alternative 2, and areas within a twomile radius. TBCC conducted wildlife baseline investigations in 2002 on the Little Thunder LBA Tract as proposed, the area added by Alternative 2, and areas within a two-mile radius. TCC conducted wildlife baseline investigations in 2002 on the West Roundup LBA Tract as proposed, the areas added by Alternative 3, and 3-47

3.0 Affected Environment areas within a two-mile radius. ACC initiated wildlife baseline investigations in 2003 on the West Antelope LBA Tract as proposed, the area added by Alternative 2, and areas within a two-mile perimeter, and will complete the baseline survey in 2004. The results of site-specific surveys for the entire proposed lease areas and appropriate perimeters will be part of the mine permitting process if lease sales are held and the tracts are proposed for mining. The General Analysis Area consists primarily of uplands. The topography is relatively level to gently sloping, except along some of the drainages where channel incision has created some steeper slopes and gullying. All of the vegetation types listed in the vegetation section provide habitat for some wildlife species. In an undisturbed condition, the major vegetation types in the General Analysis Area provide high quality habitats for many species. Vegetation types tend to occur in a mosaic across the landscape; therefore, many wildlife species can be expected to utilize more than one habitat type. Wildlife habitat types include sagebrush-grassland, upland grassland, seeded grassland, bottomland grassland, and riparian areas. The predominant habitat is sagebrush-grassland, which consists mostly of big sagebrush, western wheatgrass, needleandthread, prairie junegrass, sandberg bluegrass, blue grama, and cheatgrass brome. The upland grassland or mixed-grass prairie is the next largest habitat type and it consists mostly of 3-48 needleandthread, western wheatgrass, prairie junegrass, sixweeks-grass, cheatgrass brome, and fluffweed. Seeded grassland is dominated by crested wheatgrass, but older seedings have a mixture of less dominant species including needleandthread, fringed sagewort, prairie junegrass, threeawn, and big sagebrush. Bottomland grassland and riparian habitat is limited to corridors along Antelope Creek, Spring Creek, Horse Creek, Porcupine Creek, Trussler Creek, West School Creek, Little Thunder Creek, North Prong Little Thunder Creek, and some of the larger tributaries of these streams. Vegetation common to these areas includes Kentucky bluegrass, western wheatgrass, blue grama, green needle grass, mutton bluegrass, sedges, foxtail barley, Japanese brome, alkali bluegrass, and poverty weed. Several playas dominated by western wheatgrass are scattered throughout the General Analysis Area. Very few trees are present in the General Analysis Area with the exception of some stands of cottonwood along Antelope Creek and a few isolated cottonwoods along some of the larger drainages. An occasional rough breaks habitat is found within the General Analysis Area and is distinguished by the irregularity of vegetation, slopes, and soils. Vegetation on the rough breaks is typically sparse and comprised mostly of western wheatgrass, needleandthread, blue grama, broom snakeweed, rubber rabbitbrush,

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment wildbuckwheat, birdfoot sagewort, and big sagebrush. All streams are ephemeral or intermittent, but a few persistent pools are often present in their channels. Development of CBM resources in the area west of and within the General Analysis Area could potentially increase surface flows in some drainages and fill reservoirs, ponds, and playas, resulting in an increase in habitat for waterfowl, shorebirds, and aquatic species. 3.10.1 Big Game The four big game species that are expected to occur in suitable habitat throughout the General Analysis Area include pronghorn (Antilocapra americana), mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), and elk (Cervus elaphus). No crucial big game habitat or migration corridors are recognized by the WGFD in this area. Pronghorn are the most common big game species in this area. This species is most abundant in the upland grassland or mixed-grass prairie habitats. Reclaimed grassland constitutes only a small portion of the available habitat around the mines, although a large portion of pronghorn are observed during winter surveys in these areas. Home range for pronghorn can vary between 400 acres to 5,600 acres, according to several factors including season, habitat quality, population characteristics, and local livestock occurrence. Typically, daily South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS movement does not exceed six miles. Pronghorn make seasonal migrations between summer and winter habitats, but migrations are often triggered by availability of succulent plants and not local weather conditions (Fitzgerald et al. 1994). The WGFD has classified the General Analysis Area as yearlong and winter/yearlong pronghorn range. The WGFD Cheyenne River Herd Unit encompasses the majority of the General Analysis Area, while a small part of the area is included the WGFD Hilight Herd Unit. In post-season 2002, the WGFD estimated the Cheyenne River Herd Unit to be 34,146 animals with an objective of 38,000. The WGFD estimated the 2002 post-season population of the Hilight Herd Unit to be approximately 11,000 animals, which is at the objective of 11,000 (WGFD 2002). Mule deer use nearly all habitats, but prefer sagebrush grassland, rough breaks, and mixed-grass prairie. Browse is an important component of the mule deer’s diet throughout the year, comprising as much as 60 percent of total intake during autumn, while forbs and grasses typically make up the rest of their diet (Fitzgerald et al. 1994). This species tends to be more migratory than white-tailed deer, traveling from higher elevations in the summer to winter ranges that provide more food and cover. The WGFD has classified most of the General Analysis Area as out of the normal mule deer use range, although areas that roughly follow the predominant stream channels are classified as yearlong range and some winter/yearlong 3-49

3.0 Affected Environment range is found near Antelope Creek in Converse County. The entire area is located within the WGFD Thunder Basin Mule Deer Herd Unit. No crucial or critical mule deer ranges or migration corridors occur on or within several miles of any of the LBA tracts in the General Analysis Area. White-tailed deer are not managed separately by WGFD, but are included with mule deer as part of the Thunder Basin Herd Unit. Whitetailed deer prefer riparian habitats and are therefore seldom observed in the General Analysis Area due to the lack of that particular habitat. WGFD classifies the entire General Analysis Area, with the exception of a narrow corridor along Antelope Creek, as out of the normal white-tailed deer use range. White-tailed deer are occasionally recorded along Antelope Creek, which is classified as yearlong range. Elk reside in the Rochelle Hills that border the eastern edge of the General Analysis Area. Elk do wander from the protection of the Rochelle Hills to forage in native and reclaimed grasslands within the General Analysis Area, although none of the area is classified by the WGFD as an elk use area. As more lands are reclaimed from mining, elk are shifting their winter use to these areas. The WGFD has designated an approximately five square mile area on reclaimed lands within the Jacobs Ranch Mine permit area as crucial winter habitat for the Rochelle Hills elk herd (Odekoven 1994). 3.10.2 Other Mammals A variety of small and medium-sized mammal species occur in the vicinity of the General Analysis Area. These include predators and furbearers, such as coyote (Canis latrans), red fox (Vulpes vulpes), bobcat (Lynx rufus), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), long-tailed weasel (Mustela frenata), badger (Taxidea taxus), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), raccoon (Procyon lotor), and beaver (Castor canadensis). Prey species include various rodents (such as mice, rats, voles, gophers, ground squirrels, chipmunks, muskrats, and prairie dogs) and lagomorphs (jackrabbits and cottontails). These species are cyclically common and widespread throughout the region (Commonwealth 1980, Powder River Eagle Studies 1987-1999). Porcupines and bats (hoary and big brown) have also been recorded. The prey species are important for raptors and other predators. Surveys have been conducted to locate prairie dog colonies on and within one-half mile of the proposed lease areas, current mine permit areas and anticipated permit amendment study areas in the General Analysis Area. There are six prairie dog towns located on or within one-half mile of the two NARO LBA tracts. No colonies were observed on the NARO North LBA Tract and one colony is within a half-mile radius of that tract. Three colonies were observed on the NARO South LBA Tract and two others are within a half-mile radius of South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-50

3.0 Affected Environment that tract. No colonies were observed on the area added to the NARO South tract under Alternative 2. Recent surveys indicate prairie dog colonies are not located on or within one-half mile of the proposed lease area for the Little Thunder LBA Tract or the area added under Alternative 2. Recent surveys found no prairie dog colonies located within the West Roundup LBA Tract. One small colony is located within the area added under Alternatives 2 and 3. One other colony is located just over one-half mile south of the LBA tract. Four black-tailed prairie dog colonies have been inventoried on and within one-half mile of the West Antelope LBA Tract and Alternative 2 area. Two colonies are included in, or overlap the proposed lease area; one in the north-central part and one in the south-central part of the LBA tract as applied for under the Proposed Action. A third colony covers roughly 2.5 acres in the southwestern corner of the lands added by Alternative 2. The fourth colony is on an existing lease at the Antelope Mine just east of the LBA tract and has been disturbed by the Antelope Mine operations. Additional discussion of prairie dog colonies identified on the LBA tracts is included in Appendices G through K of this EIS. 3.10.3 Raptors Common raptor species expected to occur in suitable habitats in the South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS General Analysis Area include golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), ferruginous hawk (Buteo regalis), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), Swainson's hawk (Buteo swainsoni), rough-legged hawk (Buteo lagopus), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), American kestrel (Falco sparverius), prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus), great horned owl (Bubo virginianus), burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), and short-eared owl (Asio flammeus). Those species that commonly nest in the General Analysis Area are the ferruginous hawk, golden eagle, red-tailed hawk, Swainson’s hawk, great horned owl, and burrowing owl. Habitat is limited for those species that nest exclusively in trees or on cliffs, but several species are adapted to nesting on the ground, creek banks, buttes, or rock outcrops. Over time, natural forces have destroyed many nests, while others have been relocated for mitigation or removed by mining activities. In some cases, nests have been created to mitigate other nest sites impacted by mining operations at these mines. As of a survey that was completed in 2000, there were 77 intact raptor nests within the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts and a twomile radius area, 45 of which were active. After the 2001 breeding season 63 known nests were intact within Black Thunder Mine’s current raptor survey area, which includes the current Black Thunder Mine permit area and a two-mile radius area.

3-51

3.0 Affected Environment After the 2001 breeding season, 28 known nests were intact within the West Roundup LBA Tract raptor survey area, which includes the West Roundup LBA Tract, areas added under Alternatives 2 and 3, and a two-mile perimeter. One of those intact nests is within the LBA tract as proposed, one nest is within the area added under Alternative 3, and the other 26 nests are in the two-mile perimeter survey area. At the end of 2000, there were 42 intact raptor nests within the raptor survey area for the West Antelope LBA Tract, which includes the tract as proposed, lands added by Alternative 2, and a two-mile radius. Nine nests in the survey area were occupied: seven on the LBA tract as proposed and two on the lands added under Alternative 2. 3.10.4 Game Birds A few upland game birds are known to regularly occur in suitable habitats in the General Analysis Area. The species include mourning doves (Zenaida macroura), sage grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus), and wild turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo). The gray partridge (Perdix perdix) and the sharp-tailed grouse (Tympanuchus phasianellus) have also been observed sporadically in the vicinity of the General Analysis Area. The sage grouse is a yearlong resident and the most common upland game bird species in the area. USFWS has received several petitions to list the sage grouse under the ESA. The causes of the range-wide decline in 3-52 sage grouse population levels are not completely understood, but they may be influenced by local conditions. However, habitat loss and degradation, as well as loss of population connectivity are important factors (Braun 1998, Wisdom et al. 2002). Following the deaths of 11 sage grouse in northeastern Wyoming from West Nile virus in August and early September 2003, the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission announced on September 11 that the 2003 hunting season for the species in Johnson, Sheridan, and Campbell Counties would be closed. According to a press release, the commission took this action because the infection is much higher in northeastern Wyoming than the rest of the state and the area is on the fringe of sage grouse range with marginal, fragmented habitat (WGFD 9/11/2003 press release). Sage grouse are dependent on sagebrush. Population and habitat analyses suggest that wintering habitat can be as limiting as mating and breeding habitats. SPRB mining companies conduct surveys of sage grouse lek, or strutting ground, attendance and surveys to identify new sage grouse leks in the spring as part of the annual wildlife surveys that are conducted for each mine. These surveys, which include the mine permit area and a one-mile perimeter, were initiated when the mines were initially permitted, generally in the mid-1980s. As a result, most of the area included in each of the proposed South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment LBA tracts has been included in previous annual survey areas for each of the SPRB mines. In May 2002, the USFWS office in Cheyenne, Wyoming released a list entitled Coal Mine List of 40 Migratory Bird Species of Management Concern in Wyoming, which replaced the previous Migratory Birds of High Federal Interest List. The greater sage grouse is included on the new list and, as a result, the presence of sage grouse and sage grouse sign are included in the annual migratory bird surveys that are conducted for each mine in both spring and summer. These surveys cover the mine’s permit area and a one-half mile perimeter. As discussed below, five sage grouse leks have been surveyed within the General Analysis Area. Two of the leks have been active during recent survey years, and three of the leks have not been attended by grouse in the spring for several years. Overall, the sage grouse population appears to be steadily declining. Disturbance of leks, nesting areas, and brood-rearing areas are key threats to this species in the General Analysis Area. The sage grouse is a yearlong resident in the general North Antelope/ Rochelle Complex area and is found on lands within and adjacent to the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts; however, no historic or active sage grouse leks are located on or within approximately 1.3 miles of the NARO North tract as proposed and approximately 4.5 miles of the NARO South tract as proposed. Four sage grouse leks (Wilson, Rochelle, Kort, and Payne) have been discovered in South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS the wildlife monitoring survey area for the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. These four leks, which are all located in the eastern portion of the mine’s current permit area, comprise the Rochelle lek complex. The Wilson and Rochelle leks have not been attended since 1997 and 1999, respectively, although the Kort and Payne leks are currently active. The Kort lek, which is located 3.5 miles east-southeast of the NARO North tract in the SE¼ SW¼ of Section 31, T.42N., R.69W., was first identified in spring 1998. Male attendance on the Kort lek has fluctuated between peaks of 13 in 2000 to four in spring 2003. For unknown reasons, grouse apparently shifted their breeding activities from the Wilson lek and formed the Kort lek. The Payne lek, which is located approximately 1.3 miles east of the NARO North LBA Tract in the NE¼ NW¼ of Section 26, T.42N., R.70W., was discovered in spring 2001. The Payne lek hosted peak male counts of 21, 18, and 7 in 2001, 2002, and 2003, respectively. The Payne lek now appears to be the primary lek for the Rochelle lek complex (TWC 2003). The sage grouse is a yearlong resident in the general Black Thunder Mine area but does not appear to frequent the Little Thunder LBA Tract. One sage grouse lek was discovered on the Black Thunder Mine permit area in 1984. Annual monitoring of that lek, known as the Black Thunder lek, began in 1985 and has continued to the present. The Black Thunder lek is approximately 2,000 ft southeast of the LBA tract as proposed. In 2001, for the eighth consecutive year, no 3-53

3.0 Affected Environment grouse were observed at the former Black Thunder lek. The Black Thunder lek, discussed above, is located approximately onehalf mile north of the West Roundup LBA Tract. As indicated above, the lek has been abandoned since 1994. No new leks were found and no sage grouse were observed during a survey conducted during the spring of 2001 in the North Rochelle Mine permit area and a one-mile perimeter. Sage grouse are not common in the vicinity of the West Antelope LBA Tract wildlife study area or the adjacent Antelope Mine. The lack of use of this area by sage grouse has been documented since the late 1970s. No sage grouse leks have been observed on or near the Antelope Mine during baseline studies (1978-1979) or the mine’s annual wildlife monitoring surveys (1982-2000), which included the eastern 73 percent of the LBA tract as proposed and the entire Alternative 2 area. The nearest known lek is approximately five miles southeast of the West Antelope LBA Tract. 3.10.5 Migratory Bird Species of Management Concern in Wyoming Table 3-8 is the Coal Mine List of 40 Migratory Bird Species of Management Concern in Wyoming, which USFWS will use for reviews related to existing and proposed coal mine leased land (USFWS 2002). This list was taken directly from the Wyoming Bird Conservation Plan (Cerovski, et al. 2000). The Coal Mine List of 40 Migratory Bird Species of Management 3-54 Concern in Wyoming replaced the Migratory Birds of High Federal Interest (MBHFI) list. SPRB mining companies previously conducted annual surveys for the species included on the MBHFI list and now conduct annual surveys for the species included on the new list. The surveys, which are conducted in the spring and summer, include the permit area for each mine and a onehalf mile perimeter. Table 3-8 includes the regional status and expected occurrence, historical observations, and breeding records on and near the SPRB Coal LBA Tracts for each of the species on the list, based on a compilation of the results of the annual surveys. Depending on the location, between 19 and 21 of the listed species have historically been observed within the General Analysis Area. The species commonly observed nesting in the area include the ferruginous hawk, burrowing owl, Brewer’s sparrow, lark bunting, Swainson’s hawk, McCown’s longspur, and vesper sparrow. The mountain plover, upland sandpiper, short-eared owl, loggerhead shrike, chestnut-collared longspur, grasshopper sparrow, and the greater sage grouse do not have abundant nesting habitat available, but have been documented to nest within the General Analysis Area. Additional information about the observed occurrence of the mountain plover on the five LBA tracts can be found in Appendices G through K. The bald eagle is seasonally common and most frequently observed during the winter months. The burrowing owl is common and classified as a South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment Table 3-8. 40 Migratory Bird Species of Management Concern in Wyoming for Coal Mines: Their Regional Status, and Expected and Actual Occurrence on or Near the SPRB Coal LBA Tracts.
Seasonal Status/Breeding Records in Northeastern WY1 Summer/Breeder Resident/Breeder Summer/Breeder Summer/Observed Summer/Breeder Summer/Breeder Summer/Breeder Summer/Breeder Summer/Observed Summer/Breeder Resident/Observed Summer/Breeder Resident/Breeder Summer/Breeder Expected Occurrence on and in Vicinity of the LBA Tracts2 Uncommon Uncommon Common Rare Common Common Not Expected Common Uncommon Uncommon Uncommon Migrant Common Seasonally Common Uncommon Historical Sighting Records and Breeding Status in Vicinity of the LBA Tracts3 None-Few sightings Uncommon breeder Occasional-Common breeder None-Few sightings Common breeder Common breeder None Common breeder Few sightings, potential migrant Few sightings, potential breeder None Recent common breeder Frequent in winter Few sightings, potential breeder

Species Mountain plover* Greater sage-grouse* McCown’s longspur* Baird’s sparrow* Ferruginous hawk* Brewer’s sparrow* Sage sparrow Swainson’s hawk Long-billed curlew* Short-eared owl* Peregrine falcon Burrowing owl* Bald eagle* Upland sandpiper*

LEVEL I (species need conservation action)

LEVEL II (species need monitoring) Cassin’s kingbird Lark bunting* Dickcissel* Chestnut-collared longspur* Black-chinned hummingbird Pygmy nuthatch Marsh wren Western bluebird Sage thrasher Grasshopper sparrow* Bobolink Common loon* Black-billed cuckoo Red-headed woodpecker Yellow-billed cuckoo Eastern screech-owl Western screech-owl Western scrub-jay Loggerhead shrike* Vesper sparrow Lark sparrow* Ash-throated flycatcher Bushtit Merlin* Sprague’s pipit Barn owl
1 2 3

Never Recorded Summer/Breeder Summer/Observed Summer/Breeder Never Recorded Never Recorded Never Recorded Summer/Breeder Summer/Breeder Summer/Breeder Summer/Observed Summer/Observed Never Recorded Summer/Breeder Summer/Observed Never Recorded Never Recorded Never Recorded Summer/Breeder Summer/Breeder Summer/Breeder Summer/Observed Never Recorded Resident/Observed Never Recorded Summer/Observed

Not Expected Common Rare Common Not Expected Not Expected Not Expected Not Expected Uncommon Uncommon Rare Not Expected Not Expected Uncommon Very Rare Not Expected Not Expected Not Expected Uncommon Common Uncommon Not Expected Not Expected Uncommon Not Expected Very Rare

None Common breeder None-Few Sightings Occasional breeder None None None None Uncommon breeder Few sightings, potential breeder None None-Few Sightings None None None None None None Occasional breeder Common breeder Few sightings None None Few sightings None None

Compiled from Luce, et al. (1999), for extreme southern Campbell and northern Converse Counties. Expected occurrence in the study area was based on range, history of occurrence, and habitat availability. Sighting records were derived from actual occurrence on or within one-half mile of the LBA tracts and anticipated permit amendment study area. Species marked with an asterisk have historically been recorded during baseline or monitoring surveys for the four applicant mines.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-55

3.0 Affected Environment recent common breeder in the General Analysis Area. Sage grouse, recently added to the Level 1 list, is uncommon in the General Analysis Area and is classified as an uncommon breeder. Additional information about the observed occurrence of the bald eagle on the five LBA tracts can be found in Appendices G through K. Suitable nesting habitat is scarce if not absent in the General Analysis Area for the remainder of the Migratory Bird Species of Management Concern in Wyoming. The other species that are listed in Table 3-8 have rarely or never been recorded in the General Analysis Area. 3.10.6 Other Species Wildlife surveys within the General Analysis Area have documented numerous other wildlife species that inhabit the region, including various nongame birds, waterfowl, shorebirds, herptiles, and nongame fish. All these species are generally common inhabitants of the area and none are of specific concern to state or federal agencies. Under natural conditions, aquatic habitat is very limited by the ephemeral nature of surface waters in the General Analysis Area. The lack of deep-water habitat and extensive and persistent water sources limits the presence and diversity of fish and other aquatic species. Fish surveys were conducted during baseline studies for the North Antelope and Rochelle Mines in the late 1970s, for 3-56 the North Rochelle Mine in 19801981, for the Antelope Mine in the late 1970s and in 1998 (for the Horse Creek lease), and for the Little Thunder LBA Tract in 2002. Additional discussion of fisheries and baseline studies on the LBA tracts is included in Appendix K. Fish species are not normally found on the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts, due to the ephemeral nature of the drainages on these tracts. It is possible that some fish species, such as fathead minnow or black bullhead, could exist in some of the deeper pools on Porcupine Creek, but their existence has not been documented and the tendency of these pools to go dry during drought periods makes the presence of fish unlikely. Aquatic habitat is very limited on the Little Thunder LBA Tract. The principle drainages in the study area are Little Thunder Creek and North Prong Little Thunder Creek, which are ephemeral, under natural conditions, and are not known to support fisheries this far up the drainage. Recent CBM development has created a perennial flow in Little Thunder Creek and its tributaries. In addition, Little Thunder Reservoir, which is located on Little Thunder Creek upstream of the Little Thunder LBA Tract in Section 22, T.43N., R.71W., has historically maintained and currently maintains both game and non-game fisheries. Aquatic habitat is very limited on the West Roundup LBA Tract. The principle drainages in the study area South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment are Trussler Creek and Olson Draw, which are ephemeral, under natural conditions, and do not support fisheries. Aquatic habitat is limited in the West Antelope LBA Tract study area. Antelope Creek is an intermittent stream where it crosses the LBA tract. The other principal drainage on the tract is Spring Creek, which is an ephemeral drainage. Baseline aquatic studies for the Antelope Mine (Commonwealth Associates, Inc. 1980) found three common species in Antelope Creek at the confluence of Spring Creek and Antelope Creek, which is on the LBA tract. These species are: the sand shiner (Notropis stramineus), fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas), and plains killifish (Fundulus kansae). The fathead chub (Platygobio gracilus), which is listed by Region 2 of the USDA-FS as a Sensitive Species (Appendix K), has been recorded in Antelope Creek, downstream of the West Antelope LBA Tract (Commonwealth Associates, Inc. 1980, Wechse et al. 1978), but has not been recorded in the vicinity of the tract. Horse Creek, located east of the West Antelope LBA Tract, was sampled in 1998 during baseline studies for the Horse Creek lease tract, and the green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus) was the only species caught. As discussed above, produced water from CBM wells has created perennial flow in Little Thunder Creek, and may create perennial flows in some of the other naturally ephemeral drainages in the General Analysis Area. This South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS may increase habitat for waterfowl and aquatic species while CBM production continues. 3.10.7 Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Animal Species, USDA-FS Region 2 Sensitive Species, and BLM Sensitive Species Refer to Appendices G through K. 3.11 Ownership and Use of Land Land ownership within the General Analysis Area consists of private lands intermingled with federal lands. Table 3-9 summarizes the distribution of surface ownership for each LBA tract, including the tract and the entire study area BLM is evaluating in the alternatives for each tract. Federally owned lands in the General Analysis Area include portions of the TBNG administered by the USDA-FS. Livestock grazing on native rangeland is the primary land use, while oil and gas production, wildlife habitat, and recreation are secondary land uses for both public and private lands. Surface ownership for each LBA tract is shown in Figures 3-11 through 3-14. Areas of disturbance within and near the five proposed lease areas include roads, oil and gas wells and associated production facilities, and surface mine-related facilities and activities. State Highways 59 and 450 are in the vicinity of the LBA tracts. Several paved county roads traverse and provide public and private access within the General Analysis Area. These include County

3-57

3.0 Affected Environment Table 3-9. Distribution of Surface Ownership Within Each LBA Tract and Study Area.
Federal Ownership LBA Tract NARO North (As Proposed) NARO South (Alternative 2) Little Thunder (Alternative 2) West Roundup (Alternative 3) West Antelope (Alternative 2) Totals (Acres) 1,718.6 0.0 1,100.7 1,257.1 0.0 4,076.4 (Percent) 9.8 0.0 6.3 7.2 0.0 23.3 Private Ownership (Acres) 650.8 3,201.8 3,982.8 1,783.1 3,877.9 13,496.4 (Percent) 3.7 18.2 22.7 10.1 22.1 76.7

Road 37, Antelope Road, Reno Road, and Edwards Road. The oil and gas estate within the LBA tracts is both federally and privately owned, with the majority (approximately 67 percent) being federally owned. Most of the federally owned oil and gas estate is leased. The ownership of the oil and gas estate for each LBA tract is shown in Figures 3-15 through 3-18. Lists of the current federal oil and gas lessees for each tract are shown in Tables 310 through 3-13. There are 35 permitted conventional oil and gas wells on lands included in the LBA tracts as proposed and the lands added under BLM’s alternatives (Figures 3-15 through 3-18). Of these, 25 wells are plugged and abandoned or shut in and 10 wells are still producing. Of the 10 producing wells, six are on federal oil and gas leases and four are on private leases. All of the conventional oil and gas wells within the LBA tract configurations were originally drilled between 1968 and 1989. The Supreme Court has ruled that the CBM belongs to the owner of the 3-58

oil and gas estate (98-830). Therefore, the oil and gas lessees have the right to develop CBM as well as conventional oil and gas on the LBA tracts. CBM development is most extensive in the northwestern portion of the General Analysis Area. When the Draft SPRB Coal EIS was prepared, only the Little Thunder LBA Tract included CBM wells that were producing. As of October 2003, producing CBM wells were also present on the West Roundup and NARO North LBA Tracts, under the Proposed Action and/or Preferred Alternatives for those tracts. There is CBM drilling and production activity in the general vicinity of the NARO South and West Antelope LBA Tracts, but no wells are currently producing in the area included under the Proposed Action or Preferred Alternatives for these tracts. According to the WOGCC records as of October 6, 2003, there are approximately 285 CBM wells that are capable of production on or in sections adjacent to the proposed tracts. These wells are listed in Appendix L. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment
BNSF + Double Tr UP acks
Antelope Road

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

T. 42 N. T. 41 N.

NARO NORTH

T. 42 N.
5 4

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

T. 41 N.

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
Double Tracks
Antelo pe Ro ad

NARO SOUTH

BNSF + UP

T. 41 N.

26 Campbell County Converse County

30 25

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

LEGEND
North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Permit Boundary NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts as Applied for U.S.A. Jerry and Barbara Dilts, John, Jerry and Steve Dilts, Bridle Bit Ranch Company
0 2500 5000 10000

PRCC ACC

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 3-11. Surface Ownership Within the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-59

3.0 Affected Environment
R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

25 26

Small Road

T. 44 N. T. 43 N.
3 2 1 6

T. 44 N. T. 43 N.

LEGEND
Black Thunder Mine Permit Boundary Little Thunder LBA Tract as Applied for TBCC U.S.A. ALC Naomi M. Hopkins Trust B.N. Railroad Company & Western Railroad Properties (Glacier Park Company)

State Highway 450

7 12

Hilight Road

14 13

27 BNSF + UP Double Tracks

31
0 2500 5000 10000

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 3-12. Surface Ownership Within the Little Thunder LBA Tract.

3-60

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment
R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
22 23 24 19 20 21 22

Hilight Road

31 36

T. 43 N. T. 42 N.
3 2

T. 43 N. T. 42 N.

Reno Road

8 7

9 10

15
BNSF + UP Double Tracks

Antelope Road

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

LEGEND
North Rochelle Mine Permit Boundary West Roundup LBA Tract as Applied for TBCC U.S.A.
0 2500 5000 10000

TCC GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 3-13. Surface Ownership Within the West Roundup LBA Tract.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-61

3.0 Affected Environment
R. 71 W.
17 16 15 14
Antelo pe Ro ad

BN SF &

Campbell County Converse County 30 29 28 27 26

Double Tracks

T. 41 N. T. 40 N.

P &U SF s BN Track le Trip

Co un ty R oa d3 (a.k 7 .a. An telo pe

Road)

59 way High State

R. 71 W.

LEGEND
Antelope Mine Permit Boundary West Antelope LBA Tract as Applied for ACC
0 2500 5000 10000

Gene and Patricia Litton

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 3-14. Surface Ownership Within the West Antelope LBA Tract.

3-62

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment
BNSF + Double Tr UP acks
Antelope Road

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

NOT POSTED

PRIVATE WYW 43652

WYW WYW 0100872A 75680

WYW 0100872A PRIVATE
28

WYW 0185974B
25

PRIVATE

WYW 67220A

WYW 89160

WYW 0100872

WYW 67022

WYW 49833

WYW 127399

WYW 143496 WYW 125978

WYW 147135
34 35 36 31 32 33 34

T. 42 N. T. 41 N.

WYW 67220C

NARO NORTH

T. 42 N.
5 4

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

T. 41 N.

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
BNSF + UP Double Tracks
Antelo pe Ro ad

WYW 141205

NARO SOUTH WYW 141206
T. 41 N.

WYW 143508
24

WYW 136937

WYW 138118 WYW 136942
26 Campbell County Converse County

NOT POSTED WYW 136937

T. 41 N.

WYW 140769

(TERMINATED)

WYW 142766

WYW 63650
30 29 28 27

WYW 59583 WYW 61641

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

Conventional Oil & Gas Wells

CBM Wells

LEGEND
Plugged and Abandoned Permitted But Not Yet Drilled Shut In Spudded Temporarily Abandoned Producing WYW 67022

NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2 Area Removed Under Alternative 3 Existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Federal Coal Leases Federal Oil and Gas Lease Number Oil and Gas Ownership Boundaries

See Table 3-10 for Lessees of Record

2500

5000

10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 3-15. Oil and Gas Ownership on the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-63

3.0 Affected Environment
R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

25 26

Small Road

T. 44 N. T. 43 N.
3

PRIVATE

T. 44 N. T. 43 N.

LEGEND
Little Thunder LBA Tract as Applied for Existing Black Thunder Mine Federal Coal Leases Area Added Under Alternatives 2 & 3 North Tract Under Alternative 3

WYW 127786

WYW 0196946

State Highway 450

WYW 11 036006

WYW 0263451

WYW 0263451A

WYW 9923A

South Tract Under Alternative 3 WYW Federal Oil and Gas Lease Number 143063 Oil and Gas Ownership Boundaries Conventional Oil & Gas Wells

Hilight Road

PRIVATE

WYW 140772

PRIVATE
13

CBM Wells Plugged and Abandoned Permitted But Not Yet Drilled Shut In Spudded Temporarily Abandoned Producing

WYW 143063

See Table 3-11 for Lessees of Record WYW 140940
27 BNSF + UP Double Tracks 26 25 30

PRIVATE

31
0 2500 5000 10000

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 3-16. Oil and Gas Ownership on the Little Thunder LBA Tract.

3-64

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment
R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
22 23 24 19 20 21 22

Hilight Road

WYW 130556

T. 42 N.
3 2

WYW 130024

T. 43 N.

WYW 129487

31 36

T. 43 N. T. 42 N.

WYW 143948
1

WYW 144471 PRIVATE
6

WYW 116352

PRIVATE

NOT 4 POSTED

Reno Road

WYW 147833

PRIVATE
10 11 12 7

WYW 143932
8

WYW 140760
9

WYW 27703
10

WYW 8396

WYW 042736C

WYW 141022

Antelope Road

15
BNSF + UP Double Tracks

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

Conventional Oil & Gas Wells

CBM Wells

LEGEND
Plugged and Abandoned Permitted But Not Yet Drilled

West Roundup LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2 Area Added Under Alternative 3 Existing North Rochelle Mine Federal Coal Leases North Rochelle Mine Federal Coal Lease WYW-127221 Modification Area WYW 27703 Federal Oil and Gas Lease Number Oil and Gas Ownership Boundaries

See Table 3-12 for Lessees of Record

Shut In Spudded Temporarily Abandoned Producing

2500

5000

10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 3-17. Oil and Gas Ownership on the West Roundup LBA Tract.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-65

3.0 Affected Environment
R. 71 W.
17 16 15 14
Antelo pe Ro ad

WYW 138119

WYW 141206

WYW 142771
Campbell County Converse County 30

WYW 138120

PRIVATE WYW 142771

WYW 140769

WYW 136942
27 26

BN SF &

Double Tracks

WYW 124831
31

WYW 127785
32

PRIVATE
33

T. 41 N. T. 40 N.

WYW 124831 WYW 136942

T. 41 N.

WYW 136674
6 5

WYW 141204
4

WYW 136674
3 2

WYW 140768

WYW 136674

WYW 141204

WYW 143504 WYW 142769

T. 40 N.

WYW 136674
8 9 10 11

P &U SF s BN Track le Trip

Co un ty R oa (a. d3 k.a 7 .A nte l ope R oad)

See Table 3-13 for Lessees of Record

59 way High State

R. 71 W.

Conventional Oil & Gas Wells

CBM Wells

LEGEND
Plugged and Abandoned Permitted But Not Yet Drilled Shut In Spudded Temporarily Abandoned Producing West Antelope LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2 Area Removed Under Alternative 3 Existing Antelope Mine Federal Coal Leases WYW 136942 Federal Oil and Gas Lease Number Oil and Gas Ownership Boundaries

2500

5000

10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 3-18. Oil and Gas Ownership on the West Antelope LBA Tract.

3-66

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment Table 3-10. NARO North and South LBA Tracts Oil and Gas Ownership.
For the following locations, both the oil and gas rights (including CBM) and coal rights are owned by the federal government. Location T.42N., R.70W. Section 28 Lots 9,10 Section 28 Lots 11-14 Section 28 Lots 15, 16 Section 29 Lots 11-14 Section 29 Lots 6-10, 15,16 Section 29 Lot 5 Section 30 Lot 11 Section 30 Lot 12 Section 30 Lots 13,14 Section 30 Lots 15-20 T.42N., R.71W. Section 25 Lots 5, 9-15 Section 25 Lot 6 Section 25 Lots 7, 8 Lease Number WYW 143496 WYW 127399 WYW 125978 WYW 049833 WYW 0 100872 WYW 0 100872 A Lessees of Record Powder River Coal Co. Powder River Coal Co. Expired 12/31/2001 Powder River Coal Co. Key Production Co. Inc. Powder River Coal Co. Damson Oil Corp. Powder River Coal Co. IL Stalls R. Lee Tucker Powder River Coal Co. Powder River Coal Co. Maurice W. Brown

WYW 075680 WYW 089160 WYW 067022

WYW 067220 A

Powder River Coal Co. Not Posted

WYW 043652

Section 26 Lots 7, 8 Section 35 Lots 9, 10, 15, 16

WYW 0 185974 B

WYW 067220 C

Section 35 Lots 1, 2, 7, 8

WYW 147135

NPC Inc. Powder River Coal Co. Citadel Energy Inc Key Production Co. Inc Powder River Coal Co. Ocean Energy Inc. Reunion Energy Co. Axel Johnson Expl. Black Hills Expl. & Prod. Co. D.L. Cook Jerry D. Ladd Meyer Oil Co. Inc Whiting Petro. Corp Dale O Wright Bill Barrett Corp.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-67

3.0 Affected Environment Table 3-10. NARO North and South LBA Tracts Oil and Gas Ownership (Continued).
For the following locations, both the oil and gas rights (including CBM) and coal rights are owned by the federal government. Location T.41N., R.70W. Section 19 Lots 6-11, 13, 14, 19, 20 Section 19 Lots 15-18 Section 20 Lots 5-16 Section 29 Lots 1-12 Section 21 Lots 5, 12, 13 Section 28 Lots 3-6 Section 28 Lot 11, NESW Lease Number Lessees of Record Not Posted WYW 136937 Powder River Coal Co.

WYW 063650

Citation 1998 Investment LP

WYW 059583

Section 30 Lot 5 Section 30 Lots 6, 11, 12 Section 30 Lots 7-10 T.41N., R.71W. Section 23 Lots 1,9 Section 23 Lot 8 Section 24 Lot 12 Section 24 Lots 1-10, 15, 16 Section 24 Lots 11, 13, 14 Section 25 Lots 1-4 Section 25 Lots 9, 10, 12

WYW 061641

DNR Oil & Gas Inc. GPM Inc. Jetta Production Co. Inc. JPC LLC Providence Energy Corp. Powder River Coal Co. DNR Oil & Gas Inc. Not Posted

WYW142766

Terminated

WYW 141206 WYW 141205

Williams Prod. RMT Co. Williams Prod. RMT Co.

WYW 143508 WYW 138118 WYW 140769 WYW 136942

Lance Oil & Gas Co. Inc. Williams Prod. RMT Co. Redstone Resources Inc. Yates Petroleum Corp Lance Oil & Gas Co. Inc. Williams Prod. RMT Co. Gregor Klurfeld

Note: For the rest of the LBA tract, the oil and gas rights (including CBM) are privately owned, and the coal rights are federally owned.

3-68

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment Table 3-11. Little Thunder LBA Tract Oil and Gas Ownership.
For the following locations, both the oil and gas rights (including CBM) and coal rights are owned by the federal government. Location T.43N., R.71W. Section 1 Lot 16 Section 2 Lots 5, 6, 11-14, 19, 20 Section 11 Lots 3-6, 11-14 Lease Number WYW 0 196946 Lessees of Record Chisholm Trail Ventures LP M&K Oil Co. Inc Questar Expl. & Prod. Co. John P. Caviuolo G F Collins Jr Trust NPC Inc. Chisholm Trail Ventures LP Robert W. Deputy Thomas H. Farley Jr Kerr McGee Corp Key Production Co. Inc Questar Expl. & Prod. Co R B C Expl. Co Ryder Stilwell Oil Diana L. Stadelman Joseph R. Stadelman WP Properties Corp M&K Oil Co Inc Chisholm Trail Ventures LP Key Production Co. In M&K Oil Co. Inc Questar Expl. & Prod. Co. M&K Oil Co. Inc. Western Gas Resources Inc. CH4 Energy LLC Western Gas Resources Inc Williams Prod. RMT Co. Western Gas Resources Inc.

WYW 127786 WYW 036006

Section 12 Lots 2-8, 11-14 Section 12 Lot 15

WYW 0 263451 WYW 009923 A

Section 12 Lots 9,10,16 Section 14 Lots 2, 6, 9, 14 Section 24 Lots 4, 5, 10-15 Section 25 Lots 1- 8 Note:

WYW 0 263451 A WYW 140772 WYW 143063

WYW 140940

For the rest of the LBA tract, the oil and gas rights (including CBM) are privately owned, and the coal rights are federally owned.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-69

3.0 Affected Environment Table 3-12. West Roundup LBA Tract Oil and Gas Ownership.
For the following locations, both the oil and gas rights (including CBM) are owned by the federal government Location T.42N., R.70W. Section 4 Lots 17,18 Section 6 Lots 8, 9, 15, 16, 23 Section 6 Lot 22 Section 7 Lots 13, 14 Section 8 Lots 1-8 Section 8 Lots 9-12, 16 Section 9 Lots 3-6 Section 9 Lots 11-14 Section 9 Lots 1, 2, 7, 8 T.43N., R.70W. Section 31 Lots 13, 20 Section 31 Lots 14, 19 Section 31 Lots 15-18 T.42N., R.71W. Section 1 WYW 143940 Lance Oil & Gas Co. Inc Lots 7-10 Williams Prod. RMT Co. Section 1 WYW 147833 Lance Oil & Gas Co. Inc Lot 15 Williams Prod. RMT Co. Note: For the rest of the LBA Tract, the oil and gas rights (including CBM) are privately owned and the coal rights are federally owned. Lease Number Lessees of Record Not Posted WYW 144471 WYW 116352 WYW 008396 WYW 143932 WYW 042736 C WYW 140760 Lance Oil & Gas Co., Inc. Williams Prod. RMT Co. Expired Myco Industries Inc. Sacramento Partners LP Williams Prod. RMT Co. Lance Oil & Gas Co., Inc. Bill Barrett Corp. Abo. Petr. Corp. Myco Industries Inc. Yates Drilling Co. Yates Petroleum Co. Julian C. Tucker Clayton Conrad Bill Barrett Corp. George P. Jouflas Westport Oil & Gas Co, Inc. Westport Oil & Gas Co, Inc. Westport Oil & Gas Co. Inc

WYW 141022 WYW 027703

WYW 129487 WYW 130024 WYW 130556

3-70

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment Table 3-13. West Antelope LBA Tract Oil and Gas Ownership.
For the following locations, both the oil and gas rights (including CBM) and coal rights are owned by the federal government. Location T.40N., R.71W. Section 3 Lots 15-18 Section 4 Lots 7-10, 13, 14, 19, 20 Section 4 Lots 5, 6, 11, 12, 15-18 Section 5 Lots 5-7, 10-12, 15 Section 9 Lot 1 Section 5 Lots 13, 14, 19, 20 Section 10 Lots 3, 4 T.41N., R.71W. Section 22 Lot 2 Section 22 Lot 16 Section 27 Lots 6-11 Section 32 Lots 15, 16 Section 33 Lots 13-16 Section 28 Lots 1, 2, 7-10, 15, 16 Section 28 Lots 3-6, 11-14 Section 29 Lots 1-4, 6-9, 13, 14 Section 32 Lots 2, 3, 6-11, 14 Section 33 Lots 1-3, 9-12 Lease Number WYW 143504 Lessees of Record Abo Petroleum Corp. Myco Industries Inc. Yates Drilling Co. Yates Petroleum Co. Swift Energy Co. Swift Energy Co.

WYW 141204 WYW 136674

WYW 140768 WYW 142769

Swift Energy Co. M.J. Harvey Jr.

WYW 141206 WYW 138119 WYW 136942

Williams Prod. RMT Co. Bowers Oil & Gas Inc. Spring Creek Ranch Gregor Klurfeld

WYW 140769 WYW 138120 WYW 142771 WYW 127785 WYW 124831

Lance Oil & Gas Co. Inc. Williams Prod. RMT Co Bowers Oil & Gas Inc. Spring Creek Ranch Lance Oil & Gas Co. Inc. Williams Prod. RMT Co Fred L. Engle

Note:

Abo Petroleum Co. Key Production Co. Myco Industries Yates Drilling Co Yates Petroleum Co. For the rest of the LBA Tract, the oil and gas rights (including CBM) are privately owned and the coal rights are federally owned.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-71

3.0 Affected Environment Forty-two CBM wells are currently producing and three are shut-in within the lands encompassed by the Little Thunder LBA Tract as proposed and the lands added under BLM’s alternatives. The WOGCC has approved a well spacing pattern of one well per 80 acres for development of CBM resources in the PRB. Most of the available 80-acre spacing units within the Little Thunder LBA Tract and the lands added under the Action Alternatives have been drilled and are producing (Figure 3-16). WOGCC records from September 17, 2003 indicates that the reported cumulative production from each of these wells through July 2003 ranged from approximately 6,000 MCF to 315,000 MCF gas. Drilling in the West Roundup and NARO North LBA Tracts to date has only occurred in the western portion of these tracts, and the wells are shown as producing (Figures 3-15 and 3-17). Due to the limited production history, estimates of well life, reserves, or economics cannot be reliably forecasted in most cases. Provisional production decline curves prepared for some of the wells with the lengthiest production histories suggest that the expected life for wells located on or near the SPRB LBA tracts might range from one to five years. These wells demonstrate that CBM can be produced in areas that have been affected by mining-related groundwater drawdown. Certain ancillary facilities are needed to support oil and gas production. These support facilities may include well access roads, well pads, production equipment at the wellhead 3-72 (which may be located on the surface and/or underground), well production casing (which extends from the surface to the zone of production), underground pipelines (which gather the oil, gas, and/or water produced by the individual wells and carry it to a larger transmission pipeline or collection facility), facilities for treating, discharging, disposing of, containing, or injecting produced water, central metering facilities, electrical power utilities, gas compressor stations, and highpressure transmission pipelines for delivering the gas to market. Currently, some of these oil and gas production facilities, particularly oil and gas pipelines, exist on the LBA tracts, as discussed in Section 3.17 of this EIS. Additional support facilities will continue to be constructed on the LBA tracts as new conventional oil and gas and CBM wells are drilled and completed. Coal mining is a dominant land use within the General Analysis Area. The North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, Antelope, and Jacobs Ranch Mines form a group of contiguous or nearly contiguous active surface coal mines located in southern Campbell and northern Converse Counties (Figure 3-1). Coal production at these five mines increased by 217 percent between 1990 and 2002 (from approximately 70 million tons in 1990 to over 222 million tons in 2002). Since 1992, nine maintenance coal leases have been sold within this group and the five LBA tracts being evaluated in this EIS are in this group of mines (Tables 1-1 and 1-2). South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment Neither Campbell nor Converse Counties have applicable countywide land use plans, nor do the proposed lease areas have designated zoning classifications. The City of Gillette/Campbell County Comprehensive Planning Program (City of Gillette 1978) provides general land use goals and policies for state and federal coal leases in the county. The Converse County Land Use Plan (Converse County 1978) does not specifically address coal leasing. Big game hunting is the principal recreational land use within the General Analysis Area, and pronghorn, mule deer, white-tailed deer, and elk are present within the area. On private lands, hunting is allowed only with landowner permission. Land ownership within the PRB is largely private (approximately 80 percent), with some private landowners permitting sportsmen to cross and/or hunt on their land. There has been a trend over the past two decades towards a substantial reduction in private lands that are open and reasonably available for hunting. Access fees continue to rise and many resident hunters feel these access fees are unreasonable. This trend has created problems for the WGFD in their attempt to distribute and control harvest at optimal levels, as well as for sportsmen who desire access to these animals (WGFD 1996). In general, publicly owned lands are open to hunting if legal access is available. Due to safety concerns, however, public surface lands contained within an active mining South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS area are often closed to the public, further limiting recreational use. There are public surface lands included within the NARO North LBA Tract, the Little Thunder LBA Tract, and the West Roundup LBA Tract. There are no public surface lands included in the NARO South or West Antelope LBA Tracts. (Figures 3-11 through 3-14) Specific details regarding big game herd management objectives within and near the General Analysis Area are contained in the Casper and Sheridan Region Annual Big Game Herd Unit Reports (WGFD 2000, 2002). The WGFD classifies the entire General Analysis Area as yearlong and winter/yearlong habitat for antelope. The extreme southern portion of the General Analysis Area is within severe winter range for antelope. All of the LBA tract configurations are classified as yearlong and/or winter/yearlong antelope habitat. No crucial or critical pronghorn habitat is recognized by the WGFD in this area. The proposed lease areas are within pronghorn antelope Hunt Areas 24 and 27, which contain the Hilight and Cheyenne River Herd Units, respectively. In post-season 2002, the population of the Hilight Herd Unit was estimated to be approximately 11,000 animals, which is at the WGFD objective of 11,000. The post-season 2002 population of the Cheyenne River Herd Unit was estimated to be approximately 34,146 animals with a population objective of 38,000 antelope (WFGD 2002).

3-73

3.0 Affected Environment Historical problems associated with the management of the Hilight Herd Unit include hunter access, over harvest on limited public lands, and quantifying landowner preferences and desires. Prior to 1997, the herd population was fairly stable and near the objective of 11,000 antelope. Losses from severe winters, poor production rates, and disease subsequently decreased the population, but it has recently recovered and begun to stabilize near the objective level. Hunt Area 24 contains mostly privately owned surface lands with poor hunter access to limited publically owned lands; therefore, the number of antelope will steadily increase. As the population exceeds objective levels, more licenses will be needed and these may be difficult to sell in this mostly private land area. Nearly all landowners charge access fees for hunting and private land access is based on the desires and perceptions of the landowners. A series of harsh winter conditions and correspondingly poor reproduction rates are believed to be the main reasons that population of the Cheyenne River Herd Unit is under objective. In an effort to increase the population of this herd, the WGFD will decrease the availability of hunting licenses in areas where winters have been particularly hard and where the antelope population has been low for several years. Management direction will be to decrease female harvest slightly to compensate for severe winters. The WGFD has classified the entire General Analysis Area as either out of the normal mule deer use range or yearlong range, with some winter/yearlong range in the extreme southern portion of the area. Crucial or critical mule deer habitat does not occur within the General Analysis Area. The proposed lease areas are located within mule deer Hunt Areas 10 and 21, part of the Thunder Basin Mule Deer Herd Unit, which also includes Hunt Areas 7, 8, 9, and 11. The Thunder Basin Herd Unit encompasses 3,642 square miles, of this, 71 percent is privately owned. Access fees are common, resulting in heavy hunting pressure on accessible public lands, particularly in recent years. Between 1983 and 2001, the post-season objective for this mule deer herd was 13,000, but the population was consistently above that objective. The 2000 post-season population was estimated at 21,742, which was 67 percent above the objective. To address this concern, WGFD increased the objective to 20,000 head in December 2001. Forage production in 2000 was below normal due to drought conditions, and a severe winter in 2000-2001 resulted in increased mortality and poor production. Consequently, the 2001 post-season herd population dropped to about 18,000. Drought conditions continued more significantly through 2002, but a mild 2001-2002 winter moderated the negative drought effects. In conjunction with a reduced harvest in 2002, the post-season population was being maintained at roughly 18,000 animals, 10 percent below the objective. It is likely that drought South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-74

3.0 Affected Environment conditions will continue to suppress productivity and the Thunder Basin Mule Deer Herd Unit population will remain stable or decrease slightly in 2003. The Rochelle Hills Elk Herd resides in the Rochelle Hills that border the eastern edge of the General Analysis Area. The LBA tracts within the General Analysis Area are within Elk Hunt Areas 113 and 123; however, very limited use of these lands by elk occurs. The herd favors the ponderosa pine/juniper woodlands, savanna, and steeper terrain habitat offered by the Rochelle Hills. As more lands are reclaimed from coal mining adjacent to the Rochelle Hills, elk are shifting their winter use to those sites. Such lands typically offer excellent winter grass supplies, especially during more severe winters when other sites are less accessible. Presently, elk are regularly using the reclaimed mined lands of the Jacobs Ranch, Black Thunder, and North Rochelle Mines. More such habitat should become available over the next several years. Much of the occupied range of this herd is located on the TBNG, which is administered by the USDA-FS. While hunting in Areas 113 and 123 has been permitted every two or three years, Area 126, which is south of the General Analysis Area, has had an annual hunting season. Bull quality is very good for this herd, and many taken have scored in the record books. Owing to their habituation to humans, many people enjoy these elk along Highway 450 and within accessible USDA-FS land; thus, they provide nonconsumptive recreational South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS use opportunities. These elk are not causing significant damage to private lands and most area landowners as well as hunters generally desire a high quality herd. Elk have been observed dispersing from the designated herd boundary, possibly due to increasing population density and habitat limitations. White-tailed deer are not managed separately by WGFD, but are included with mule deer as part of the Thunder Basin Herd Unit. Whitetailed deer are seldom observed within the General Analysis Area due to their preference for riparian woodlands and irrigated agricultural lands. WGFD classifies the entire General Analysis Area, with the exception of a narrow corridor along Antelope Creek, as out of normal white-tailed deer use range. The narrow corridor along Antelope Creek is classified as yearlong range. Under natural conditions, aquatic habitat is very limited by the ephemeral nature of surface waters in the General Analysis Area; therefore, public fishing opportunities are very limited. The lack of deep-water habitat and extensive and persistent water sources limits the presence and diversity of fish and other aquatic species. There are no fisheries on any of the LBA tracts. Little Thunder Creek supports channel catfish and a variety of nongame fish downstream of the Little Thunder LBA Tract. Little Thunder Reservoir, which is located on Little Thunder Creek upstream of the Little Thunder LBA Tract in Section 22, T.43N., R.71W., has historically maintained and currently 3-75

3.0 Affected Environment maintains both game and non-game fisheries. 3.12 Cultural Resources Cultural resources, which are protected under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, are nonrenewable remains of past human activity. The PRB, including the General Analysis Area, appears to have been inhabited by aboriginal hunting and gathering people for more than 11,000 years. Throughout the prehistoric past, the area was used by highly mobile hunters and gatherers who exploited a wide variety of resources. Several thousand cultural sites have been recorded within the PRB. The general chronology for aboriginal occupation (dated as years before present [B.P.]) is: • • • • Paleoindian period (11,0007,500 years B.P.) Archaic period (7,500-1,800 years B.P.) Prehistoric period (1,800-400 years B.P.) Historic period (200-120 years B.P.) including the gathering of plant resources. This lifeway continued to the late Prehistoric period, which is marked by a technological change from dart projectiles to the bow and arrow and by the appearance of ceramics. During the Archaic and late Prehistoric periods, the PRB was occupied by small bands of hunters and gatherers whose movements were determined to a large degree by seasonal and environmental changes that influenced the occurrence of subsistence resources (BLM 1979). Protohistoric and early Historic sites are found in the PRB, including the General Analysis Area. This period is characterized by rare historic trade goods, sites, and routes associated with early trappers and military expeditions, and early ranching attempts that date to the 1880s. A few small coal mining sites also exist. Historic sites within the General Analysis Area have been recorded as debris scatters representing sheepherder camps and related activities. No historic trails are known or have been recorded within the General Analysis Area, although the Bozeman Trail crosses the southwestern portion of the PRB. A Class III cultural resources survey is a professionally conducted, intensive and comprehensive inventory of a target area, designed to locate all cultural properties which have surface and exposed profile indications. The goal of the survey is to locate and evaluate for the NRHP all cultural resources 50 years and older within the study area. Cultural South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

The Paleoindian period includes a series of cultural complexes identified by distinctive large projectile points (spear points) often associated with the remains of large, now extinct mammals (mammoth, bison, camel, etc.). The Archaic period is characterized by a range of smaller side-notched, stemmed or cornernotched projectile points and by more generalized subsistence pursuits 3-76

3.0 Affected Environment properties are recorded and sufficient information collected on them to allow evaluation for possible inclusion in the NRHP. That determination is made by the managing federal agency in consultation with SHPO. Consultation with SHPO must be completed prior to approval of the MLA mining plan. Once a Class III survey is completed, site-specific testing or limited excavation is utilized, if necessary, to gather additional data which will: 1) determine the final evaluation status of a site and/or 2) form the basis of additional work that will be conducted during implementation of a treatment plan if the site is eligible for the NRHP. A treatment plan is then developed for those sites that are eligible for the NRHP and are within the area of potential effect. Treatment plans are implemented prior to mining and can include such mitigative measures as avoidance (if possible), large scale excavation, complete recording, Historical American Building Survey/Historic American Engineering Record documentation, archival research, and other acceptable scientific practices. Data recovery plans are required for those sites recommended as eligible for the NRHP following testing and consultation with SHPO. Until consultation has occurred and agreement regarding NRHP eligibility has been reached, all sites recommended as eligible or undetermined eligibility must be protected from disturbance. Full consultation with SHPO will be South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS completed prior to approval of the MLA mining plans. Those sites determined to be unevaluated or eligible for the NRHP through consultation would received further protection or treatment. Numerous Class I (survey records review) and Class III cultural resource surveys associated with oil field development and surface mining operations have been conducted in the General Analysis Area. PRCC, TBCC, TCC, and ACC all contracted with GCM Services, Inc. of Butte, Montana to perform Class III and Class I surveys of their respective LBA study areas in 1999 and 2001. Each of the LBA study areas is comprised of the LBA tract as applied for, BLM’s proposed alternative tract configurations, and the applicant mine’s anticipated permit amendment study area. These areas include all anticipated areas of disturbance assuming the coal is mined by the existing adjacent mines. The NARO North and South LBA study area has been entirely surveyed for cultural resources at a Class III level. A total of 194 cultural sites were documented in the study area, of which 79 sites are located within the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts and quarter mile disturbance buffers. These sites are classified as prehistoric (59 sites), historic (17 sites), multi-component (one site), or undetermined (two sites). Four prehistoric sites have been recommended as eligible for the NRHP by the cultural site recorder.

3-77

3.0 Affected Environment The Little Thunder LBA study area has been entirely surveyed for cultural resources at a Class III level. A total of 44 archaeological sites and 16 isolated finds have been documented in the Little Thunder LBA study area. These sites are classified as prehistoric (25 sites), historic (11 sites), or multicomponent (eight sites). All of these sites are listed as not eligible for the NRHP by SHPO or were recommended as not eligible by the cultural site recorder. No further work with cultural resources has been recommended in this study area. The entire West Roundup LBA study area has been surveyed for cultural resources at a Class III level. A total of 31 archaeological sites have been recorded and documented in the West Roundup LBA study area. These sites are classified as prehistoric (14 sites), historic (11 sites), or multicomponent (six sites). One historic and 17 prehistoric isolated finds were also recorded. None of the sites have been recommended by the cultural site recorders or determined by an agency to be eligible for the NRHP, and no further work is recommended. The West Antelope LBA study area has been entirely surveyed for cultural resources at a Class III level. From these cultural inventories, 53 archaeological sites have been recorded and documented in the West Antelope LBA study area. These sites are classified as prehistoric (42 sites), historic (10 sites), or multicomponent (one site). One historic and 12 prehistoric isolated finds were also recorded. Three prehistoric 3-78 campsites, as well as one site containing prehistoric stone rings, are recommended as eligible for the NRHP by their cultural site recorder. An additional four eligible sites, which are within or adjacent to the existing Antelope Mine’s permit area, were previously recorded and have been mitigated to prevent adverse effects to the site’s cultural resources. 3.13 Native American Consultation Native American heritage sites can be classified as prehistoric or historic. Some may be presently in use as offering, fasting, or vision quest sites. Other sites of cultural interest and importance may include rock art, stone circles, various rock features, fortifications or battle sites, burials, and locations that are sacred or part of the oral history and heritage but have no man-made features. No Native American heritage, special interest, or sacred sites have been formally identified and recorded to date within the General Analysis Area. However, the geographic position of the General Analysis Area between mountains considered sacred by various Native American cultures (the Big Horn Mountains to the west, the Black Hills to the east, and Devils Tower to the north) creates the possibility that existing locations may have special religious or sacred significance to Native American groups. Tribes that have been identified as potentially having concerns about actions in the PRB include the Crow, Northern Cheyenne, Shoshone, South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment Arapaho, Oglala Lakota, Rosebud Sioux, Flandreau Santee Sioux, Santee Sioux, Crow Creek Sioux, Lower Brule Sioux, Standing Rock Sioux, and Cheyenne River Sioux. These tribal governments and representatives have been sent copies of the EIS. They are also being provided with maps showing the location of each of the LBA tracts and more specific information about the known cultural sites on each of the tracts in this analysis. Their help is being requested in identifying potentially significant religious or cultural sites in the General Analysis Area before a leasing decision is made on each of the LBA tracts. Native American tribes were consulted at a general level in 19951996 as part of an effort to update the BLM Buffalo Resource Area RMP. Some of the Sioux tribes were consulted by BLM on coal leasing and mining activity in the PRB at briefings held in Rapid City, South Dakota in March 2002. 3.14 Paleontological Resources The formations exposed on the surface of the PRB are the sedimentary Eocene Wasatch and Paleocene Fort Union Formations, which are both known to contain fossil remains. Some intensive paleontological surveys have been conducted in the PRB. Vertebrate fossils that have been described from the Wasatch Formation include mammals such as early horses, tapiroids, condylarths, primates, insectivores, marsupials, creodonts, carnivores, and multituberculates; South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS reptiles such as crocodilians, alligators, lizards, and turtles; birds; eggs; amphibians; fish; plants; and non-marine invertebrates such as mollusks and ostrocods. The Fort Union Formation also contains fossils of plants, reptiles, fish, amphibians, and mammals. USDA-FS has developed a draft classification system which they have used in the revised Land and Resource Management Plan for the Thunder Basin National Grassland (USDA-FS 2001b) to classify geological units according to the probability of them yielding paleontological resources that are of concern to land managers. The classification is based largely on how likely a geologic unit is to produce scientifically significant fossils. The fossil yield potential classes are described below. Class 1 - Igneous and metamorphic (volcanic ashes are excluded from this category) geologic units that are not likely to contain recognizable fossil remains. Class 2 - Sedimentary geologic units that are not likely to contain vertebrate fossils or scientifically significant nonvertebrate fossils. Class 3 - Fossilferous sedimentary geologic units whose fossil content varies in significance, abundance, and predictable occurrence. Also sedimentary units of unknown fossil potential. Class 4 - Class 4 geologic units are Class 5 units (see below) that have 3-79

3.0 Affected Environment lowered risks of human-caused adverse impacts and/or lowered risk of natural degradation. Class 5 - Fossilferous geologic units that regularly and predictably produce vertebrate fossils and/or scientifically significant nonvertebrate (plant and invertebrate) fossils, and that are at risk of natural degradation and/or human-caused adverse impacts. USDA-FS has determined that the USDA-FS lands included in the NARO North, Little Thunder, and West Roundup LBA Tracts are classified as Class 3 or Class 5. Paleontological resource examinations associated with surface mining operations have been conducted in conjunction with cultural resource inventories within the General Analysis Area. The inventories include pedestrian examinations for fossils along rock outcrops. A primary goal of the paleontological surveys that have been conducted is to locate concentrations of fossilized vertebrate skeletal material and evidence (trace fossils) such as those reported to occur in the Wasatch Formation within the PRB. If unique finds are located, qualified paleontologists are then assigned to assess and mitigate the site. The lack of well-exposed rock outcrops contributes to the lack of vertebrate fossils, as does the low preservation potential and conditions of deposition of the Wasatch and Fort Union Formations. In contrast to the lack of fossil animal material, fossil 3-80 plant material is common. The fossil plants inventoried are primarily leaves and fossilized wood. The leaves usually occur as lignitic impressions in sandstone and siltstone and as compact masses in shale. Leaves are the most abundant fossils found during paleontological surveys and are frequently encountered during mining operations. The fossilized wood often occurs near the top of a coal seam, in carbonaceous shale or within channel sandstone. Exposures of fossil logs are common, but usually very fragmentary. Like fossil leaves, fossil logs can be readily collected in the PRB. No significant or unique paleontological localities have been recorded on federal lands in the General Analysis Area. 3.15 Visual Resources Visual sensitivity levels are determined by people’s concern for what they see and the frequency of travel through an area. Landscapes within the General Analysis Area include rolling sagebrush and shortgrass prairie, which are common throughout the PRB. There are also areas of altered landscape, such as oil fields and coal mines. Existing surface mines form a nearly continuous band on the east side of Highway 59 from Gillette south about 50 miles. Other man-made intrusions include ranching activities (fences, homesteads, and livestock), oil and gas development (pumpjacks, pipeline ROWs, CBM well shelters, and CBM compressor stations), South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment transportation facilities (roads and railroads), and electrical power transmission lines. The natural scenic quality in the immediate lease area is fairly low because of the industrial nature of the adjacent existing mining operations. Visual resource management guidelines for BLM lands are to manage public lands for current VRM classifications and guidelines. The VRM system is the basic tool used by BLM to inventory and manage visual resources on public lands. The VRM classes constitute a spectrum ranging from Class I through Class V that provides for an increasing level of change within the characteristic landscape. BLM evaluated the visual resources on lands in the Buffalo and Platte River RMPs (BLM 1985a and 1985b) for management purposes. The inventoried lands were classified into VRM classes. In the General Analysis Area, which does not include any BLM-administered surface land, the predominant VRM class is IV. For lands classified as VRM Class IV, activities, such as mining, attract attention and are dominant features of the landscape in terms of scale. The USDA-FS has established visual quality objectives for the TBNG. In the General Analysis Area, facilities and landscape modifications may be visible but should be reasonably mitigated to blend and harmonize with natural features according to the revised Land and Resource Management Plan for the Thunder Basin National Grassland (USDA-FS South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS 2001b). The NARO North, Little Thunder, and West Roundup LBA Tracts include USDA-FS surface land. Current mine facilities and activity are visible from various public-use roads in the General Analysis Area, including Antelope Road, Mackey Road, Piney Canyon Road, Edwards/Reno Road, Hilight Road, State Highway 59, State Highway 450, and County Road 37. Mining activity and facilities are also visible from the LBA tracts. 3.16 Noise Existing noise sources in the General Analysis Area include coal mining activities, traffic on nearby state highways and county roads, rail traffic, wind, and CBM compressor stations. Noise originating from CBM development equipment (e.g., drilling rigs and construction vehicles) is apparent locally over the short term (i.e., 30 to 60 days) where well drilling and associated construction activities are occurring. However, if the drilling and construction sites are sufficiently widespread, then the elevated levels of noise generated from each site should not overlap in time or space with noise from other sites. Longterm noise from the ongoing development of CBM resources is associated with the new compressor stations. Studies of background noise levels at adjacent mines indicate that ambient sound levels generally are low, owing to the isolated nature of the area. Current noise levels in the proposed LBA tracts are estimated to be 40-60 3-81

3.0 Affected Environment dB(A), with the noise level increasing with proximity to active mining at adjacent mines. Mining activities are characterized by noise levels of 85-95 dB(A) at 50 ft from actual mining operations and activities (BLM 1992b). The unit of measure used to represent sound pressure levels (decibels) using the A-weighted scale is dB(A). It is a measure designed to simulate human hearing by placing less emphasis on lower frequency noise because the human ear does not perceive sounds at low frequency in the same manner as sounds at higher frequencies. Figure 3-19 presents noise levels associated with some commonly heard sounds. The nearest occupied dwellings to the five LBA tracts included in this analysis are: • one occupied dwelling is located at the west side and immediately adjacent to the southern edge of the NARO North LBA Tract; no occupied dwellings are closer than three miles from the NARO South LBA Tract; one occupied dwelling is located less than one mile from the western edge of the Little Thunder LBA Tract and the area added by Alternative 2; the Wilkinson homestead house is located just over three miles from the southern edge of the West Roundup LBA Tract, although it is property of PRCC and not occupied; one occupied dwelling is located approximately one mile from the western edge of the West Antelope LBA Tract. Figures 3-20 through 3-23 depict the locations of these residences with respect to the LBA tracts. 3.17 Transportation Facilities Within the General Analysis Area, the major north-south public transportation corridor is State Highway 59 in Campbell and Converse Counties, and the principal east-west transportation corridor is State Highway 450 in Campbell County. Other paved county roads, including the Edwards Road, Reno Road, and Antelope Road in Campbell County and County Road 37 in Converse County, provide public and private access within the General Analysis Area. There are numerous other improved and unimproved local roads and accesses in the area for both public and private use. The General Analysis Area presently has one major railroad. The GilletteDouglas rail spur, used jointly by BNSF & UP, runs north-south through the area with spur lines connecting the railroad with the applicant mines for transporting coal that originates in the General Analysis Area. The DM&E Railroad is presently proposing expansion into Wyoming. Although the specific route is still under consideration, the tracks would terminate at the coal mines located in the General Analysis Area. There are numerous oil and gas pipelines, power lines, telephone lines, and ROWs in the General Analysis Area. Figures 3-20 through 3-23 depict the current

• •

•

3-82

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment

HOW IT FEELS

EQUIVALENT SOUNDS
50 hp siren (100 ft) Jet engine (75 ft) Turbo-fan jet at takeoff power (100ft) Scraper-loader Jet fly over (1000 ft) Noisy newspaper press Air compressor (20 ft) Power lawnmower Steady flow of freeway trafic 10-HP outboard motor Automatic dishwasher Vacuum cleaner Window air conditioner outside at 2 ft. Window air conditioner in room Occasional private auto at 100 ft. Quiet home during evening Bird calls Library Soft whisper 5 ft.

DECIBELS

EQUIVALENT SOUNDS
Jackhammer

HOW IT SOUNDS

Near permanent damage level from short exposures Pain to ears Danger to hearing

130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20

Chainsaw Fire cracker (15 ft.) Rock and roll band Unmuffled motor bike (2-3 ft.) Car horn Unmuffled cycle (25 ft.) Garbage trucks and city buses Diesel truck (25 ft.) Garbage disposal Food blender Muffled jet ski (50 ft.) Passenger car 65 mph (25 ft) Busy downtown area

135 dB(A) Approx. 64 times as loud as 75dB(A) 125 dB(A) Approx. 32 times as loud as 75dB(A) 115 dB(A) Approx. 16 times as loud as 75dB(A) 105 dB(A) Approx. 8 times as loud as 75dB(A) 95 dB(A) Approx. 4 times as loud as 75dB(A) 85 dB(A) Approx. 2 times as loud as 75dB(A) 75dB(A)

Uncomfortably loud

Discomfort threshold Very loud Conversation stops

Intolerable for phone use Extra auditory physiological effects

Quiet Sleep interference

Normal conversation

55 dB(A) Approx. 1/4 as loud as 75dB(A) 45 dB(A) Approx. 1/8 as loud as 75dB(A) 35 dB(A) Approx. 1/16 as loud as 75dB(A)

Very quiet

In a quiet house at midnight

Leaves rustling

Adapted From ABC's of Our Noise Codes published by Citizens Against Noise, Honolulu, Hawaii

Figure 3-19. Relationship Between A-Scale Decibel Readings and Sounds of Daily Life.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-83

3.0 Affected Environment
4
Reno Road

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
Reno Road 10

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.
7 8 9

11
Antelope Road

NARO NORTH
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21

Payne Road

Mackey Road
30 29 28 27

Piney Canyon (Mackey) Road

T. 42 N. T. 41 N.

Residence

12
Antelo d pe Roa

10 9 North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Access

26 Campbell County Converse County

Road)

Dyno Nobel, Inc. Facilities

30 31

T. 41 34 N. T. 40 3 N.

NARO SOUTH
32 33
Irw in

Co u (a. nty k.a Ro . A ad nte 37 lop e

34
Road

6 R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.

T. 41 N. T. 4 40 N.

LEGEND
NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2 Area Removed Under Alternative 3 Existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Federal Coal Leases
0 5000 10000 20000

BNSF & UP Rail Line Conventional Oil and Gas Pipeline

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 3-20. Transportation Facilities Within and Adjacent to the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts.

3-84

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment
R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
Hilight Road

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.
20 21 22 23 24 19

Jacobs Road

Small Road

T. 44 N. T. 43 N.

4
State Highway 450

Residence 9

24
Sta te H ighw ay 4 50

T. 43 32 N. T. 42 5 N.

Hilight Road

Cre ek

Ro ad

T. 43 N. T. 42 N.

3
Edwards Road

2
Reno Road

ol ho Sc

Residence
8 9 10 11
Antelope Road

14 13 18 17 16 15
Reno Road

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.

LEGEND
Existing Black Thunder Mine Federal Coal Leases BNSF & UP Rail Line Proposed DM & E Rail Line Conventional Oil and Gas Pipeline Little Thunder LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternatives 2 & 3 North Tract Under Alternative 3 South Tract Under Alternative 3

5000

10000

20000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 3-21. Transportation Facilities Within and Adjacent to the Little Thunder LBA Tract.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-85

3.0 Affected Environment
3 State Hwy 450 2

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
1 6

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.
1 6

Stat eH ighw ay 4 50 25 30

T. 43 N. T. 42 N.

Hilight Road

Ro ad

T.
34 35 36 31 32 33 43

Cre ek

2
Reno Road

ol ho Sc

Edwards Road

T. 42 N.

11
Antelope Road

Residence 7

14
Reno Road

Payne Road

Piney Canyon (Mackey) Road

T. 42 N. T. 41 N.

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.

LEGEND
Existing North Rochelle Mine Federal Coal Leases BNSF & UP Rail Line Proposed DM & E Rail Line Conventional Oil and Gas Pipeline
0 5000 10000 20000

West Roundup LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2 Area Added Under Alternative 3 North Rochelle Mine Federal Coal Lease WYW-127221 Modification Area

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 3-22. Transportation Facilities Within and Adjacent to the West Roundup LBA Tract.

3-86

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment
T. 42 35 N. T. 41 2 N. R. 72 W. R. 71 W.
36 31
ay 59 Highw State

Antelope Road

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
36 31

T. 42 N. T. 41 N.

North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Access
14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15

Dyno Nobel, Inc. Facilities
Campbell County Converse County 25 26 30 29 28 30 27 26 25 29 28 27

T. 41 35 N. T. 40 N.
2

33 32

Irwin Road

T. 41 N. T. 40 N.

School Bus Stop
14 13 Residence 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15

37 oad ad) ty R Ro oun lope C te . An .a (a.k

9 ay 5 ighw e H Stat

R. 72 W. R. 71 W.

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

LEGEND
West Antelope LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2 Area Removed Under Alternative 3 Existing Antelope Mine Federal Coal Leases BNSF & UP Rail Line Conventional Oil and Gas Pipeline

5000

10000

20000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 3-23. Transportation Facilities Within and Adjacent to the West Antelope LBA Tract.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-87

3.0 Affected Environment transportation facilities in the LBA tracts included in this EIS. 3.18 Socioeconomics The social and economic study area for the proposed project involves primarily Campbell County and the cities of Gillette and Wright; however, it also includes the city of Douglas in Converse County. The communities of Gillette and Douglas would most likely attract the majority of any new residents due to their current population levels and the availability of services and shopping amenities. 3.18.1 Population According to 2000 census data, Campbell County had a population of 33,698, with Gillette accounting for 19,646 of the county’s residents and Wright accounting for 1,347. Between 1990 and 2000, Gillette grew by 2,011 persons, averaging 1.1 percent per year. Wright had an average growth rate of 0.9 percent during this time period (U.S. Department of Commerce 1990 and 2000). The estimated July 2002 Campbell County population was 36,110, which represents a greater than three percent annual growth rate in recent years and makes Campbell County the fastest growing county in the state (Wyoming Department of Administration and Information 2003a). Converse County’s population in 2000 was 12,052, with 5,288 of the county’s residents living in Douglas. Between 1990 and 2000, Douglas grew by 212 persons, an average 3-88 increase of 0.4 percent per year. The July 2002 estimated population of Converse County was 12,433, indicating a recent annual growth rate of 1.4 percent since the April 2000 census. CBM-spurred population growth is occurring in both Gillette and Douglas. The current CBM boom is contributing to low housing vacancy and a tight labor market. To date, however, enrollment in Gillette-area schools has not increased as a result of CBM development due to a mobile, relatively young work force (Mathes 2002). 3.18.2 Local Economy Coal production, as reported by the Wyoming State Inspector of Mines, showed the State’s coal mines set a new yearly production record of 373.2 million tons in 2002. This was an increase of 1.2 percent over the 368.9 million tons produced in 2001. Campbell County coal production (12 active mines in 2002 and 11 active mines in 2001) increased by 1.0 percent (329.5 million tons to 332.8 million tons) from 2001 to 2002, and Converse County coal production (one active mine in 2001 and 2002) increased by 8.9 percent (24.6 million tons to 26.8 million tons) during the same time period. The combined 2002 coal production in these two counties was 96 percent of the state total (Wyoming Department of Employment 2001 and 2002). In the second quarter of 2002, 29 percent of the total employment and 43 percent of the total payroll in South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment Campbell County were attributed to mining, which also includes oil and gas employment. During the same time period in Converse County, 8 percent of the employment and 12 percent of the payroll were attributed to mining (Wyoming Department of Employment 2003). Approximate taxes and royalties from coal production in Campbell and Converse Counties are presented in Table 3-14. Following is a breakdown of each revenue source, in order from the largest total revenue producer to the smallest. The greatest source of combined state and federal revenue from Wyoming coal is the federal royalty. The current royalty rate for federal coal leases is 12.5 percent of the sales price, with half of this revenue returned to the state. At an estimated average sales price for PRB coal in 2002 of $5.55 per ton (WSGS 2003a), royalties were about $249.5 million. Surface coal mines contribute 35 cents per produced ton to the AML program operated by the OSM, with half of this revenue earmarked for reclamation and other approved programs within the state. With 359.6 million tons of coal produced in Campbell and Converse Counties in 2002, AML contributions were about $125.9 million. Severance taxes are collected by the state for removal or extraction of resources such as oil, natural gas, coal, and trona. The current Wyoming severance tax rate is seven percent of the state valuation of produced surface coal. The average South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS valuation of coal produced during 1997 through 2001 in Campbell County and Converse County was $3.49 and $3.07 per ton, respectively (Wyoming Business Council 2003). Applying these average valuation rates to the 2002 coal production yields an estimated 2003 severance tax collection in the two counties of $87.1 million. The State of Wyoming retains approximately 83 percent of the severance tax, and the remainder is returned to cities, towns, and counties. Lease bonus bids are one-time payments to the BLM for the right to enter into lease agreements for federal minerals. Bonus bids are paid in five annual installments, with half of each installment returned to the state. In the year 2002, bonus bid payments were made for two coal leases (North Jacobs Ranch and Horse Creek) and totaled $94.1 million (BLM 2003c). Ad valorem taxes are collected by the county and disbursed to schools, cities, towns, the state foundation, and various other subdivisions within the county. Ad valorem taxes comprise production and property taxes, with production taxes being far greater than property taxes for surface coal mines. Production taxes are calculated as 100 percent of the state valuation of produced coal times the sum of mill levies for the production area. Property taxes are calculated as 11.5 percent of the property valuation at each mine times the mill levies. In recent years, Campbell and Converse County mill levies have averaged about 62 (Wyoming Department of Revenue 3-89

3.0 Affected Environment Table 3-14. Estimated 2003 Fiscal Revenues from 2002 Coal Production in Campbell and Converse Counties. Campbell County Converse County Revenue Item (millions of dollars) (millions of dollars) Federal Mineral Royalties 230.9 18.6 Abandoned Mine Lands Fund 116.5 9.4 Severance Tax 81.3 5.8 Bonus Bid Annual Revenues 90.1 3.9 Ad Valorem Tax 72.0 5.1 Black Lung Tax 73.9 6.0 Sales and Use Tax 6.3 0.2 Totals 671.0 49.0 2002). Production and property taxes paid by surface coal mines in the two counties in 2003 are estimated at $77.1 million. The federal government levies a four percent tax on the sales price of all surface coal toward the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund. The estimated black lung taxes paid by coal mines in Campbell and Converse Counties for 2002 production total $79.8 million. Sales and use taxes are distributed to cities and towns within each county and to the county’s general fund. According to the Excise Tax Division of the Wyoming Department of Revenue (2003), the sales and use taxes collected from coal mines and coal mining-related services in Campbell and Converse Counties in FY 2003 were $6.6 million. Additional sources of revenue include federal income tax and annual rentals that are paid to the federal government. The estimated total fiscal benefit to the State of Wyoming, including half of the federal mineral 3-90 royalties, half of the AML fees, half of the bonus bid payments, and all of the ad valorem taxes, severance taxes, and sales and use taxes for coal produced in Campbell and Converse Counties in 2002 is $405.7 million, or $1.13 per ton. This agrees with an estimate previously proposed by the University of Wyoming of $1.10 per ton (Borden et al. 1994). Figure 3-24 depicts the estimated total revenues to state and federal governments from 2002 coal production in Campbell and Converse Counties. Nationally, the minerals industry (including oil and gas) accounted for 1.3 percent of the GDP in 2001, and coal mining alone accounted for 0.1 percent (U.S. Department of Commerce 2003b). The most recent GSP calculations for Wyoming (2001) indicate that the minerals industry accounted for 23 percent of the GSP, which made it the largest sector of the Wyoming economy. Coal mining alone accounted for 5.4 percent of the Wyoming GSP (Wyoming Department of Administration and Information 2003a). South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment

AML Fund $63.0 million (15.5%)

Sales and Use Taxes $6.6 million (1.6%)

Bonus Bid Payments $47.1 million (11.6%)

Federal Royalties $124.8 million (30.8%)

Ad Valorem Taxes $77.1 million (19.0%)

Severance Tax $87.1 million (21.5%)

Total Wyoming Revenue = $405.7 million

AML Fund $63.0 million (20%)

Federal Royalties $124.8 million (40%)

Bonus Bid Payments $47.1 million (15%) Total Federal Revenue = $314.7 million

Black Lung Fund $79.8 million (25%)

Figure 3-24. Estimated Wyoming and Federal Revenues from 2002 Coal Production in Campbell and Converse Counties.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3-91

3.0 Affected Environment 3.18.3 Employment Coal mining has changed a great deal since the 1970s, and new technologies have been a major contributor to these changes. The local coal mining labor force grew during the 1970s, declined during the 1980s, remained fairly constant through the 1990s, and gradually increased during the early 2000s. Since 1980, overall production has risen while employee numbers have generally decreased or remained constant. The employment decline followed large industry capital investments in facilities and production equipment, the majority of which were aimed at increasing productivity. There has been a recent upturn in Campbell County coal mining employment, where the number of employees increased from 3,011 to 3,580 from 1998 to 2002. Downsizing of the Dave Johnston Mine outweighed growth of the Antelope Mine and caused Converse County mining employment to decrease during the same time period from 337 to 315 employees (Wyoming Department of Employment 19982002). In September 2003, the total labor force in Campbell County stood at 22,510 with an unemployment rate of 3.3 percent, which matched the unemployment rate in September 2002 (Wyoming Department of Employment 2003). In 2002, around 4,260 people were directly employed by surface coal mines or coal contractors, representing about 19 percent of the employed labor force (Wyoming Department of Employment 2002 and 2003). The 2002 annual average employment in Campbell County of 22,026 set the all-time employment record. Prior to 2000, the Campbell County annual employment record was 19,128 and was set in 1982, a record year for mining employment. Total employment declined to a low of 14,288 in 1988, gradually increased during the 1990s, and sharply increased in the early 2000s. The current CBM development has resulted in a tight labor market for both skilled and unskilled labor; however, the mining industry has not had difficulty filling positions due to attractive wage and benefit packages and predictable schedules (Hockert 2000). As of September 2003, the total Converse County labor force was 6,340 with an unemployment rate of 3.5 percent, compared to 4.0 percent in September 2002 (Wyoming Department of Employment 2003). In 2002, about 375 people, or 6 percent of the employed labor force, were employed by area coal mines or coal contractors (Wyoming Department of Employment 2002 and 2003). Total employment in Converse County declined from 7,710 in 1981 to a low of 4,845 in 1985. Employment gradually increased to 6,499 by 2000 and decreased in 2001 and 2002. Mining employment (include oil and gas workers) declined from 2,290 in 1980 to a low of 729 in 1990 and has slightly increased since that time.

3-92

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment 3.18.4 Housing The U.S. Census Bureau (USDOC 2003a) estimated 13,608 housing units in Campbell County in July 2002. This represents a 2.4 percent increase above the 13,288 housing units reported in the 2000 census and an 18 percent increase above the 11,538 housing units reported in the 1990 census. The number of housing units in Gillette, which is only reported in the biennial census, increased by 12 percent from 7,078 in 1990 to 7,931 in 2000. Wright had 544 housing units during the 2000 census. This was a 3.2 percent increase over the 527 houses reported in the 1990 census. According to the Wyoming Housing Database Partnership (2003), the average valuation of a single family housing unit in Campbell County in 2002 was $139,200, which was 6.1 percent higher than the average 2001 valuation. Campbell County residential building permits rose from 15 in 1990 to 144 in 2002 (Wyoming Housing Database Partnership 2003). Due to population growth associated with CBM development, the housing vacancy rate in Gillette is low, with single family unit vacancy at nearly zero percent and apartment vacancy at 1.5 percent. Although several housing projects are on the horizon in the Gillette area, some new residents are currently unable to find rentals and are living in motels (Gillette NewsRecord 2002b). The estimated number of housing units in Converse County in July 2002 was 5,718. This represents a 0.9 percent increase above the 5,669 housing units reported in the 2000 census and a 9.2 percent increase above the 5,234 housing units reported in 1990. Douglas had 2,385 housing units in 2000, which was a 5.2 percent increase above the 2,267 units reported in 1990. In Converse County, residential building permits varied between zero and two per year from 1987 to 1990, rose to 27 in 1997, and fell to 16 in 2002 (Wyoming Department of Administration and Information 2003a). According to the 2000 census, Converse County contained 5,669 housing units, 2,385 of which were in Douglas. This represents a 5.2 percent increase over the 2,267 housing units reported in the 1990 census. The average valuation of a single family housing unit in Converse County in 2002 was $109,900. The Converse County single family unit vacancy rate in 2002 was nearly zero percent, and the apartment vacancy rate was 2.4 percent (Wyoming Housing Database Partnership 2003). According to an area realtor, the tight housing market is typical in Douglas and may not be attributable to CBM development (Hollaway 2002). According to a 2001 report on housing needs in Campbell County, roughly 61 percent of PRB surface coal mining employees live in Gillette and surrounding areas, 14 percent live in Wright, and 25 percent live 3-93

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment outside of Campbell County (Pedersen Planning Consultants 2001). 3.18.5 Local Government Facilities and Services Gillette has generally maintained a steady population growth since 1987, when it totaled 17,054 (City of Gillette 2002). Owing to the substantial revenues generated by mineral production, local government facilities and services have kept pace with growth and are adequate for the current population. The opening of the South Campus of Campbell County High School has helped to alleviate overcrowding at the North Campus. South Campus opened in February 1999 with approximately 300 students and 22 teachers. The combined enrollment in both campuses for the 2003-2004 school year is approximately 1,500 students with 124 teachers (CCSD 2003). The estimated 2002 population of Douglas (5,443) is lower than its peak of 7,800 in 1982, and local government facilities and services are generally adequate for the current population. The town has limited building space (platted lots) available for future growth. Some indoor recreational facilities may also be near capacity. Wright was established in 1976 by the Atlantic Richfield Company and is the nearest community to the SPRB mines. Wright’s population peaked in 1985 at approximately 1,800 and decreased to 1,285 by 1994. The estimated 2002 population of Wright was 1,427. As of October 2000, the 3-94 town of Wright was not experiencing population growth due to CBM development (Buresh 2000). However, increasing CBM development and the construction of several proposed power plants in Campbell County will likely bring new residents to Wright (Pedersen Planning Consultants 2001). With the possible exception of residential housing units, Wright’s infrastructure is more than adequate for the current and planned population, and with the current building going on it can double in population before services become limiting. 3.18.6 Social Conditions Despite past boom and bust cycles in the area’s economy, a relatively stable social setting now exists in these communities. Most residents have lived in the area for a number of years, social ties are well established, and residents take great pride in their communities. Many of the people place a high priority on maintaining informal lifestyles and small town traditions, and there are some concerns that the area could be adversely affected by more than a modest growth in population. At the same time, there is substantial interest in enhancing the economic opportunities available in the area and a desire to accommodate reasonable levels of growth and development. Wyoming’s economy has been growing steadily since reaching the bottom of an energy bust in 1987. The largest growth since the energy bust occurred in the early 1990s and South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

3.0 Affected Environment 1999 to 2001, when the national economy was suffering. Conversely, the Wyoming economy grew slowly during the national economic boom of 1996 to 1998. As the national economy seems to be recovering in 2003, Wyoming’s economy is slowing. The forecast is for slow growth through 2012. Wyoming population is projected to increase at approximately 0.5 percent per year. Non-agricultural employment has been projected to increase by an average of 1.0 percent through 2012 (Wyoming Department of Administration and Information 2003b). Mining employment (including oil and gas) has been projected to remain approximately constant between 2003 and 2012. In 2002 there were 17,900 jobs in the mining sector in Wyoming. This number was down 2 percent from the 18,300 mining jobs in 2001. This small decrease was attributed to decreases in oil and gas jobs and in the support activities for mining (excluding oil and gas) (Wyoming Department of Employment 2003). Continued development of CBM resources in Wyoming may cause greater increases in mining sector employment through 2012 than previously estimated. 3.18.7 Environmental Justice Environmental Justice issues are concerned with actions that unequally impact a given segment of society either as a result of physical location, perception, design, noise, or other factors. On February 11, 1994, Executive Order 12898, “Federal South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS Action to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations”, was published in the Federal Register (59 FR 7629). The Executive Order requires federal agencies to identify and address disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations (defined as those living below the poverty level). The Executive Order makes it clear that its provisions apply fully to Native American populations and Native American tribes, specifically to effects on tribal lands, treaty rights, trust responsibilities, and the health and environment of Native American communities. Communities within Campbell and Converse Counties, entities with interests in the area, and individuals with ties to the area all may have concerns about the presence of coal mines within the General Analysis Area. Communities potentially impacted by the presence or absence of a coal mine have been identified in this section of the EIS. Environmental Justice concerns are usually directly associated with impacts on the natural and physical environment, but these impacts are likely to be interrelated with social and economic impacts as well. Native American access to cultural and religious sites may fall under the umbrella of Environmental Justice concerns if the sites are on tribal lands or access to a specific location has been granted by treaty right.

3-95

3.0 Affected Environment Compliance with Executive Order 12898 concerning Environmental Justice was accomplished through opportunities for the public to receive information on this EIS in conjunction with consultation and coordination described in Section 1.5 of this document. This EIS and contributing socioeconomic analysis provide a consideration of the impacts with regard to disproportionately adverse impacts on minority and/or low-income groups, including Native Americans. 3.19 Hazardous and Solid Waste Potential sources of hazardous or solid waste on each of the five LBA tracts would include spilling, leaking, or dumping of hazardous substances, petroleum products, and/or solid waste associated with mineral, coal, oil and/or gas exploration and development, or agricultural or livestock activities. No such hazardous or solid wastes are known to be present on any of the five LBA tracts. Wastes produced by current mining activities at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mines are handled according to the procedures described in Chapter 2.

3-96

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES This chapter discloses the potential environmental consequences that may result from implementing the Proposed Action or alternatives to the Proposed Action for the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA1 Tracts. The alternatives for each tract are described in Chapter 2. The effect or impact a consequence will have on the quality of the human environment is also discussed. For instance, the consequence of an action may be to greatly increase the number of roads in an area. If the number of roads in an area is increased, opportunities for road-based recreation would be increased but the opportunities for primitive recreational activities and solitude would be decreased. Evaluation of the impact would depend on an individual’s (or a group’s) preferred use of that area. If an LBA tract is leased to an applicant as a maintenance tract under one of the Action Alternatives, the permit area for the adjacent mine would have to be amended to include the new lease area before it could be disturbed. Tables 4-1 through 4-4 show the areas to be mined and disturbance areas for the existing applicant mines (which represent the No Action Alternatives), and how the mine areas would change under the Action Alternatives for each LBA tract. If a tract is leased, the area that would have to be added to the
1

existing mine permit area would be that portion of the LBA tract that lies outside the existing permit boundary plus an adjacent strip of land that would be used for highwall reduction after mining and such mine-related activities as construction of diversions, flood and sediment control structures, roads, and stockpiles. Portions of the LBA tracts that are contiguous to the existing leases will be disturbed under the current mining plans in order to recover the coal in the existing leases. For all five of the LBA tracts included in this analysis, the environmental consequences of implementing the Proposed Action, Alternative 2, or Alternative 3 would be similar in nature, but in general the Action Alternative that disturbs the smallest area of land surface would have the least impact. The smallest disturbance area for the NARO North and South LBA Tracts would occur if the Alternative 3 tract configuration for the NARO South LBA Tract is chosen (Table 4-1). For the Little Thunder and West Roundup LBA Tracts, selection of the Proposed Action tract configuration would have a smaller disturbance area than the other Action Alternatives (Tables 4-2 and 4-3). For the West Antelope LBA Tract, selection of the Alternative 3 tract configuration would have a smaller disturbance area than the other Action Alternatives (Table 4-4). The BLM’s Preferred Alternative Tract configurations are discussed in Chapter 2 and identified in Tables 4-1 through 4-4. Surface mining and reclamation have been ongoing in the eastern PRB for 4-1

Refer to page xii for a list of abbreviations and acronyms used in this document.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-1. Comparison of Existing and Proposed North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Disturbance Area and Mining Operations.
No Action Alternative (Existing Permit Area) Additional Lease Area (Acres) NARO North NARO South Total Total Lease Area (Acres) Increase in Lease Area (Percent) Estimated Additional Mine Disturbance Area (Acres)2 NARO North NARO South Total Estimated Total Mine Disturbance Area (Acres) Increase in Estimated Disturbance Area (Percent) Estimated Additional Recoverable Coal (Million Tons)3 NARO North NARO South Total Estimated Recoverable Coal for Mine as of 1/02 (Million Tons) Increase in Estimated Recoverable Coal as of 1/02 (Percent)
1 2 3

Proposed Action 2,369.380 2,133.635 4,503.015 19,398.515 30.2 3,600 3,100 6,700 27,110 27.4 306.9 200.0 506.9 1,411.3 56.0

Alternative 21 2,369.38 3,201.81 5,571.19 20,466.69 37.4 3,600 4,345 7,945 28,355 30.7 306.9 307.0 613.9 1,518.3 67.9

BLM’s Preferred Alternatives1 2,369.380 2,956.725 5,326.105 20,221.605 35.8 3,600 4,100 7,700 28,110 37.7 306.9 270.4 577.3 1,481.7 63.8

Alternative 31 2,369.38 1,406.89 3,776.27 18,671.77 25.4 3,600 1,263 4,863 25,273 23.8 306.9 128.0 434.9 1,339.3 48.1

------14,895.50 --------20,410 --------904.4 ---

For the NARO North Tract, BLM did not identify any alternate tract configurations for analysis. The tract is the same for the Proposed Action, Alternative 2, Alternative 3, and Preferred Alternative. Total Disturbance Area = area to be mined + area disturbed for mine facilities, access roads, haul roads, railroad facilities, stockpiles, etc. Estimated Recoverable Coal Resources = tons of in-place coal × recovery factor. NARO North LBA Tract Proposed Action: PRCC’s estimated recovery factor = 95 percent, based on historic operations. NARO South LBA Tract Proposed Action: PRCC’s estimated recovery factor = 83 percent, based largely upon unmineable reserves within railroad ROW and unrecoverable coal in partially burned areas. NARO South LBA Tract Alternative 2: PRCC’s estimated recovery factor = 79 percent, based largely upon unmineable reserves within railroad ROW and unrecoverable coal in partially burned areas. NARO South LBA Tract Preferred Alternative: PRCC’s estimated recovery factor = 78 percent, based largely upon unmineable reserves within railroad ROW and unrecoverable coal in partially burned areas. NARO South LBA Tract Alternative 3: PRCC’s estimated recovery factor = 91 percent, based largely upon unrecoverable coal in partially burned areas.

4-2

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-2. Comparison of Existing and Proposed Black Thunder Mine Disturbance Area and Mining Operations.
No Action Alternative (Existing Permit Area) Additional Lease Area (Acres) North Tract South Tract Total Total Lease Area (Acres) Increase in Lease Area (Percent) Estimated Additional Mine Disturbance Area (Acres)1 Estimated Total Mine Disturbance Area (Acres) Increase in Estimated Disturbance Area (Percent) Estimated Additional Recoverable Coal (Million Tons)2 Estimated Recoverable Coal for Mine as of 1/02 (Million Tons) Increase in Estimated Recoverable Coal as of 1/02 (Percent)
1 2

Proposed Action na na 3,449.32 16,222.22 27.0 5,424 23,900 29.4

Alternative 2 (BLM’s Preferred Alternative) na na 5,083.50 17,856.40 39.8 6,577 25,053 35.6

Alternative 3 1,065.49 4,018.01 5,083.50 17,856.40 39.8 6,577 25,053 35.6

--12,772.90 ----18,476 ---

---

440

553

920.3

1,360.3

1,473.3

---

47.8

60.0

Total Disturbance Area = area to be mined + area disturbed for mine facilities, access roads, haul roads, railroad facilities, stockpiles, etc. Estimated Recoverable Coal Resources = tons of in-place coal × recovery factor. Little Thunder LBA Tract: TBCC’s estimated recovery factor = 92 percent, based on unmineable reserves within railroad ROW. Little Thunder LBA Tract (Alternative 2): TBCC’s estimated recovery factor = 79.5 percent based on unmineable reserves within railroad ROW. Little Thunder LBA Tract (Alternative 3, North Tract): TBCC’s estimated recovery factor = 71.9 percent based on unmineable reserves within railroad ROW. Little Thunder LBA Tract (Alternative 3, South Tract): TBCC’s estimated recovery factor = 81.7 percent based on unmineable reserves within railroad ROW.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4-3

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-3. Comparison of Existing and Proposed North Rochelle Mine Disturbance Area and Mining Operations.
No Action Alternative (Existing Permit Area) Additional Lease Area (Acres) Total Lease Area (Acres) Increase in Lease Area (Percent) Estimated Additional Mine Disturbance Area (Acres)1 Estimated Total Mine Disturbance Area (Acres) Increase in Estimated Disturbance Area (Percent) Estimated Additional Recoverable Coal (Millions Tons)2 Estimated Recoverable Coal for Mine as of 1/02 (Million Tons) Increase in Estimated Recoverable Coal as of 1/02 (Percent)
1 2

Proposed Action 1,870.65 5,314.15 54.3 3,161

Alternative 2 2,652.69 6,096.19 77.0 3,161 8,449 59.8 231.3 486.3 90.7

BLM’s Preferred Alternative 2,812.51 6,256.01 81.7 3,865 9,153 73.1 287.5 542.5 112.7

Alternative 3 3,049.93 6,493.43 88.6 4,105 9,393 77.6 308.3 563.3 120.9

--3,443.5 ---

5,288 ----255 ---

8,449 59.8 173.3 428.3 68.0

Total Disturbance Area = area to be mined + area disturbed for mine facilities, access roads, haul roads, railroad facilities, stockpiles, etc. Estimated Recoverable Coal Resources = tons of in-place coal × recovery factor. West Roundup LBA Tract Proposed Action, Alternative 2, and Alternative 3: TCC’s estimated recovery factor = 90 percent, based on historic operations.

4-4

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-4. Comparison of Existing and Proposed Antelope Mine Disturbance Area and Mining Operations.
No Action Alternative (Existing Permit Area) Additional Lease Area (Acres) Total Lease Area (Acres) Increase in Lease Area (Percent) Estimated Additional Mine Disturbance Area (Acres)1 Estimated Total Mine Disturbance Area (Acres) Increase in Estimated Disturbance Area (Percent) Estimated Additional Recoverable Coal (Million Tons)2 Estimated Recoverable Coal for Mine as of 1/02 (Million Tons) Increase in Estimated Recoverable Coal as of 1/02 (Percent)
1 2

Proposed Action 3,542.19 11,561.39 44.2 3,200

Alternative 2 3,877.90 11,897.10 48.4 3,500

Alternative 3 (BLM’s Preferred Alternative) 2,809.13 10,828.33 35.0 2,467

-8,019.20 -----

8,821 ---

12,021 36.3

12,321 39.7

11,288 28.0

---

228.4

254.3

170.4

347.3

575.7

601.6

517.7

---

65.8

73.2

49.1

Total Disturbance Area = are to be mined + area disturbed for mine facilities, access roads, haul roads, railroad facilities, stockpiles, etc. Estimated Recoverable Coal Resources = tons of mineable coal × recovery factor. West Antelope LBA Tract Proposed Action, Alternative 2, and Alternative 3: ACC’s estimated recovery factor = 93 percent after eliminating coal that won’t be mined beneath Antelope Creek valley.

over two decades. During this time, effective mining and reclamation technologies have been developed and continue to be refined. Mining and reclamation operations are regulated under SMCRA and Wyoming statutes. WDEQ technically reviews all mine permit application packages to ensure that the mining and reclamation plans comply with all state permitting requirements and that the proposed coal mining operations comply with the performance standards of the DOI-approved Wyoming program. BLM and USDA-FS may attach South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

special stipulations to all coal leases (Appendix D), and there are a number of federal and state permit approvals that are required in order to conduct surface mining operations (Appendix A). The regulations are designed to ensure that surface coal mining impacts are mitigated. The impact assessment that follows considers all measures required by federal and state regulatory authorities as part of the Proposed Action and Alternatives. Section 4.1 analyzes the direct and indirect impacts that would be associated with mining the five LBA 4-5

4.0 Environmental Consequences tracts included in this analysis if they are leased under the respective Proposed Actions and alternative tract configurations. Section 4.2 presents the probable environmental consequences of the No Action Alternatives (Alternative 1, not issuing leases for one or more of the tracts). Section 4.3 discusses regulatory compliance, mitigation, and monitoring in terms of what is required by federal and/or state law (and is therefore part of the Proposed Actions and Action Alternatives) and any additional mitigation and monitoring that may be required. Section 4.4 summarizes the residual effects of the Proposed Actions, and Action Alternatives. Section 4.5 discusses the cumulative impacts that would occur if all these lands were mined when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions. The cumulative impact analysis includes a discussion of other projects that are in progress, or are proposed in Campbell and Converse Counties, Wyoming, and that would occur independently of leasing the LBA tracts. Projects that have proceeded beyond preliminary planning phases include: 1) construction and operation of the Two Elk power plant, which has been proposed near the Black Thunder Mine; 2) construction and operation of the Wygen II power plant, which has been proposed near the Wyodak Mine site, east of Gillette; 3) the construction and operation of the DM&E Railroad line; and 4) the ongoing development of CBM resources adjacent to and west of the area of active mining. Section 4.6 analyzes the relationship between 4-6 local short-term uses of man’s environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity. Section 4.7 presents the irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources that would occur with implementation of the Proposed Actions or Action Alternatives. 4.1 Direct and Indirect Impacts of Action Alternatives Impacts can range from beneficial to adverse and they can be a primary result of an action (direct) or a secondary result (indirect). They can be permanent, long-term (persisting beyond the end of mine life and reclamation), or short-term (persisting during mining and reclamation and until the time the reclamation bond is released). Impacts also vary in terms of significance. The basis for conclusions regarding significance are the criteria set forth by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1508.27) and the professional judgment of the specialists doing the analyses. Impact significance may range from negligible to substantial; impacts can be significant during mining but be reduced to insignificance following completion of reclamation. 4.1.1 Topography and Physiography Surface coal mining would permanently alter the topography of each LBA tract that is leased and mined. Topsoil would be removed from the land and stockpiled or placed directly on recontoured areas. Overburden would be blasted and South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences stockpiled or directly placed into the already mined pit, and coal would be removed. The existing topography on each LBA tract would be substantially changed during mining. Highwalls with vertical heights equal to overburden, interburden, and coal thicknesses would exist in the active pits. If necessary, streams would be diverted into temporary channels or blocked to prevent flooding of the pits. Typically, a direct permanent impact of coal mining and reclamation is topographic moderation. After reclamation, the restored land surfaces are generally gentler, with more uniform slopes and restored basic drainage networks. The original topography in the NARO North, Little Thunder, West Roundup and West Antelope tracts is relatively flat, with average slopes ranging from one to three percent. As a result, the expected postmining topography on these tracts would be similar to the premining topography. On the NARO South LBA Tract, slopes average about five percent. Since the NARO South LBA Tract is characterized by steeper slopes, the post-mining topography on this tract would be gentler and more uniform than the pre-mining topography. Following reclamation, the average surface elevation on each LBA tract would be lower due to coal removal. The removal of the coal would be partially offset by the swelling that occurs when the overburden and interburden are blasted and removed. Table 4-5 presents the approximate postmining surface elevation change for each LBA tract as applied for South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS under the Proposed Action and Action Alternatives. After the coal is removed, the land surface would be restored to approximate original contour or to a configuration approved by WDEQ/LQD when the mining and reclamation permit for the existing mine is amended to include the LBA tract. Direct adverse impacts resulting from topographic moderation include a reduction in microhabitats (e.g., cutbank slopes) for some wildlife species and a reduction in habitat diversity, particularly a reduction in slope-dependent shrub communities and associated habitat. These impacts would be greater on the tracts characterized by steeper premining topography. A potential indirect impact may be a long-term reduction in big game carrying capacity. A direct beneficial impact of the lower and flatter terrain would be reduced water runoff, which would allow increased infiltration and result in a minor reduction in peak flows. This may help counteract the potential for increased erosion that could occur as a result of higher near-surface bulk density of the reclaimed soils (Section 4.1.3). It may also increase vegetative productivity, and potentially accelerate recharge of groundwater. For each LBA tract, the approximate original drainage pattern would be restored, and stock ponds and playas would be replaced to provide livestock and wildlife watering sources. These topographic changes would not conflict with regional land use, and the postmining topography would be 4-7

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-5. Average Overburden, Interburden, and Coal Thicknesses and Approximate Postmining Surface Elevation Changes of the Five LBA Tracts.
Overburden Thickness (ft) 307 Interburden Thickness (ft) 0 Coal Thickness (ft) 79 Swell Factor (percent) 15 Coal Recovery Factor (percent) 95 Postmining Elevation Change1 29 ft lower

LBA Tract and Configuration NARO North Proposed Action* NARO South Proposed Action Alternative 2* Alternative 3 Little Thunder Proposed Action Alternative 2* Alternative 3 (North Tract) Alternative 3 (South Tract) West Roundup Proposed Action Alternative 2 Alternative 3* West Antelope Proposed Action Alternative 2 Alternative 3*
*
1

113 145 99

61 60 63

69 70 67

12 12 12

95 95 95

45 ft lower 42 ft lower 44 ft lower

260 279 310 269

54 46 18 58

97 98 96 98

16 16 16 16

92 92 92 92

39 ft lower 38 ft lower 36 ft lower 38 ft lower

318 306 316

0 0 0

69 67 65

16 16 16

90 90 90

11 ft lower 11 ft lower 8 ft lower

138 150 140

68 67 62

88 89 81

22 22 22

93 93 93

37 ft lower 35 ft lower 31 ft lower

The BLM’s Preferred Alternative. For the NARO South and West Roundup Tracts, the BLM’s Preferred Alternative is to add portions of the study areas discussed in Chapter 2 for those tracts. Reclaimed (postmining) surface elevation change calculated as: (coal thickness × coal recovery factor) - swell factor × (overburden thickness + interburden thickness).

4-8

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences designed to adequately anticipated land use. support mine permitting process, each mine operator develops a management plan to ensure that this unsuitable material is not placed in areas where it may affect groundwater quality or revegetation success. Each mine operator also develops backfill monitoring plans as part of the mine permitting process to evaluate the quality of the replaced overburden. These plans are in place for the existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mines and would be developed for the LBA tracts if they are leased. NARO North and South LBA Tracts Within the NARO North LBA Tract, mining would remove an average of 307 ft of overburden, no interburden, and 79 ft of coal on about 2,369 acres under the Proposed Action, which is the Preferred Alternative. Within the NARO South LBA Tract under the Proposed Action and Alternatives 2 and 3, the coal reserves beneath an area of approximately 578 acres were burned by spontaneous coal fires in the past. Under the Proposed Action for the NARO South LBA Tract, mining would remove an average of 113 ft of overburden, 61 ft of interburden, and 69 ft of coal on about 1,556 acres. Under Alternative 2, which is the Preferred Alternative, mining would remove an average of 145 ft of overburden, 60 ft of interburden, and 70 ft of coal on about 2,379 acres from the NARO South LBA Tract. Under Alternative 3, mining would remove an average of 99 ft of overburden, 63 ft of interburden, and 67 ft of coal on 4-9

These impacts are occurring on the existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mine coal leases as coal is mined and minedout areas are reclaimed. Under the Proposed Action, Alternative 2, or Alternative 3, the areas that would be permanently topographically changed would increase as shown in Tables 41 through 4-4. 4.1.2 Geology The geology from the base of the lowest coal seam mined to the land surface would be subject to permanent change after the coal is removed on the LBA tracts under the Proposed Actions and Action Alternatives. The subsurface characteristics of these lands would be radically changed by mining. The replaced overburden and interburden (backfill) would be a mixture of the geologically distinct layers of sandstone, siltstone, and shale that currently exist. The resulting physical characteristics would also be significantly altered. Drilling and sampling programs are conducted on the existing leases by all mine operators to identify overburden material that may be unsuitable for reclamation (i.e., material that is not suitable for use in reestablishing vegetation or that may affect groundwater quality due to high concentrations of certain constituents such as selenium or adverse pH levels). As part of the South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences about 829 acres from the NARO South LBA Tract. Some of the coal that is included in the NARO South LBA Tract under the Proposed Action or Alternative 2 is located within the BNSF & UP railroad ROW and would, therefore, not be mined because it has been determined to be unsuitable for mining according to the coal leasing unsuitability criteria (43 CFR 3461). Therefore, the area of coal removal under the Proposed Action and Alternative 2 would actually be somewhat smaller than the acreages shown above. Table 4-5 presents the average overburden, interburden, and coal thicknesses for the NARO North and South LBA Tracts as applied for and Alternatives 2 and 3. Table 4-6 presents the average overburden, interburden, and mineable coal thicknesses for the existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex permit area. The replaced overburden and interburden would be a relatively homogeneous (compared to the premining layered overburden and interburden) and partly recompacted mixture averaging about 357 ft in thickness in the NARO North LBA Tract under the Proposed Action (Preferred Alternative). The backfill in the NARO South LBA Tract would average about 198 ft in thickness under the Proposed Action, about 233 ft in thickness under Alternative 2 (Preferred Alternative), and about 185 ft in thickness under Alternative 3. A total of approximately 506.9 million additional tons of coal would be recovered from both tracts under the Proposed Action, compared to an estimated 613.9 million tons under 4-10 Alternative 2, an estimated 434.9 million tons under Alternative 3, or an estimated 577.3 million tons under the BLM’s Preferred Alternative. Little Thunder LBA Tract Within the Little Thunder LBA Tract, there is an average of 260 ft of overburden, 54 ft of interburden, and 97 ft of coal on about 3,449 acres under the Proposed Action. There is an average of 279 ft of overburden, 46 ft of interburden, and 98 ft of coal on about 5,084 acres included in the Little Thunder LBA Tract Alternative 2 tract configuration, which is the Preferred Alternative. Under Alternative 3 for the Little Thunder LBA Tract, there is an average of 310 ft of overburden, 18 ft of interburden, and 96 ft of coal on about 1,065 acres included in the north tract, and an average of 269 ft of overburden, 58 ft of interburden, and 98 ft of coal on about 4,018 acres included in the south tract. Some of the coal that is included in the Little Thunder LBA Tract under the Proposed Action or Alternatives 2 or 3 is located within the BNSF & UP railroad or Wyoming Highway 450 ROWs and would, therefore, not be mined because it has been determined to be unsuitable for mining according to the coal leasing unsuitability criteria (43 CFR 3461). Therefore, the area of coal removal under the Proposed Action and Alternatives 2 and 3 would actually be somewhat smaller than the acreages shown above. Table 4-5 presents the average overburden, interburden, and coal thicknesses for the Little Thunder LBA Tract as South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-6. Average Overburden, Interburden, and Coal Thicknesses for the Applicant Mines’ Existing Permit Areas.
Average Overburden Thickness (ft) 205 204 210 35 Average Interburden Thickness (ft) 0 11 0 62 Average Total Mineable Coal Thickness (ft) 67 74 60 86

Applicant Mine North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Black Thunder North Rochelle Antelope

applied for and Alternatives 2 and 3. Table 4-6 presents the average overburden, interburden, and mineable coal thicknesses for the existing Black Thunder Mine permit area. The replaced overburden and interburden would be a relatively homogeneous (compared to the premining layered overburden and interburden) and partly recompacted mixture averaging about 372 ft in thickness under the Proposed Action, and about 385 ft in thickness under Alternative 2. Under Alternative 3, the replaced overburden would average about 388 ft in thickness in the North tract and about 387 ft in thickness in the South tract. Approximately 440 million additional tons of coal would be recovered under the Proposed Action, compared to 553 million tons under Alternatives 2 (the BLM’s Preferred Alternative) and 3 (111.9 million tons in the north tract and 441.1 million tons in the south tract). West Roundup LBA Tract Within the West Roundup LBA Tract, mining would remove an average of 318 ft of overburden, no interburden, South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

and 69 ft of coal on about 1,871 acres under the Proposed Action. Mining would remove an average of 306 ft of overburden, no interburden, and 67 ft of coal on about 2,653 acres under the Alternative 2 tract configuration. Mining would remove an average of 316 ft of overburden, no interburden, and 65 ft of coal on about 2,812 acres under the Alternative 3 tract configuration, which is the Preferred Alternative. These acreage figures represent the estimated area of actual coal removal under the Proposed Action and Alternatives 2 and 3. Table 4-5 presents the average overburden, interburden, and coal thicknesses for the West Roundup LBA Tract as applied for and Alternatives 2 and 3. Table 4-6 presents the average overburden, interburden, and coal thicknesses for the existing North Rochelle Mine permit area. The replaced overburden and interburden would be a relatively homogeneous (compared to the premining layered overburden and interburden) and partly recompacted mixture averaging about 376 ft in thickness under the Proposed Action, about 362 ft in thickness under Alternative 2, and about 373 ft in 4-11

4.0 Environmental Consequences thickness under Alternative 3. Approximately 173.3 million additional tons of coal would be recovered under the Proposed Action, compared to an estimated 231.3 million tons under Alternative 2, an estimated 308.3 million tons under Alternative 3, or an estimated 287.5 million tons under the BLM’s Preferred Alternative. West Antelope LBA Tract Within the West Antelope LBA Tract, mining would remove an average of 138 ft of overburden, 68 ft of interburden, and 88 ft of coal on about 2,755 acres under the Proposed Action. Mining would remove an average of 150 ft of overburden, 67 ft of interburden, and 89 ft of coal on about 3,091 acres under the Alternative 2 tract configuration. Mining would remove an average of 140 ft of overburden, 62 ft of interburden, and 81 ft of coal on about 2,022 acres under the Alternative 3 tract configuration, which is the Preferred Alternative. These acreage figures represent the estimated area of actual coal removal under the Proposed Action and Alternatives 2 and 3. Table 4-5 presents the average overburden, interburden, and coal thicknesses for the West Antelope LBA Tract as applied for and Alternatives 2 and 3. Table 4-6 presents the average overburden, interburden, and coal thicknesses for the existing Antelope Mine permit area. The replaced overburden and interburden would be a relatively homogeneous (compared to the 4-12 premining layered overburden and interburden) and partly recompacted mixture averaging about 257 ft in thickness under the Proposed Action, about 271 ft in thickness under Alternative 2, and about 252 ft in thickness under Alternative 3. Approximately 228.4 million additional tons of coal would be recovered under the Proposed Action, compared to an estimated 254.3 million tons under Alternative 2, or an estimated 170.4 million tons under Alternative 3 (the BLM’s Preferred Alternative). 4.1.2.1 Mineral Resources During mining, other minerals present on each of the LBA tracts could not be developed. Some of these minerals could, however, be developed after mining. Before mining operations could begin, all oil and gas wells would have to be abandoned, and all oil and gas production equipment would have to be removed to a level below the coal. The reservoirs below the coal would not be disturbed by removal of the coal. The oil and gas lessee could recomplete or re-drill wells to recover remaining oil and gas resources from any subcoal oil and gas reservoirs following mining. This would only occur if they believe that the value of the remaining reserves would justify the expense of reestablishing production. Section 3.3 includes a discussion on the oil and gas fields in the General Analysis Area and the LBA tracts that overlie them, and Section 3.11 includes a discussion on the currently producing wells and their associated facilities specific to South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences each of the LBA tracts and associated Action Alternatives. CBM resources that are not recovered prior to mining would be irretrievably lost when the coal is removed. As discussed in Sections 3.3 and 3.11, CBM wells have been and are being drilled on and/or near each of the LBA tracts in the General Analysis Area. As of August 2003, the NARO South LBA Tract was the only LBA tract without producing CBM wells under the Proposed Action or any of the Action Alternatives. The West Antelope LBA Tract currently has no producing CBM wells under the Proposed Action or Preferred Alternative tract configurations. Since there is limited production history from wells within the General Analysis Area, there is limited data available to estimate well life for existing or future CBM wells. For the purposes of this EIS, the BLM WSO-RMG reviewed the existing CBM resource and production data in the General Analysis Area. All productive CBM wells within the ten-township area which covers the General Analysis Area were reviewed in June 2002 to determine whether decline curve analysis could be used to forecast reserves or evaluate well economics. None of the wells had sufficient production to yield decline curves that could be accepted with confidence for forecasting purposes. These analyses did indicate that CBM reserves are probably limited in the General Analysis Area, suggesting that shorter well lives might be expected. Provisional decline curves which were prepared for several wells South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS with the lengthiest production histories suggest that well life periods for wells located on or near the LBA lands might be on the order of one to five years. Detailed CBM resource analyses have been prepared by the WSO-RMG in support of coal leasing actions and other program activities in the General Analysis Area and at other localities in the PRB mining area. Coal seam gas-in-place is dependent on a number of factors, including coal rank, coal lithology, and particularly for the purposes of these analyses, methane adsorptive capacity of the coals, which is controlled by hydrostatic pressure within the coal seam. Methane adsorption analyses describe the volume of methane that can be adsorbed by a specific sample of coal across a varying range. This pressure/volume relationship can be represented by an equation and curve known as an adsorption isotherm. Although gas content can vary widely from sample to sample depending upon other properties of the coal, the adsorption data provide a means of predicting CBM adsorptive capacity based on pressure. WSO-RMG has developed preliminary CBM reservoir models based on these principles to estimate CBM gas content and in-place resources in the mining areas and elsewhere in the PRB. These analyses use publicly available methane adsorption data collected cooperatively by the WSORMG and the U.S. Geological Survey, coal geology from publicly-available coal drill holes, and hydrologic data from groundwater monitoring wells 4-13

4.0 Environmental Consequences that are reported by GAGMO. This model can be used to calculate and map hydrostatic pressure within the coal seams based on the annual reported water levels. The data and model were used to calculate and map estimated coal gas content (in scf/ton) across the General Analysis Area in 1982, prior to extensive mining, and subsequently in 2000. An average gas content for each proposed LBA tract can be estimated from the maps (year 2000) of estimated gas content. An evaluation of CBM gas-in-place was prepared using the coal reserves (in tons) reported in each LBA application and the estimated coal gas content (in scf/ton) for each LBA tract as visually estimated from the 2000 gas content map. The results of this evaluation are shown in the following tract discussions. Implicit in the analysis conducted by WSO-RMG is the observation that coal mining and mine-related dewatering affects CBM resources and development potential. As described, water production from the coal seams is required to reduce hydrostatic pressure in the coal seams so that methane can desorb from the coals for production. Minerelated dewatering of the coal seams has the same effect of reducing hydrostatic pressure and methane desorption. The preliminary CBM reservoir models indicate that depletion of the hydrostatic pressures and methane resources has occurred adjacent to mining areas since not long after mining began and continues to the present time. Based on the methane adsorption/pressure 4-14 analyses prepared for the General Analysis Area, the preliminary model shows that as much as 60 percent of the original in-place CBM resources in the LBA areas may have been depleted between 1982 and 2000. This effect will be enhanced as mining continues to proceed toward the LBA tracts and will continue whether or not they are leased and mined. The short productive life inferred for CBM wells in the LBA areas suggests that wells which are completed early could recover substantial portions of the remaining reserves prior to any mining within the LBA tracts. NARO North and South LBA Tracts CBM is currently being produced on the NARO North tract as proposed, but not on the NARO South tract as proposed or on lands added under Alternative 2. Under the Proposed Action, there would potentially be 29 and 26 CBM well locations on the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts, respectively, if all the 80-acre spacing units within the tracts were drilled. There would be 13 more potential CBM well sites on lands added by Alternative 2, while Alternative 3 would remove from the NARO South tract nine potential well sites. As of August 2003, eight CBM wells had been drilled and were all producing on the NARO North LBA Tract as proposed. As of August 2003, no CBM wells had been drilled on the NARO South LBA Tract as proposed or on lands added under Alternative 2. WSO-RMG estimates that the average gas content in the NARO North LBA South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Tract is seven scf/ton, based on the year 2000 gas content calculations. Based on that estimate, the recoverable CBM resource in the NARO North LBA Tract would be approximately 2.261 billion cubic feet under the Proposed Action. For the NARO South LBA Tract, WSO-RMG estimates that the average gas content is four scf/ton, and the estimated recoverable CBM resource is 0.964 billion cubic feet. CBM will be produced by the existing CBM wells and other wells, if more are drilled, during the time it takes to lease and permit the LBA tracts and, on a case-by-case basis, until mining activity approaches each well. As indicated above, BLM’s analysis suggests that substantial portions of these remaining reserves could be produced prior to initiation of mining activity on the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts under the Proposed Actions or Alternatives 2 or 3. CBM reserves that are not recovered prior to mining would be lost. Agreements between affected oil and gas lessees and coal lessees must be negotiated in order to optimize recovery of both resources. Little Thunder LBA Tract CBM is currently being produced on the Little Thunder LBA Tract as proposed and the area added under Alternatives 2 and 3. As discussed in Section 3.11, 45 CBM wells have been completed for production within the lands encompassed by the Little Thunder LBA Tract as proposed and the lands added under Alternatives 2 and 3. Most of the available 80-acre South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS spacing units within the tract as proposed had been drilled as of August 2003. Review of WOGCC records on September 17, 2003 indicates that all but three of these 45 wells were producing at that time. WSO-RMG estimates that the average gas content in the Little Thunder LBA Tract is 14 scf/ton, based on the year 2000 gas content calculations. Based on that estimate, the current recoverable CBM resource in the Little Thunder LBA Tract would be approximately 6.7 billion cubic feet. CBM will be produced by the existing CBM wells and other wells, if more are drilled, during the time it takes to lease and permit the LBA tract and, on a case-by-case basis, until mining activity approaches each well. As indicated above, BLM’s analysis suggests that substantial portions of these remaining reserves could be produced prior to initiation of mining activity on the Little Thunder LBA Tract under the Proposed Action or Alternatives 2 or 3. CBM reserves that are not recovered prior to mining would be lost. Agreements between affected oil and gas lessees and coal lessees must be negotiated in order to optimize recovery of both resources. West Roundup LBA Tract CBM is currently being produced on the West Roundup LBA Tract as proposed and the area added under Alternative 3. Under the Proposed Action, there would potentially be 28 well locations on the West Roundup LBA Tract if all the 80-acre spacing units within the tract were drilled. 4-15

4.0 Environmental Consequences There would be nine more potential well sites on lands added by Alternative 2, and 14 more potential well sites on lands added by Alternative 3. As of August 2003, four CBM wells had been drilled and all four wells were producing on the tract as proposed and the area added under Alternative 3. WSO-RMG estimates that the average gas content in the West Roundup LBA Tract is nine scf/ton, based on the year 2000 gas content calculations. Based on that estimate, the current recoverable CBM resource in the West Roundup LBA Tract would be approximately 1.558 billion cubic feet. CBM will be produced by the existing CBM wells and other wells, if more are drilled, during the time it takes to lease and permit the LBA tract and, on a case-by-case basis, until mining activity approaches each well. As indicated above, BLM’s analysis suggests that substantial portions of these remaining reserves could be produced prior to initiation of mining activity on the West Roundup LBA Tract under the Proposed Action or Alternatives 2 or 3. CBM reserves that are not recovered prior to mining would be lost. Agreements between affected oil and gas lessees and coal lessees must be negotiated in order to optimize recovery of both resources. West Antelope LBA Tract As of August 2003, CBM was not being produced on the West Antelope LBA Tract as proposed, although one CBM well had been drilled and was 4-16 producing on the lands added by Alternative 2. Under the Proposed Action, there would potentially be 47 well locations on the West Antelope LBA Tract if all the 80-acre spacing units within the tract were drilled. There would be four more potential well sites on lands added by Alternative 2, while Alternative 3 would remove from the West Antelope tract nine potential well sites. WSO-RMG estimates that the average gas content in the West Antelope LBA Tract is nine scf/ton, based on the year 2000 gas content calculations. Based on that estimate, the current recoverable CBM resource in the West Antelope LBA Tract would be approximately 2.645 billion cubic feet. CBM will be produced by the existing CBM wells and other wells, if more are drilled, during the time it takes to lease and permit the LBA tract and, on a case-by-case basis, until mining activity approaches each well. As indicated above, BLM’s analysis suggests that substantial portions of these remaining reserves could be produced prior to initiation of mining activity on the West Antelope LBA Tract under the Proposed Action or Alternatives 2 or 3. CBM reserves that are not recovered prior to mining would be lost. Agreements between affected oil and gas lessees and coal lessees must be negotiated in order to optimize recovery of both resources. 4.1.3 Soils Removal and replacement of soil resources during mining and South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences reclamation would cause changes in soil resources. In general, soil chemistry and soil nutrient distribution would be more uniform, and average topsoil quality would be improved in reclaimed areas on the five LBA tracts because soil material that is not suitable to support plant growth would not be salvaged for use in reclamation. This would result in more uniform vegetative productivity on the reclaimed land. On each LBA tract, the replaced topsoil would support a stable and productive vegetation community adequate in quality and quantity to support the planned postmining land uses (wildlife habitat and rangeland). There would be an increase in the near-surface bulk density of the reclaimed soil resources on each LBA tract. As a result, the average soil infiltration rates would generally decrease, which would increase the potential for runoff and soil erosion. Topographic moderation following reclamation would potentially decrease runoff, which would tend to offset the effects of decreased soil infiltration capacity. The change in soil infiltration rates would not be permanent because revegetation and natural weathering action would form a new soil structure in the reclaimed soils, and infiltration rates would gradually return to premining levels. Direct biological impacts to reclaimed soil resources on each LBA tract considered in this EIS would include a short-term reduction in soil organic matter, microbial populations, seeds, bulbs, rhizomes, and live plant parts for soil resources that are stockpiled before placement. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS Each mine would build sediment control structures as needed to trap eroded soil. Revegetation would reduce wind erosion, and soil or overburden materials containing potentially harmful chemical constituents (such as selenium) would be specially handled. These measures are required by state regulations and are therefore considered part of the Proposed Action and Action Alternatives. The previous discussion describes the impacts to soil resources that generally occur as a result of surface mining and reclamation. The following discussion is a description of potential impacts to soil resources on each LBA tract following reclamation under the Proposed Action or Action Alternatives. NARO North and South LBA Tracts Under the currently approved mining and reclamation plan, approximately 20,410 acres of soil resources will be disturbed in order to mine the coal in the existing leases at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex (Table 41). If the NARO North and South LBA Tracts are leased, disturbance related to coal mining would directly affect an additional 6,700 acres of soil resources under the two Proposed Actions, or 7,945 acres under Alternative 2, or 4,863 acres under Alternative 3. Under the BLM’s Preferred Alternatives, disturbance related to coal mining would directly affect an additional 7,700 acres. Average topsoil thickness would be 20 to 39 inches across the entire reclaimed surface on both tracts. The types and quantities of soils that are 4-17

4.0 Environmental Consequences present on the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts under the Proposed Action and Alternatives 2 and 3 are similar to soils currently being salvaged and utilized for reclamation on the existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex coal leases. Little Thunder LBA Tract Under the currently approved mining and reclamation plan, approximately 18,476 acres of soil resources will be disturbed in order to mine the coal in the existing leases at the Black Thunder Mine (Table 4-2). If the Little Thunder LBA Tract is leased, disturbance related to coal mining would directly affect an additional 5,424 acres of soil resources on and adjacent to the tract under the Proposed Action, or 6,577 acres under Alternative 2, which is the BLM’s Preferred Alternative. Under Alternative 3, the total additional disturbance area would also equal 6,577 acres (1,382 acres would be disturbed to mine the north tract and 5,195 acres would be disturbed to mine the south tract). Average topsoil thickness would be about 18 inches across the entire reclaimed surface. The types of soils and the quantities of the soil resource included in the Little Thunder LBA Tract under the alternatives considered in this EIS are similar to the soils on the existing coal leases at the Black Thunder Mine. West Roundup LBA Tract Under the currently approved mining and reclamation plan, approximately 4-18 5,288 acres of soil resources will be disturbed in order to mine the coal in the existing leases at the North Rochelle Mine (Table 4-3). If the West Roundup LBA Tract is leased, disturbance related to coal mining would directly affect an additional 3,161 acres of soil resources under the Proposed Action, or 3,161 acres under Alternative 2, or 4,105 acres under Alternative 3, or 3,865 acres under the BLM’s Preferred Alternative. Average topsoil thickness would be about 38 inches across the entire reclaimed surface. The types of soils and the quantities of the soil resource included in the West Roundup LBA Tract under the alternatives considered in this EIS are similar to the soils on the existing coal leases at the North Rochelle Mine. West Antelope LBA Tract Under the currently approved mining and reclamation plan, approximately 8,821 acres of soil resources will be disturbed in order to mine the coal in the existing leases at the Antelope Mine (Table 4-4). If the West Antelope LBA Tract is leased, disturbance related to coal mining would directly affect an additional 3,200 acres of soil resources on and adjacent to the LBA tract under the Proposed Action, or 3,500 acres under Alternative 2, or 2,467 acres under Alternative 3, which is the BLM’s Preferred Alternative. Average topsoil thickness would be about 19 inches across the entire reclaimed surface. The types of soils and the quantities of the soil resource included in the West Antelope LBA Tract under the South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences alternatives considered in this EIS are similar to the soils on the existing leases at the Antelope Mine. 4.1.4 Air Quality—Direct and Indirect Environmental Consequences This section describes the potential impacts that mining the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts would have on air quality in the General Analysis Area. Specifically, this section deals with how the air quality impacts related to mining these LBA tracts would be expected to differ from the air quality impacts related to current mining operations in this area. This EIS evaluates the potential impacts of leasing the five LBA tracts. For the purpose of impact assessment, mining the LBA tracts is considered to be a logical consequence of leasing the tracts. The cumulative impacts (the impacts of mining the LBA tracts in conjunction with other activities) on air quality in the area are addressed in Section 4.5.4. 4.1.4.1 Regulatory Background Air pollution impacts are limited by local, state, tribal, and federal air quality regulations and standards, and implementation plans established under the federal CAA and the CAAA of 1990. In Wyoming, air pollution impacts are managed by WDEQ/AQD under the WAQSR and the EPA approved State Implementation Plan. Regulations applicable to surface coal mining may include NAAQS/WAAQS, PSD, NSPS, and Federal Operating South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS Permit Program (Title V). A company initiating a project must go through the WDEQ/AQD New Source Review permitting process to obtain either a construction or modification permit or a permit waiver. The permitting process ensures sources comply with the standards and regulations stated above. The Federal CAA requires the EPA to identify NAAQS to protect the public health and welfare. Currently the EPA has established NAAQS for six pollutants (also known as “criteria pollutants”). The State of Wyoming has also established ambient air quality standards (WAAQS) for those pollutants that are as stringent as or more stringent than the NAAQS, and are enforceable under WAQSR. Table 4-7 shows the NAAQS and the WAAQS. During the New Source Review permitting process, applicants must demonstrate compliance with these standards; this can be done by modeling or other methods approved by the WDEQ/AQD Administrator. A project will typically model for criteria pollutants emitted by the project to show its contribution to ambient air quality concentrations. Please see Section 3.5.3 for more information. The PSD regulation is intended to prevent deterioration of air quality in areas that are in attainment with the NAAQS. This is achieved by establishing increments, or maximum allowable increases in the ambient concentration of PM10, NO2, and SO2 for Class I and Class II areas. A proposed new point source that has the potential to emit more than 250 TPY of any criteria pollutant (or a 4-19

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-7.
Ozone (O3) Carbon Monoxide (CO) Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) as Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)

Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutants.
Averaging Period
1-Hour 8-Hourb 8-Hourd 1-Houre Annual Annual 24-Hourd 3-Hourd 24-Hourd 24-Hour (based on the 99th percentile averaged over three years) Annual Arithmetic Mean 24-Hour (based on the 98 percentile averaged over three years) Annual Arithmetic Mean (averaged over three years)
th

Criteria Pollutant

Wyoming Standards Concentrationa
---80 ppbvc 9 ppmv (10 mg/m3) 35 ppmv (40 mg/m3) 100 µg/m3 (50 ppbv) 60 µg/m3 (20 ppbv) 260 µg/m3 (100 ppbv) 1,300 µg/m3 (500 ppbv) 150 µg/m3 ---50 µg/m3 ------1.5 µg/m3 Primary 70 µg/m3,e Secondary 40 µg/m3,f 250 µg/m3 500 µg/m3

Primarya

Federal Standards Secondarya
Same as Primary Standards ---Same as Primary Standards ------1,300 µg/m3 (500 ppbv) Same as Primary Standards

120 ppbv (235 µg/m3) 80 ppbv (157 µg/m3) 9 ppmv (10 mg/m3) 35 ppmv (40 mg/m3) 100 µg/m3 (53 ppbv) 80 µg/m3 (30 ppbv) 365 µg/m3 (140 ppbv) ---150 µg/m3 150 µg/m3 50 µg/m3 65 µg/m3 15 µg/m3 1.5 µg/m3 -------------

Particulate Matter 10 Microns in Aerodynamic Diameter (PM10)

Particulate Matter 2.5 Microns in Aerodynamic Diameter (PM2.5)

Lead (Pb) Hydrogen Sulfide Suspended Sulfates Fluorides in Ambient Air

Calendar Quarter ½ Hour ½ Hour Annual 30 Day

Same as Primary Standards -------------

b c

d e f

12 Hours ---3.0 µg/m3 ---1.8 µg/m3 24 Hours ------0.5 µg/m3 7 Days ------0.4 µg/m3 30 Days ------Equivalent units given in parentheses are based upon a reference temperature of 25 degrees C and a reference pressure of 760 mm mercury. Measurements of air quality are corrected to a reference temperature of 25 degrees C and a reference pressure of 760 mm mercury (1,013.2 millibar); ppmv and ppbv in this table refer to parts per million by volume and parts per billion by volume, respectively, or micro-moles of pollutant per mole of gas. The 8-hour ozone standard will be implemented once an area achieves attainment for the 1-hour standard. The 8-hour ozone standard is met when the average of the annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration is less than or equal to 0.008 ppm (80 ppbv). A violation occurs on the second exceedance during a calendar year. Not to be exceeded more than two times per year. Not to be exceeded more than two times in five consecutive days.

4-20

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences listed source that has the potential to emit 100 TPY or more) must undergo a regulatory PSD increment consumption analysis during the WDEQ/AQD permitting process as well as BACT review. Modifications to existing major PSD sources are subject to PSD regulation if the modification results in a significant net emissions increase of any regulated pollutant. The net emissions increase is figured by the modification plus permits issued after a baseline date. In the PRB, the PM10 baseline year is 1997, the NO2 baseline year is 1988. To date, there are no coal mines within the State of Wyoming that have been subject to PSD review in the permitting process (see Section 3.5.3). This NEPA analysis compares potential air quality impacts from the Proposed Action and Action Alternatives to applicable ambient air quality standards, PSD increments, and AQRVs (such as visibility), but it does not constitute a regulatory PSD analysis; it is strictly for informational purposes. The NSPS were established by the CAA and adopted by reference into the WAQSR. The standards, which are for new or modified stationary sources, require the sources to achieve best demonstrated emission control technology. The NSPS apply to specific processes that are listed in the standards. For surface coal mining in the PRB, this includes certain activities at coal preparation plants. The requirements applicable to these existing units can be found in 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart Y South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS (Standards of Performance for Coal Preparation Facilities). All sources being permitted within the State of Wyoming must utilize BACT, not just sources subject to PSD review. During the New Source Review permitting process, a BACT analysis is performed for the proposed construction or modification. The BACT process evaluates possible control technologies for the proposed action on the basis of technical feasibility and economic reasonability. Decisions are made on a case by case basis of which technology to apply and are mandated through the permit. See Section 3.5.5.3 for BACT measures that have been applied at coal mines. Major sources of air pollutants must obtain an operating permit from WDEQ/AQD Operating Permit Program (also known as Title V). A “major source” is, generally, a facility that emits over 100 TPY of any criteria pollutant, 25 TPY of combined HAPs or 10 TPY of an individual HAP. The operating permit compiles all applicable air quality requirements for a facility and specifies compliance assurance in the form of testing, monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements. Currently the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex and the Black Thunder Mine have Title V operating permits, while the Antelope and Rochelle Mines do not.

4-21

4.0 Environmental Consequences 4.1.4.2 Specific Regulatory Applicability A new mine or a modification to an existing coal mine must be permitted by WDEQ/AQD under WAQSR Chapter 6, Section 2 and must demonstrate that they will comply with all applicable aspects of WAQSR. The following summarizes the construction/modification permitting analysis for surface coal mines. When a company decides to construct a new surface coal mine or modify an existing surface coal mine that will cause an increase in pollutant emissions, they must submit an application, which is reviewed by WDEQ/AQD New Source Review staff and the applicable WDEQ/AQD Field Office. Typically, a company will meet with the WDEQ/AQD prior to submitting an application to determine issues and details that need to be included in the application. A surface coal mining application will include the standard application, BACT measures that will be implemented, an inventory of point and fugitive sources in the area, and modeling analyses. BACT must be utilized for all sources being permitted within the State of Wyoming. WAQSR Chapter 6 Section 2(b) (v) lists BACT measures to be utilized (but not limited to) at large mining operations. An applicant uses these and other BACT measures in the development of their own PM10 and NO2 point and fugitive source inventories (see Section 3.5.5.3 for a discussion of mining BACT measures). During the application 4-22 review, WDEQ/AQD can also require further control measures through the BACT review process. For the modeling analyses, an applicant must put together an emission inventory of PM10 from their facility and surrounding sources. For PM10, both point sources and fugitive dust emissions are quantified. The emissions are based on the facility’s potential to emit in the highest production year. The applicant also examines the surrounding coal facilities and their previous air quality permits to determine the worst case emission year for those facilities, based on potential to emit. They will then choose two or more years for modeling analyses. Coal mines in the PRB are also required to quantify NO2 emissions from their facility. Dispersion modeling is required to demonstrate compliance with the ambient standard. Potential emissions from diesel powered mining equipment and blasting are modeled. Locomotive emissions are also quantified and included in the NO2 modeling analysis. Long-term PM10 modeling is conducted for the permit application to demonstrate compliance with the annual PM10 standard. For point sources, the Industrial Source Complex Model-Long Term version 3 (ISCLT3) is used, for fugitive dust the FDM is used. A background of 15 µg/m3 is used to represent PM10 concentration in the PRB prior to operation of coal mine sources. The point source and fugitive modeling results are added to the background South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences and compared standard. to the annual review period, after which a final decision on the permit is made. In order to demonstrate that mining operations will comply with all applicable aspects of the WAQSR, the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mines have all conducted air quality modeling analyses as required by WDEQ/AQD. WDEQ/AQD air quality permit analyses use a background PM10 concentration of 15 µg/m3 and 20 µg/m3 for NOx. These concentrations represent estimated background ambient air quality in the area prior to operation of the coal mine sources. Potential emissions corresponding to the maximum production level from the all coal mines in the area are then added to this background concentration. The resulting particulate levels are then compared to the average annual PM10 standard of 50 µg/m3 and the average annual NOx standard of 100 µg/m3 to determine compliance with the annual NAAQS. This constitutes a demonstration of compliance with the “long-term” or annual NAAQS. In conducting an analysis of air quality impacts in the PRB for the Wyoming and Montana BLM, Argonne National Laboratory used a background concentration of 17 µg/m3 for PM10 and 16.5 µg/m3 for NOx for the entire PRB (Table 3-1). These background concentrations are based on recently monitored values in Gillette, Wyoming which include all sources operating at the time the value was measured, including existing coal mine operations located around Gillette. The Argonne analysis then inventoried and modeled impacts 4-23

Short term PM10 modeling is not required by WDEQ/AQD, nor does WDEQ/AQD consider it to be an accurate representation of short term impacts. The CAAA (Section 234) mandates the Administrator of the EPA to analyze the accuracy of short term modeling in regard to fugitive particulate emissions from surface coal mines. A June 26, 1996 letter from EPA Region VIII to Wyoming State Representatives states the results of a study where the short term model failed to meet evaluation criteria and tended to overpredict 24hr impacts of surface coal mines. The Memorandum of Agreement of January 24, 1994 between EPA Region VIII and the State of Wyoming allows WDEQ/AQD to conduct monitoring in lieu of short-term modeling for assessing coal miningrelated impacts in the PRB. This regulatory procedure remains in place and in effect. Ambient particulate monitoring is required of each coal mine through conditions of their respective permits. The application is reviewed by WDEQ/AQD to determine compliance with all applicable air quality standards and regulations. This includes review of compliance with emission limitations established by NSPS, review of compliance with ambient standards through modeling analyses, and establishment of control measures to meet BACT requirements. The WDEQ/AQDproposed permit conditions are placed on public notice for a 30-day South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences from sources constructed after the date of the monitored background concentration. In the case of the surface coal mines, the Argonne National Laboratory analysis modeled impacts from the projected production increases at each coal mine. The North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mines all performed dispersion modeling using the FDM to model impacts from area and line sources and the EPA’s Industrial Source Complex (ISC3) to model impacts from point sources. 4.1.4.3 Existing Air Quality Issues As discussed in Section 3.5.4, the major types of emissions that come from surface coal mining activities are particulates from mining activities such as blasting, hauling coal and overburden, tailpipe emissions from large mining equipment, and gaseous clouds containing NO2 that are produced by overburden blasting. As discussed in Section 3.5.3, surface coal mines in the Wyoming PRB have not been subject to PSD requirements. Only some fraction of the mine emissions included in the WDEQ/AQD air quality permit analyses consume increment based on permits in place in the baseline year of 1997. As a result, the concentrations predicted by the WDEQ/AQD air quality permit analyses should not be compared to PSD increments. Public exposure to surface mining operations is most likely to occur along publicly accessible roads and highways that pass through the area of the mining operations. Occupants of dwellings in the area could also be affected. Although this is a sparsely populated area, there are several occupied dwellings, public-accessable facilities, and school bus stops in the area. Roads, highways, currently occupied dwellings, public-accessible facilities, and school bus stops in the vicinity of each LBA tract are shown in Figures 3-20 through 3-23. Particulates include solid particles and liquid droplets that can be suspended in air. Section 3.5.5 describes historical, regional, and site-specific particulate levels, including recently occurring exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 standard detected by monitors at several mines in the Wyoming PRB, including the applicants for the Little Thunder and West Roundup LBA Tracts. Section 3.5.5 also discusses the control measures that WDEQ/AQD has or may require to reduce PM10 levels. Particulates, especially fine particles, have been linked to numerous respiratory-related illnesses and can adversely affect individuals with preexisting heart or lung disease. They are also a major cause of visibility impairment in many parts of the United States. While individual particles cannot be seen with the naked eye, collectively they can appear as black soot, dust clouds, or gray hazes. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4-24

4.0 Environmental Consequences Gaseous NO2 is reddish-brown, heavier than air, and has a pungent odor. It is highly reactive and combines with water to form nitric acid and nitric oxide. “Nitrogen dioxide gas may cause significant toxicity because of its ability to form nitric acid with water in the eye, lung, mucous membranes, and skin” (EPA 2001). Acute exposure may cause death by damaging the pulmonary system. “Chronic or repeated exposure to lower concentrations of NO2 may exacerbate pre-existing respiratory conditions, or increase the incidence of respiratory infections” (EPA 2001). There are no NAAQS for NO2 for periods shorter than one year, but there is concern about the potential health risk associated with shortterm exposure to NO2 from blasting emissions. NIOSH, OSHA, and EPA have identified the following shortterm exposure criteria for NO2: • NIOSH’s recommended Immediately Dangerous to Life and Health level is 20.0 ppm (37,600 g/m3); EPA’s Significant Harm Level, a one-hour average, is 2.0 ppm (3,760 µg/m3); OSHA’s Short-Term Exposure Limit, a 15-minute timeweighted average, which was developed for workers, is 5.0 ppm (9,400 g/m3), which must not be exceeded during any part of the workday, as measured instantaneously); • NIOSH’s recommendation for workers is a limit of 1.0 ppm (1,880 µg/m3) based on a 15minute exposure that should not be exceeded at any time during the workday; and EPA recommends that concentrations not exceed 0.5 ppm (940 µg/m3) for a 10minute exposure to protect sensitive members of the public (EPA 2003).

•

A study conducted by Dr. Edward Faeder for the Black Thunder Mine recommended a limit of 5.0 ppm (9,400 g/m3) for a 10-minute exposure. According to EPA “…the exact concentrations at which NO2 will cause various health effects cannot be predicted with complete accuracy because the effects are a function of air concentration and time of exposure, and precise measurements have not been made in association with human toxicity. The information that is available from human exposures also suggests that there is some variation in individual response” (EPA 2001). NO2 is a product of incomplete combustion at sources such as gasoline- and diesel-burning engines or from mine blasting activities. The incomplete combustion may be caused by wet conditions, incompetent or fractured geological formations, deformation of bore holes, and other factors. Generally, NOx emissions are more prevalent at operations that use the blasting 4-25

•

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences technique referred to as cast blasting. The combination of these factors makes it difficult to eliminate NOx production (Chancellor 2003). Efforts to eliminate NOx production have included use of different blasting agents, different blends of blasting agents, different additives, different initiation systems and sequencing, borehole liners, and smaller cast blasts. Using these techniques, the mines have been able to reduce, but not eliminate, the production of NOx during blasting. The Eagle Butte Mine has almost eliminated NOx production, while the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex has had success in eliminating NOx in over 75 percent of their cast blasting through the use of borehole liners and changing their blasting agent blends (Chancellor 2003). Several of the mines in the Wyoming PRB, including the North Antelope Rochelle Complex, the North Rochelle Mine, and the Antelope Mine, have undertaken voluntary blasting restrictions to avoid NOx impact to the public. WDEQ has required several mines, including Antelope, North Antelope/Rochelle, Black Thunder, Belle Ayr, Eagle Butte, and Wyodak, to stop traffic on public roads during blasting due to concerns with fly rock and the “startle factor”. Two mines in the Wyoming PRB, Black Thunder and Eagle Butte, currently have blasting restrictions in their permits to address NOx. These voluntary and required restrictions are described further in Section 3.5.6. The WMA conducted a study in August 1999 and completed in April 2000 by the WMA with participation from the WDEQ/LQD and WDEQ/AQD because of the concern with the health risk that could be potentially associated with short-term exposure to NOx. The study involved collection of 15-minute average NO2 concentrations in areas that are near PRB coal mining operations and that would be accessible to the public. It was designed to help evaluate potential exposure of the public to NO2 emissions resulting from blasting activity at surface coal mines. Six monitor locations were selected “…based on their proximity to mining activity and accessibility to the public. Roads adjacent to mining activity were felt to be areas where the public exposure would most likely occur. Locations were also chosen based on dominant wind direction, and to represent areas having the greatest chance of being impacted by several mining operations” (WMA 2000). A brief summary of the findings follows: • Approximately 95 percent of the valid data points were readings of 0 ppm (0 µg/m3) NO2. The maximum 15-minute average valid values observed for each of the six monitors ranged from 0 to 1.65 ppm (03,102 µg/m3) NO2. Where readings greater than 0 ppm did occur there was a

•

4-26

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences strong correlation between NO2 readings and temperatures. This correlation indicates that the NO2 readings may have been inflated due to temperature considerations. The Black Thunder Mine also conducted a study designed to provide information on safe setback distances for blasting activities at that mine (TBCC 2002). Monitors for that report were located close to blasts in order to collect data for a modeling project; they were located within the mine permit boundary in areas that are not and would not be accessible to the public during mining operations and these areas are also cleared of employees during blasting activities. The measured NOx levels ranged from non-detectable to 21.4 ppm. The highest value was measured 361 ft from the blast. There are no state or federal rules that require the public or employees to stay back a certain distance from mine blasting operations in order to An limit their exposure to NO2. administrative ruling by the Wyoming EQC recently approved a 2,500-ft setback of blasting operations from the southern boundary of the Eagle Butte Coal Mine when prevailing winds are blowing toward the mine’s downwind neighbors (Casper Star Tribune 2003). The Eagle Butte Mine is located just north of Gillette, Wyoming. Impacts to the particulate annual ambient air quality standard and the NO2 annual ambient air quality standard are discussed separately for South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS each LBA tract in the following sections. Regional air quality impacts for this EIS are evaluated in the cumulative impact section (Section 4.5.4) of this EIS. 4.1.4.4 NARO North and South LBA Tracts Air Quality Impacts from Currently Permitted Operations WDEQ/AQD issued air quality permit MD-657 for the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex on August 14, 2001. This air quality permit was issued based on an analysis using emission factors, estimation methods, and model selection consistent with WDEQ/AQD policy. The analysis was based on a maximum coal production of 105 mmtpy. Material movement utilizes draglines, shovels, and trucks in overburden, and shovels, trucks, and conveyors in coal (PRCC 2001b). Particulate emission inventories for the mining activities at North Antelope/Rochelle Complex were prepared for all years in the currently anticipated life of the mine. Two years, 2001 and 2006, were then selected for worst-case dispersion modeling of PM10. Dispersion modeling was performed for projected mining at North Antelope/Rochelle Complex using the FDM for area and line sources and the ISCLT3 Model for point sources. As discussed in Section 4.1.4.2, a PM10 concentration of 15 µg/m3 was added to all modeled emissions to account for background fugitive dust. The resulting particulate levels were then compared 4-27

4.0 Environmental Consequences to the average annual PM10 standard of 50 µg/m3 to determine compliance with the annual NAAQS. This constitutes a demonstration of compliance with the “long-term” or annual NAAQS. Long-term modeling indicated the currently projected mine activities would be in compliance with the annual PM10 ambient air standard for the currently anticipated life of the mine, at the proposed production rates. The highest PM10 level modeled in 2001 was 38.53 µg/m3. In that year, the annual coal tonnage level was only 77 million tons but the pits were all in close proximity and close to the northern ambient air boundary. In 2006, the annual coal production was the maximum permitted production level of 105 million tons. This year showed the highest particulate level in the emission inventory. The dispersion model showed a maximum concentration of 49.94 µg/m3 for 2006. The locations of the maximummodeled PM10 concentrations are shown on Figures 4-1 and 4-2. In Wyoming, monitoring results have been used in lieu of short-term (24hour) modeling for assessing shortterm coal mining-related impacts in the PRB. WDEQ has chosen this procedure in accordance with an agreement between EPA and the State. That agreement recognizes that appropriate models do not exist to accurately predict 24-hour impacts. There have been no exceedances of the PM10 24-hour NAAQS at North 4-28 Antelope/Rochelle Complex through September 2003. It is unlikely that North Antelope/Rochelle Complex has had a large contribution (> 1.0 µg/m3) to the recent exceedances experienced at other mines. PRCC is complying with the increased monitoring frequency and cooperating with WDEQ/AQD to try to determine the causes of PM10 24-hour exceedances at other locations. BACT measures being utilized to control particulate emissions at North Antelope/Rochelle Complex are described in Section 3.5 of this document. As discussed in Section 3.5, NO2 is produced by some of the emissionproducing activities in the vicinity of the LBA tracts. North Antelope/Rochelle Complex was not required to conduct NO2 dispersion modeling in their most recent permit. This is because WDEQ determined in 1997 that NO2 levels in the PRB do not threaten the ambient air standard. However, North Antelope/Rochelle Complex is participating in the regional NO2 monitoring network. NO2 monitoring results through 1996 are shown on Table 3-4 and the 2001 and 2002 monitoring results are given in Table 3-5. Monitoring results for 1997 through 2002 are available through WDEQ/AQD. The agency is relying on those monitoring data and emission inventories in permit applications to demonstrate compliance with the annual NO2 ambient air standard (Table 3-1). Section 4.1.4.3 provides a discussion of short-term NO2 concentrations in areas of public exposure. There is no South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences
Reno Road

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
12 7 8 11

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.
7 8 9

15 BNSF + UP Double Tracks

14
Antelope Road

NARO NORTH
24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21

Payne Road

Piney Canyon (Mackey) Road

T. 42 34 N. T. 41 3 N.

T. 42 N. T. 41 N.

1 6 5

Antelo pe Road

PM10= 38.5 g/m

3
20

26 27 Campbell County Converse County

T. 41 34 N. T. 40 3 N.

NARO SOUTH
35 36 31 32 33 34
Irwin
Road

T. 41 N. T. 40 N.

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.

LEGEND
North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Permit Boundary Ambient Air Boundary Haul Roads Receptor Location Area Source
0 5000 10000 20000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Source: PRCC(2001b)

Figure 4-1. Maximum Modeled PM 10Concentrations at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Ambient Air Boundary for the Year 2001.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4-29

4.0 Environmental Consequences
Reno Road

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
12 7 8 11

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.
7 8 9

15 BNSF + UP Double Tracks

14
Antelope Road

NARO NORTH
21 22 23 24 19 20 21

Payne Road

Piney Canyon (Mackey) Road

T. 42 34 N. T. 41 3 N.

T. 42 N. T. 41 N.

1 6 5

Antelo pe Road

26 27 Campbell County Converse County

T. 41 34 N. T. 40 3 N.

NARO SOUTH
35 36 31 32 33
Irwin

34
Road

PM10= 49.9 g/m
2 1

T. 41 N. T. 40 N.

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.

LEGEND
North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Permit Boundary Ambient Air Boundary Haul Roads Receptor Location Area Source
0 5000 10000 20000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Source: PRCC(2001b)

Figure 4-2. Maximum Modeled PM 10Concentrations at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Ambient Air Boundary for the Year 2006.

4-30

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences NAAQS that regulates short-term NO2 levels. There have been no reported events of public exposure to NO2 from blasting activities at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex through 2002. The mine has, however, employed measures to control/limit public exposure to intermittent, short-term (blasting) releases as discussed in Section 3.5 of this document. Air Quality Impacts from Proposed Action and Alternatives The impacts to air quality from mining the NARO North and South LBA Tracts have been inferred from the impacts at the currently permitted mining operation. Twentyfour-hour impacts have been estimated from recent monitoring and emission control activities. This section deals with how the air quality impacts of mining the LBA tracts as proposed would differ from the currently permitted impacts of mining the existing leases at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. There have been no exceedances of the 24hour or annual ambient air standards at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex through 2002. None are expected from mining the LBA tracts, as discussed below. The NARO North and South LBA Tracts would be mined as an integral part of the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. The impacts to air quality under the No Action Alternative would be the same as those currently permitted. The impacts to air quality under the Proposed Action, Alternative 2, or Alternative 3 would South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS be expected to increase. Coal production without the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts is projected to average around 75 mmtpy. With the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts, coal production is anticipated to average around 90 mmtpy. Coal thickness in the LBA tracts is similar to the current lease areas; however, the average overburden thickness in the LBA tracts is greater (approximately 10 percent) than within the current lease. As a result, an increase in emissions is anticipated from increased production, increased overburden movement, and increased blast frequency. The overburden haul distance and related emissions are not expected to change; however, the coal haul lengths would be anticipated to increase as mining progresses farther from crushing facilities, resulting in a corresponding increase in coal haulage emissions. Material movement would continue to utilize draglines, shovels, and trucks in overburden and shovels and trucks in coal. Near-pit crushers and overland conveyors would continue to be utilized resulting in reduced coal haulage emissions. A facilities expansion is planned, according to the current air quality permit; however, expansion of the facilities is not dependent on acquisition of the LBA tracts. There are no plans to change blasting procedures or blast sizes if the LBA tracts are leased and mined. Current BACT measures for particulates and for NO2 would continue to be employed. The additional coal from the LBA tracts would allow mining operations 4-31

4.0 Environmental Consequences to continue for a longer period of time, ranging from four to six additional years depending upon the Action Alternative that is selected. In summary, increases in emissions from current levels are expected if the NARO North and South LBA Tracts are mined; however, air quality impacts from mining the NARO North and South LBA Tracts by the applicant should be within daily and annual NAAQS limits. Modeling for the current North Antelope/Rochelle Complex permit predicted no exceedances of the annual PM10 NAAQS at a 105 mmtpy production rate and there have been no exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS. The anticipated average coal production levels of 90 mmtpy are below the currently permitted levels, which were used in the modeling. As discussed above, there have been no reported events of public exposure to NO2 from blasting activities at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex through 2002. Public access to some of the roads in the area, including Piney Canyon Road and Antelope Road in the vicinity of the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, is and will continue to be blocked during blasting operations when wind directions or proximity to the road warrant such closure. PRCC, with the approval of Campbell County and USDA-FS, is scheduled to close approximately 5.3 miles of Piney Canyon Road (Figure 3-20) in 2003 to allow for future mining. PRCC is also scheduled to upgrade approximately 2.5 miles of Payne Road by surfacing it with a permanent treatment 4-32 designed to reduce dust emissions in 2003. When this happens, road blocking will continue on publiclyaccessible portions of the upgraded Payne Road and the eastern extent of Piney Canyon Road during nearby blasting operations. The occupants of the dwelling adjacent to the NARO North LBA Tract will be moving in the near future. There are no school bus stops or publicly-accessible facilities within three miles of the NARO North tract. There are no school bus stops within three miles of the NARO South tract, although a publicly-accessible facility, Dyno Nobel, Inc., which is a private company that provides blasting services to mines in the area, is located within the area added by Alternative 2 (Figure 3-20). 4.1.4.5 Little Thunder LBA Tract Air Quality Impacts from Currently Permitted Operations WDEQ/AQD issued air quality permit MD-417 for the Black Thunder Mine on July 1, 1999. This air quality permit was issued based on an analysis using emission factors, estimation methods, and model selection consistent with WDEQ/AQD policy. The air quality permit reflects analyses based on a maximum coal production of 100 mmtpy as well as permitted production from neighboring mines and permitted sources in close proximity to the mine. Material movement utilizes draglines, shovels and trucks in overburden, and shovels, trucks, and conveyors in coal. Permit MD-417 was amended February 22, 2000; therefore, the current permit number South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences is MD-417A. WDEQ/AQD also issued construction permit MD-877 for the Black Thunder Mine to install fogger systems for dust control in the coal preparation plant on June 23, 2003. Particulate emission inventories for the mining activities at Black Thunder Mine were prepared for all years in the currently anticipated life of the mine. Two years, 2002 and 2026, were then selected for worstcase dispersion modeling of PM10. Dispersion modeling was performed for projected mining at Black Thunder Mine and emissions from other existing and permitted sources in the area including North Rochelle and Jacobs Ranch Mines, Two Elk power generating station, and the ENCOAL Liquids from Coal and power generating facility. Area and line sources were modeled using the FDM and the ISCLT3 Model was used for point sources. As discussed in Section 4.1.4.2, a PM10 concentration of 15 µg/m3 was added to all modeled emissions to account for background fugitive dust. The resulting particulate levels were then compared to the average annual PM10 standard of 50 µg/m3 to determine compliance with the annual NAAQS. This constitutes a demonstration of compliance with the “long-term” or annual NAAQS. The long-term modeling indicated that currently projected mining activities, in conjunction with other existing and permitted activities in the area, would be in compliance with the annual PM10 ambient air standard for the life of the mine. Year 2002 was expected to have the highest South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS combined impacts from all three mines, largely due to the close proximity of Black Thunder Mine’s North and West pits and Jacob Ranch Mine’s pit to the respective ambient air boundaries. The highest PM10 level modeled in 2002 was 34.96 µg/m3. Year 2026 was selected as the second year for dispersion modeling. Particulate emissions in this year were the highest in the emission inventory and Black Thunder’s mining activity was near the ambient air boundary. The annual coal production was also at the maximum permitted production level of 100 million tons. The dispersion model showed a maximum concentration of 34.58 µg/m3 for 2026. The locations of the maximummodeled PM10 concentrations are shown on Figures 4-3 and 4-4. In Wyoming, monitoring results have been used in lieu of short-term (24hour) modeling for assessing shortterm coal mining-related impacts in the PRB. WDEQ has chosen this procedure in accordance with an agreement between EPA and the State. That agreement recognizes that appropriate models do not exist to accurately predict 24-hour impacts. There were no exceedances of the PM10 24-hour NAAQS at Black Thunder Mine through 2001. From January 2002 through January 2003, there were five exceedances of the PM10 24-hour NAAQS at one of the Black Thunder Mine’s air quality monitoring sites. Two of these exceedances have been flagged in the AIRS database by the WDEQ/AQD as 4-33

4.0 Environmental Consequences
R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.
24 19

Small Road

T. 44 N. T. 43 N.

4
State Highway 450

Hilight Road

17 14 13 18 16 15 14 13 18

22 BNSF + UP Double Tracks

24
State

High way 450 30

T. 43 32 N. T. 42 5 N.

4
Edwards Road

1
Reno Road

ol ho Sc

PM 10= 34.96 g/m
12 7
Antelope Road

3
8

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.

LEGEND
Black Thunder Mine Permit Boundary Ambient Air Boundary Haul Roads Receptor Location
0 5000 10000 20000

Existing Black Thunder Mine Federal Coal Leases Little Thunder LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternatives 2 & 3 North Tract Under Alternative 3 South Tract Under Alternative 3

Area Source Source: Black Thunder Mine's Air Quality Permit MD-417

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 4-3. Maximum Modeled PM the Year 2002.

10Concentrations

at the Black Thunder Mine Ambient Air Boundary for

4-34

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Cre ek

Roa d

T. 43 N. T. 42 N.

4.0 Environmental Consequences
R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.
24 19

Small Road

T. 44 N. T. 43 N.

4
State Highway 450

Hilight Road

17 17 16 15

PM10= 34.58 g/m
20 21 22

23 BNSF + UP Double Tracks

24
State

High way 450 30

T. 43 32 N. T. 42 5 N.

4
Edwards Road

1
Reno Road

ol ho Sc

12
Antelope Road

9 8

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.

LEGEND
Black Thunder Mine Permit Boundary Ambient Air Boundary Receptor Location Area Source
0 5000 10000 20000

Existing Black Thunder Mine Federal Coal Leases Little Thunder LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternatives 2 & 3 North Tract Under Alternative 3 South Tract Under Alternative 3

Source: Black Thunder Mine's Air Quality Permit MD-417

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 4-4. Maximum Modeled PM the Year 2026.

10Concentrations

at the Black Thunder Mine Ambient Air Boundary for

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Cre ek

4-35

Roa d

T. 43 N. T. 42 N.

4.0 Environmental Consequences having been impacted by winds in excess of 40 mph during the collection period. The high wind conditions combined with increased background dust levels and specific mine activities may have contributed to these exceedances. Several years of drought conditions coupled with stronger winds may be transporting more dust from upwind sources, resulting in a higher background dust level than in more normal meteorological conditions. The meteorology for the period December 2001 through February 2002 showed abnormally high average wind speeds at the neighboring North Rochelle Mine. During this period, average wind speeds were nearly 50 percent and 35 percent higher than the same period in the previous two years when average speeds of 10.0 and 12.23 mph, respectively, were recorded. It is very likely that a similar increase in wind speeds has been experienced at the Black Thunder Mine. In addition to the BACT measures discussed in Section 3.5 of this document, the mine has increased its monitoring frequency and has worked with WDEQ/AQD to develop and implement plans to reduce emissions on high wind days. Actions that the mine is implementing include elimination of unnecessary roads, periodic application of magnesium chloride and surfactants to roads, reducing the dump height of the draglines, and increasing efforts for timely reclamation of disturbed areas. There have been no exceedances of the PM10 annual NAAQS. As discussed in Section 3.5, NO2 is produced by some of the emission4-36 producing activities in the vicinity of the LBA tract. Black Thunder Mine was not required to conduct NO2 dispersion modeling in their most recent permit. This is because WDEQ determined in 1997 that NO2 levels in the PRB do not threaten the ambient standard. However, Black Thunder Mine is participating in the regional NO2 NO2 monitoring network. monitoring results through 1996 are shown on Table 3-4 and the 2001 and 2002 monitoring results are shown in Table 3-5. Monitoring results for 1997 through 2002 are available through WDEQ/AQD. The agency is relying on those monitoring data and emission inventories in permit applications to demonstrate compliance with the annual NO2 ambient air standard (Table 3-1). Section 4.1.4.3 provides a discussion of short-term NO2 concentrations in areas of public exposure. There is no NAAQS that regulates short-term NO2 levels. Black Thunder Mine received several reports of public exposure to NO2 from blasting prior to 2001. Black Thunder currently has blasting restrictions in its WDEQ/LQD approved mining permit that were developed to control/limit public exposure to intermittent, short-term (blasting) releases, which are discussed in Section 3.5. Black Thunder Mine has also experimented with procedures and materials designed to reduce the production of NO2 from blasting, including reducing the size of its blasts. No reports of public exposure to NO2 related to blasting operations at the Black Thunder Mine have been received since early 2001. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Air Quality Impacts from Proposed Action and Alternatives The annual impacts to air quality from mining the Little Thunder LBA Tract have been inferred from the modeled impacts at the currently permitted mining operation. Twentyfour-hour impacts have been estimated from recent monitoring and emission control activities. This section deals with how the air quality impacts of mining the LBA tract as proposed differ from the currently permitted impacts of mining the existing coal leases at the Black Thunder Mine. Five 24-hour PM10 exceedances have occurred during 2002 and January 2003. Black Thunder Mine is investigating these exceedances of the 24-hour standard in cooperation with the WDEQ/AQD and remedies are being developed and implemented. These are expected to reduce emissions from the mine to within the 24-hour NAAQS limit. There have been no exceedances of the annual PM10 standard, and none are expected from mining the LBA tract, as discussed below. The No Action Alternative is identical to the currently permitted operation; therefore, the impacts to air quality under Alternative 1 would be the same as those currently permitted. The Proposed Action, Alternative 2, and Alternative 3 all involve mining the LBA tract as an integral part of the Black Thunder Mine. The only differences between the Alternatives are in size of the lease area and timing of lease sales/mining. If the Little Thunder LBA Tract is mined as proposed under the Proposed Action and Alternatives 2 and 3, a net increase in total emissions of particulates and NO2 as compared to the currently permitted operation would be expected. Maximum coal production is anticipated to be 68.5 mmtpy, regardless of whether or not the Little Thunder LBA Tract is acquired. Emissions from just the coal extraction-related processes should actually decrease on an annual basis, although they would be extended for an additional 7.5 to 10.1 years. The decrease would occur because as the coal seam thickness increases in the LBA tract, the operation would advance through the property more slowly. This would decrease the acres disturbed annually, cause coal haul distances to increase more slowly, and require fewer blasts per ton of coal extracted. However, the increasing overburden-to-coal ratio of the LBA tract is expected to more than offset these decreases. With a 46 percent increase in overburden thickness, overburden extraction and haulage would generate more emissions per ton of coal mined than are modeled in the current permit. Coal removal would continue to be performed with shovels and trucks. Additional near-pit crusher and conveyor systems would be constructed if the LBA tract is acquired. This would serve to keep coal haul distances similar to haul distances without the LBA tract. The overburden haul distance and related emissions are not expected to change because the method of mining would 4-37

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences not change. Overburden movement would continue to utilize draglines, shovels, and trucks. There are no plans to change blasting procedures or blast sizes associated with the mining of this LBA tract. In addition, current BACT measures for particulates and for NO2 would continue to be employed. In summary, emissions associated with mining the Little Thunder LBA Tract are expected to increase over those modeled in the current air permit. Black Thunder Mine, in conjunction with WDEQ/AQD, is developing improvements in emission control activities to remedy current elevated levels of emissions. The mine anticipates that these improvements in emission control activities would allow permitting the LBA tract at a maximum production of 100 mmtpy. In the event that compliance cannot be demonstrated in a permit for 100 mmtpy, a lower annual production rate and/or further expansion of emission control activities at the mine would have to be evaluated for compliance prior to approval of mining operations on the Little Thunder LBA Tract. As discussed above, the Black Thunder Mine received several reports of public exposure to NO2 from blasting prior to 2001 and the mine currently has blasting restrictions in its WDEQ/LQD approved mining permit that were developed to control/limit public exposure to intermittent, short-term (blasting) releases. The mining permit would be amended to include the Little Thunder LBA Tract, if it is 4-38 leased, and WDEQ/LQD would extend the blasting restrictions to include mining operations on the tract if they determine those restrictions continue to be needed in order to limit public exposure to blasting releases. Public access to roads in the vicinity of the tract, including State Highway 450, Reno Road, and School Creek Road, is and will continue to be blocked during blasting operations when wind directions or proximity to the road warrant such closure. The owners of the dwelling located near the Little Thunder LBA Tract are currently living out of state and negotiations are in progress for purchase of the property (Figure 3-21). There are no school bus stops or publiclyaccessible facilities within three miles of the tract as proposed. 4.1.4.6 West Roundup LBA Tract Air Quality Impacts from Currently Permitted Operations WDEQ/AQD issued air quality permit MD-454 for the North Rochelle Mine on May 5, 2000. This air quality permit was issued based on an analysis using emission factors, estimation methods, and model selection consistent with WDEQ/AQD policy. The air quality permit reflects analyses based on a maximum coal production of 35 mmtpy as well as permitted production from neighboring mines and permitted sources in close proximity to the mine. Material movement utilizes draglines, shovels and trucks in overburden, and shovels, trucks, and conveyors in coal. Permit MD-790 South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences was issued August 19, 2002 by WDEQ/AQD to modify permit MD454 for replacement of the coal handling system baghouses with dry fog agglomerative dust suppression systems. WDEQ/AQD issued approval to modify permit MD-790 on March 5, 2003; therefore, the current air quality permit for the North Rochelle Mine is MD-790A (TCC 2003). Particulate emission inventories for the mining activities at North Rochelle Mine were prepared for all years in the currently anticipated life of the mine. Two years, 2002 and 2012, were then selected for worstcase dispersion modeling of PM10. Dispersion modeling was performed for projected mining at North Rochelle Mine and emissions from other existing and permitted sources in the area including Black Thunder and Jacobs Ranch Mines, Two Elk power generating station, and the ENCOAL Liquids from Coal and power generating facility. Area and line sources were modeled using the FDM and the ISCLT3 Model was used for point sources. As discussed in Section 4.1.4.2, a PM10 concentration of 15 µg/m3 was added to all modeled emissions to account for background fugitive dust. The resulting particulate levels were then compared to the average annual PM10 standard of 50 µg/m3 to determine compliance with the annual NAAQS. This constitutes a demonstration of compliance with the “long-term” or annual NAAQS. The long-term modeling indicated that currently projected mining activities, in conjunction with other South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS existing and permitted activities in the area, would be in compliance with the annual PM10 ambient air standard for the life of the mine. Year 2002 was expected to have the highest combined impacts from all three mines, largely due to the close proximity of Black Thunder Mine’s South Pit and North Rochelle Mine’s Pit 1. The highest PM10 level modeled in 2002 was 33.9 µg/m3. Year 2012 was selected as the second year for dispersion modeling. Particulate emissions in this year were nearly identical to the peak year (2005) in the emission inventory and North Rochelle’s mining activity was near the ambient air boundary. The annual coal production was also at the maximum permitted production level of 35 million tons. The dispersion model showed a maximum concentration of 42.7 µg/m3 for 2012. The locations of the maximummodeled PM10 concentrations are shown on Figures 4-5 and 4-6. In Wyoming, monitoring results have been used in lieu of short-term (24hour) modeling for assessing shortterm coal mining-related impacts in the PRB. WDEQ has chosen this procedure in accordance with an agreement between EPA and the State. That agreement recognizes that appropriate models do not exist to accurately predict 24-hour impacts. There were no exceedances of the PM10 24-hour NAAQS at North Rochelle Mine through 2000. During 2001 and 2002, there were total of 14 exceedances of the PM10 24-hour NAAQS at North Rochelle Mine’s air 4-39

4.0 Environmental Consequences
State Highway 450

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.
12 7 8 9

Hilight Road

19 24 State High way 450 25 30

T. 43 N. T. 42 N.

Roa d

T.
34 35 36 31 32 33 43

Cre ek

2
Reno Road

ol ho Sc

Edwards Road

T. 42 N.

10
BNSF + UP Double Tracks

12 Antelope Road

PM 10= 33.9 g/m
27 26 25 30 29 28 27

Piney Canyon (Mackey) Road

T. 42 N. T. 41 N.

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.

LEGEND
North Rochelle Mine Permit Boundary Ambient Air Boundary Haul Roads Receptor Location Area Source
0 5000 10000 20000

Source: TCC(2003) GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 4-5. Maximum Modeled PM the Year 2002.

10Concentrations

at the North Rochelle Mine Ambient Air Boundary for

4-40

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences
State Highway 450

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.
12 7 8 9

Hilight Road

19 24 State High way 450 25 30

T. 43 N. T. 42 N.

Roa d

T.
34 35 36 31 32 33 43

Cre ek

2
Reno Road

ol ho Sc

Edwards Road

T. 42 N.

10
BNSF + UP Double Tracks

12 Antelope Road

PM 10= 42.7 g/m
24 19

Piney Canyon (Mackey) Road

T. 42 N. T. 41 N.

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

R. 70 W. R. 69 W.

LEGEND
North Rochelle Mine Permit Boundary Ambient Air Boundary Haul Roads Receptor Location Area Source
0 5000 10000 20000

Source: TCC(2003) GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 4-6. Maximum Modeled PM the Year 2012.

10Concentrations

at the North Rochelle Mine Ambient Air Boundary for

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4-41

4.0 Environmental Consequences quality monitoring sites. Five of these exceedances have been flagged in the AIRS database by the WDEQ/AQD as having been impacted by winds in excess of 40 mph during the collection period. The high wind conditions combined with increased background dust levels and specific mine activities may have contributed to these exceedances. Several years of drought conditions coupled with stronger winds may be transporting more dust from upwind sources, resulting in a higher background dust level than in more normal meteorological conditions. The meteorology for the period December 2001 through February 2002 shows abnormally high average wind speeds. During this period, average wind speeds of 16.4 mph were recorded at the North Rochelle Mine meteorological site. This is nearly 50 percent and 35 percent higher than the same period in the previous two years when average speeds of 10.0 and 12.23 mph, respectively, were recorded. Two of these exceedances appear to be directly related to dust generated from an unpaved county road that was relocated to within 500 ft of one of the monitors. Because the road relocation occurred after the monitor was in place, the WDEQ/AQD has requested that a new monitor location be developed further from the road. In addition, the mine has treated the road with chemical stabilizers to reduce dust. In addition to the BACT measures discussed in Section 3.5 of this document, the mine has increased its 4-42 monitoring frequency and has worked with WDEQ/AQD to develop an ongoing compliance plan for controlling particulates. Part of the compliance plan involves determining the causes of the exceedances and possible solutions. Specific measures implemented at the North Rochelle Mine so far include chemical stabilization of disturbed ground, surface roughening through creation of windrows, and mulching and crimping activities. These measures are being implemented on disturbed acres susceptible to wind scouring including stockpiles, areas stripped for mine advance, and areas being brought to final grade. In addition, the mine is inter-seeding areas where the recent drought has hindered revegetation success. As discussed in Section 3.5, NO2 is produced by some of the emissionproducing activities in the vicinity of the LBA tract. North Rochelle Mine was not required to conduct NO2 dispersion modeling in their most recent permit. This is because WDEQ determined in 1997 that NO2 levels in the PRB do not threaten the ambient standard. However, North Rochelle Mine is participating in the regional NO2 monitoring network. NO2 monitoring results through 1996 are shown on Table 3-4 and the 2001 and 2002 monitoring results are given in Table 3-5. Monitoring results for 1997 through 2002 are available through WDEQ/AQD. The agency is relying on those monitoring data and emission inventories in permit applications to demonstrate compliance with the annual NO2 ambient air standard (Table 3-1). South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Section 4.1.4.3 provides a discussion of short-term NO2 concentrations in areas of public exposure. There is no NAAQS that regulated short-term NO2 levels. There have been no reported events of public exposure to NO2 from blasting activities at the North Rochelle Mine through 2002. The mine has, however, employed measures to control/limit public exposure to intermittent, short-term (blasting) releases as discussed in Section 3.5. Air Quality Impacts from Proposed Action and Alternatives The annual impacts to air quality from mining the West Roundup LBA Tract have been inferred from the modeled impacts at the currently permitted mining operation. Twentyfour-hour impacts have been estimated from recent monitoring and emission control activities. This section deals with how the air quality impacts of mining the LBA tract as proposed differ from the currently permitted impacts of mining the existing coal leases at the North Rochelle Mine. Fourteen 24-hour PM10 exceedances have occurred through 2002 and North Rochelle Mine is investigating exceedances of the 24-hour standard in cooperation with the WDEQ/AQD and remedies are being developed and implemented. These are expected to reduce emissions from the mine to within the 24-hour NAAQS limit. There have been no exceedances of the annual PM10 standard, and none are expected from mining the LBA tract, as discussed below. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS The No Action Alternative is identical to the currently permitted operation; therefore, the impacts to air quality under Alternative 1 would be the same as those currently permitted. The Proposed Action, Alternative 2, and Alternative 3 all involve mining the LBA tract as an integral part of the North Rochelle Mine. The only differences between the alternatives are in size of the lease area and timing of lease sales/mining. The Proposed Action and Alternatives 2 and 3 are expected to result in a net increase in total emissions of particulates and NO2 as compared to the currently permitted operation. Maximum coal production is anticipated to be approximately 35 mmtpy, regardless of whether or not the West Roundup LBA Tract is acquired. Emissions from just the coal extraction-related processes should actually decrease on an annual basis although they would be extended for an additional five to 8.8 years. The decrease would occur because as the coal seam thickness increases in the LBA tract, the operation would advance through the property more slowly. This would decrease the acres disturbed annually, cause coal haul distances to increase more slowly, and require fewer blasts per ton of coal extracted. However, the increasing overburdento-coal ratio of the LBA tract is expected to more than offset these decreases. With a nearly 50 percent increase in overburden thickness, overburden extraction and haulage would generate more emissions per ton of coal mined than are modeled in the current permit. 4-43

4.0 Environmental Consequences The overburden haul distance and related emissions are not expected to change. Material movement would continue to utilize draglines, shovels and trucks in overburden, and shovels and trucks in coal. Near-pit crushers and overland conveyors would continue to be utilized resulting in reduced coal haulage emissions. There are no plans to change blasting procedures or blast sizes associated with the mining of this LBA tract. In addition, current BACT measures for particulates and for NO2 would continue to be employed. In summary, emissions associated with mining the West Roundup LBA Tract are expected to increase over those modeled in the current air permit. North Rochelle Mine, in conjunction with WDEQ/AQD, is developing improvements in emission control activities to remedy current elevated levels of emissions. These improvements may not be enough to allow permitting the LBA tract at a maximum production of 35 mmtpy. It is likely, however, that a permit can be obtained with a lower annual production rate and/or further expansion of emission control activities at the mine. As discussed above, there have been no reported events of public exposure to NO2 from blasting activities at the North Rochelle Mine through 2002. Public access to some of the roads in the area, including Reno Road, Antelope Road, and School Creek Road in the vicinity of the North Rochelle Mine, is and will continue to be blocked during blasting operations 4-44 when wind directions or proximity to the road warrant such closure. The existing North Rochelle coal lease borders Reno Road on the north. Issuance of a lease for the West Roundup LBA Tract would result in mining operations bordering Reno Road on the north and south, which could result in closure or relocation of the road. The nearest dwelling (the Wilkinson homestead) is located over three miles from the West Roundup LBA Tract, although it is currently not occupied. There are no school bus stops or publicly-accessible facilities within three miles of the tract as proposed. 4.1.4.7 West Antelope LBA Tract Air Quality Impacts from Currently Permitted Operations WDEQ/AQD issued air quality permit MD-616 for the Antelope Mine on April 30, 2001. This air quality permit was issued based on an analysis using emission factors, estimation methods, and model selection consistent with WDEQ/AQD policy. The air quality permit reflects analyses based on a maximum coal production of 32 mmtpy. Material movement utilizes draglines, shovels and trucks in overburden, and shovels, trucks, and conveyors in coal (ACC 2000b). Particulate emission inventories for the mining activities at Antelope Mine were prepared for all years in the currently anticipated life of the mine. Two years, 2006 and 2016, were then selected for worst-case dispersion Dispersion modeling of PM10. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences modeling was performed for projected mining at Antelope Mine. Area and line sources were modeled using the FDM and the ISCLT3 Model was used for point sources. As discussed in Section 4.1.4.2, a PM10 concentration of 15 µg/m3 was added to all modeled emissions to account for background fugitive dust. The resulting particulate levels were then compared to the average annual PM10 standard of 50 µg/m3 to determine compliance with the annual NAAQS. This constitutes a demonstration of compliance with the “long-term” or annual NAAQS. Long-term modeling indicated the currently projected mine activities will be in compliance with the annual PM10 ambient air standard for the life of the mine. The worst-case years were selected on having the highest PM10 emissions in the emissions inventory. The dispersion model showed a maximum concentration of 47.3 µg/m3 in 2006 and 49.2 µg/m3 in 2016. Coal production in both years was the maximum permitted production level of 32 million tons. The locations of the maximummodeled PM10 concentrations are shown on Figures 4-7 and 4-8. In Wyoming, monitoring results have been used in lieu of short-term (24hour) modeling for assessing shortterm coal mining-related impacts in the PRB. WDEQ has chosen this procedure in accordance with an agreement between EPA and the State. That agreement recognizes that appropriate models do not exist to accurately predict 24-hour impacts. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS There have been no exceedances of the PM10 24-hour NAAQS at Antelope Mine through September 2003. They are complying with the increased monitoring frequency and cooperating with WDEQ/AQD to try to determine the causes of PM10 24-hour exceedances at other locations. BACT measures being utilized to control particulate emissions at Antelope Mine are described in Section 3.5 of this document. As discussed in Section 3.5, NO2 is produced by some of the emissionproducing activities in the vicinity of the LBA tract. Antelope Mine was not required to conduct NO2 dispersion modeling in their most recent permit. This is because WDEQ determined in 1997 that NO2 levels in the PRB do not threaten the ambient air standard. However, Antelope Mine is participating in the regional NO2 monitoring network. NO2 monitoring results through 1996 are shown on Table 3-4 and the 2001 and 2002 monitoring results are given in Table 3-5. Monitoring results for 1997 through 2002 are available through WDEQ/AQD. The agency is relying on those monitoring data and emission inventories in permit applications to demonstrate compliance with the annual NO2 ambient air standard (Table 3-1). Section 4.1.4.3 provides a discussion of short-term NO2 concentrations in areas of public exposure. There is no NAAQS that regulates short-term NO2 levels. There have been no reported events of public exposure to NO2 from blasting activities at the Antelope Mine through 2002. The mine has, 4-45

4.0 Environmental Consequences
T. 42 35 N. T. 41 2 N. R. 72 W. R. 71 W.
36 31 32 33 34 35

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
36 31 32 33 34

T. 42 N. T. 41 N.

BNSF & UP Double Tracks

Antelope Road

PM10= 47.3 g/m
30 29

Campbell County Converse County 26 25

T. 41 35 N. T. 40 N.
2

T. 41 N. T. 40 N.

59 way High State

22 37 oad d) ty R Roa oun pe C telo An .a. (a.k 27

R. 72 W. R. 71 W.

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

LEGEND
Antelope Mine Permit Boundary Ambient Air Boundary Haul Roads Receptor Location Area Source
0 5000 10000 20000

Existing Antelope Mine Federal Coal Leases West Antelope LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2 Area Removed Under Alternative 3

Source: ACC(2000b)

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 4-7. Maximum Modeled PM Year 2006.

10Concentrations

at the Antelope Mine Ambient Air Boundary for the

4-46

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences
T. 42 35 N. T. 412 N. R. 72 W. R. 71 W.
BNSF & UP Double Tracks

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.
32 33 34 35
Antelope Road

T. 42 N. T. 41 N.

PM 10= 49.2 g/m
7 8

3
9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10

15 14 13 18 17 16 14 13 18 17 16 15

Campbell County Converse County 26 25

30 30 29 28 27 26 25

T. 41 35 N. T. 40 N.
2

T. 41 N. T. 40 N.

59 way High State

22 37 oad d) ty R Roa oun pe C telo An .a. (a.k 27

R. 72 W. R. 71 W.

R. 71 W. R. 70 W.

LEGEND
Antelope Mine Permit Boundary Ambient Air Boundary Haul Roads Receptor Location Area Source
0 5000 10000 20000

Existing Antelope Mine Federal Coal Leases West Antelope LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2 Area Removed Under Alternative 3

Source: ACC(2000b)

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 4-8. Maximum Modeled PM Year 2016.

10Concentrations

at the Antelope Mine Ambient Air Boundary for the

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4-47

4.0 Environmental Consequences however, employed measures to control/limit public exposure to intermittent, short-term (blasting) releases as discussed in Section 3.5. Air Quality Impacts from Proposed Action and Alternatives The impacts to air quality from mining the West Antelope LBA Tract have been inferred from the impacts at the currently permitted mining operation. Twenty-four-hour impacts have been estimated from recent monitoring and emission control activities. This section deals with how the air quality impacts of mining the LBA tract as proposed differ from the currently permitted impacts of mining the existing coal leases at the Antelope Mine. There have been no exceedances of the 24-hour or annual ambient air standards at the Antelope Mine through 2002. None are expected from mining the LBA tract as discussed below. The West Antelope LBA Tract would be mined as an integral part of the Antelope Mine. The impacts to air quality under the No Action Alternative would be the same as those currently permitted. The impacts to air quality under the Proposed Action, Alternative 2, or Alternative 3 are described below. Coal production is anticipated to increase to a maximum rate of 32 mmtpy, then fall off during the mine’s later years, with or without the West Antelope LBA Tract. If the mine acquires the additional coal in the LBA tract, they would produce at a rate of 32 mmtpy for a longer period of time but the life of mine would not 4-48 be extended. As a result, the increased emissions due to coal and overburden removal operations (i.e., haulage, blasting, etc.) at the 32 mmtpy production rate would occur for a longer period of time than is shown in the current approved air quality permit. The overburden haul distance and related emissions are not expected to change; however, the average overburden thickness in the LBA tract is greater than within the current lease (approximately a 12 percent increase). Thus, an increase in emissions would be anticipated from increased overburden movement and blast frequency. This may be moderated somewhat because the coal thickness in the LBA tract is somewhat greater than in the current lease areas. This would decrease the acres disturbed annually, cause coal haul distances to increase more slowly, and require fewer blasts per ton of coal extracted. Material movement would continue to utilize draglines, shovels, and trucks in overburden, and shovels and trucks in coal. Near-pit crushers and overland conveyors would continue to be utilized resulting in reduced coal haulage emissions. Facilities shown in the current air quality permit would not change as a result of proposed mining of the LBA tract. There are no plans to change blasting procedures or blast sizes associated with the mining of the LBA tract. In addition, current BACT measures for particulates and for NO2 would continue to be employed. In summary, if the Antelope Mine acquires and mines the West South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Antelope LBA Tract, increases in emissions from current levels are expected due to an increase in the time the mine would produce at a rate of 32 mmtpy and an increase in overburden thickness. The increases would be moderated somewhat by a slower rate of advance through the tract due to the greater coal thickness in the LBA tract. Modeling for the current Antelope Mine permit showed no exceedances of the annual PM10 NAAQS at a 32 mmtpy production rate and there have been no exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS. Therefore, air quality impacts that result from mining the West Antelope LBA Tract by the applicant should also be within daily and annual NAAQS limits. As discussed above, there have been no reported events of public exposure to NO2 from blasting activities at the Antelope Mine through 2002. Public access to some of the roads in the area, including Antelope Road in the vicinity of the Antelope Mine, is and will continue to be blocked during blasting operations when wind directions or proximity to the road warrant such closure. There is one occupied dwelling located approximately one mile west and a school bus stop is located on Highway 59 approximately 1.5 miles west of the West Antelope LBA Tract. In addition, there is a publiclyaccessible facility, Dyno Nobel, Inc., which is a private company that provides blasting services to mines in the area, is located approximately 1.5 miles northeast of the area added under Alternative 2 (Figure 3-23). South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS 4.1.5 Water Resources Surface Water Changes in runoff characteristics and sediment discharges would occur during mining of each of the LBA tracts as a result of the destruction and reconstruction of drainage channels as mining progresses and the use of sediment control structures to manage discharges of surface water from the mine permit areas. Erosion rates could be high on the disturbed areas because of vegetation removal. However, both state and federal regulations require that all surface runoff from mined lands be treated as necessary to meet effluent standards. Generally, the surface runoff sediment is deposited in ponds or other sediment control devices inside the permit area before the surface runoff water is allowed to leave the permit area. Since the LBA tracts would be mined as extensions of existing mines under the Proposed Actions or Action Alternatives, there would not be a major change in the size of area that is disturbed and not reclaimed at any given time as a result of leasing these tracts. WDEQ/LQD would also require monitoring programs to assure that ponds would always have adequate space reserved for sediment accumulation. The presence of disturbed areas creates a potential that sediment produced by large storms (i.e., greater than the 10-year, 24-hour storm) could potentially adversely impact areas downstream of the mining 4-49

4.0 Environmental Consequences operations. This potential for adverse downstream impacts would be extended if the LBA tracts are leased. The loss of soil structure would act to increase runoff rates on the LBA tracts in reclaimed areas. However, the general decrease in average slope in reclaimed areas, as discussed in Section 4.1.1, would tend to counteract the potential for an increase in runoff. Soil structure would gradually reform over time, and vegetation (after successful reclamation) would provide erosion protection from raindrop impact, retard surface flows, and control runoff at approximately premining levels. After mining and reclamation are complete, surface water flow, quality, and sediment discharge from the LBA tracts would approximate premining conditions. The impacts described above would be similar for the Proposed Actions and Action Alternatives, and they are similar to the expected impacts for currently permitted mining operations. Direct and indirect impacts to the surface water system resulting from mining the five LBA tracts would add to the cumulative impacts that will occur due to mining existing leases. These impacts are discussed in Section 4.5.5. Following is a description of surface water impacts from the leasing and subsequent mining of each of the LBA tracts under the Proposed Action or Action Alternatives. NARO North and South LBA Tracts The NARO North LBA Tract may encounter significant runoff in Porcupine Creek, which is ephemeral to intermittent in the vicinity of the tract. A section of Porcupine Creek is currently diverted around active pits in the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. During mining, hydrologic control within the NARO North LBA Tract would likely consist of expanding the Porcupine Creek diversion to include the tract and diverting its ephemeral tributaries or containing them in flood control reservoirs. Due to its location in the headwater area of ephemeral Antelope Creek tributaries, and due to the fact that much of the tract drains internally to a closed basin, runoff within the NARO South LBA Tract would not be expected to be significant. During mining, hydrologic control would most likely consist of allowing runoff to accrue to the mine pit, or to flood control reservoirs, where it would be treated and discharged according to the standards of WDEQ/WQD. Little Thunder LBA Tract The Little Thunder LBA Tract may encounter significant runoff in Little Thunder Creek and North Prong Little Thunder Creek. As such, hydrologic control during mining would most likely consist of containing these ephemeral draws in flood control reservoirs or diverting flows around active pits.

4-50

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences West Roundup LBA Tract The West Roundup LBA Tract is located near the headwaters of Trussler Creek and Olson Draw, and runoff within the tract would not be expected to be significant. Hydrologic control during mining would most likely consist of containing these ephemeral draws in flood control reservoirs, diverting flows around active pits, or allowing runoff to accrue to the mine pit, where it would be treated and discharged according to the standards of WDEQ/WQD. West Antelope LBA Tract The West Antelope LBA Tract may encounter significant runoff in Spring Creek and Antelope Creek. According to ACC’s West Antelope LBA Tract Lease Application (ACC 2000a), ACC would not plan to disturb Antelope Creek and buffer zone adjacent to Antelope Creek during mining, but would plan to divert a portion of Spring Creek around the open pit area if they acquire the tract. Groundwater Surface coal mining impacts the groundwater resource quantity in two ways: 1) the coal aquifers and any overburden aquifers are removed and replaced with unconsolidated backfill and 2) water levels in the coal and overburden aquifers adjacent to the mines are depressed as a result of seepage and dewatering into the open pits in the area of coal and overburden removal. If the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS LBA Tracts are leased, the area of coal removal and reclamation would increase, and the area of impacts to groundwater quantity would increase. The area subject to lower water levels would be increased roughly in proportion to the increase in area affected by mining. Currently approved mining will remove the coal and overlying aquifers on the existing leases in the PRB and replace the separate aquifer units with backfill composed of an unlayered mixture of the shale, siltstone, and sand that makes up the existing Wasatch Formation overburden and Fort Union Formation interburden. Mining each of the LBA tracts as maintenance leases would extend these impacts onto the LBA tracts. Impacts to the local groundwater systems resulting from mining would include completely dewatering the coal, overburden, and interburden within the area of coal removal in each tract, and enlarging the area of drawdown caused by coal and overburden removal. The extent that drawdowns propagate away from the mine pits is a function of the water-bearing properties of the aquifer materials. In materials with high transmissivity and low storativity, drawdowns extend further from the pit face than in materials with lower transmissivity and higher storage. In general, due to the geologic makeup of the Wasatch Formation overburden (discontinuous lenticular sandstones in a matrix of siltstone and shale), overburden drawdowns do not extend great distances from the active mine pits (Hydro-Engineering 1997, 1998, 4-51

4.0 Environmental Consequences 1999, 2000). Because of the regional continuity and higher transmissivity within the Wyodak coal seam, drawdowns propagate much further in the coal aquifer than in the overburden. Drawdowns in the coal seam are a function of distance from the pit as well as geologic and hydrologic barriers and boundaries such as crop lines, fracture zones, and recharge sources. Some private permitted water wells will be impacted (either directly by removal of the well or indirectly by water level drawdown) by approved mining operations occurring at the applicant and adjacent mines and additional water wells would be likely to be affected if the LBA tracts are leased. In compliance with SMCRA and Wyoming regulations, mine operators are required to provide the owner of a water right whose water source is interrupted, discontinued, or diminished by mining with water of equivalent quantity and quality; this mitigation is thus part of the Action Alternatives. The most probable source of replacement water would be one of the aquifers underlying the coal. The subcoal Fort Union aquifers are not removed or disturbed by coal mining, so they are not directly impacted by coal mining activity. For each LBA tract that is leased, the mine operator would be required to update the list of wells that would potentially be impacted by currently approved mining operations and predict impacts to all of the watersupply wells within the expanded fiveft drawdown contour as part of the permitting process. The operator 4-52 would be required to commit to replacing these water supplies with water of equivalent quality and quantity if they are affected by mining. The hydraulic properties of the backfill aquifer reported in the adjacent mines’ permit documents are comparable to the Wasatch Formation overburden and Wyodak coal. The data available indicate that the hydraulic conductivity of the backfill would be greater than or equal to premining coal values, suggesting that wells completed in the backfill would provide yields greater than or equal to premining coal wells. Mining and reclamation also impacts groundwater quality; the TDS concentration in the water resaturating the backfill is generally higher than the TDS concentration in the groundwater before mining. This is due to the exposure of fresh overburden surfaces to groundwater that moves through the backfill. Research conducted by the Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology on the coal fields of the northern PRB (Van Voast and Reiten 1988) indicates that upon initial saturation, mine backfill is generally high in TDS and contains soluble salts of calcium, magnesium and sodium sulfates. As the backfill is resaturated, the soluble salts are leached by groundwater inflow and TDS concentrations tend to decrease with time, indicating that the long term groundwater quality in mined and off-site lands would not be compromised (Van Voast and Reiten 1988). South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Using data compiled from 10 surface coal mines in the eastern PRB, Martin et al. (1988) concluded that backfill groundwater quality improves markedly after the backfill is leached with one pore volume of water. The same conclusions were reached by Van Voast and Reiten (1988) after analyzing data from the Decker and Colstrip Mine areas in the northern PRB. Clark (1995) conducted a study to determine if the decreases that were predicted by the laboratory studies actually occur onsite. In the area of the West Decker Mine near Decker, Montana, his study found that dissolved solids concentrations increased when water from an upgradient coal aquifer flowed into a spoils aquifer, and apparently decreased along an inferred path from a spoils aquifer to a downgradient coal aquifer. Postmining groundwaters are therefore expected to be of better quality after one pore volume of water moves through the backfill than what is observed in the backfill today. In general, the mine backfill groundwater TDS can be expected to range from 3,000 - 6,000 mg/L, similar to the premining Wasatch Formation aquifer, and meet Wyoming Class III standards for use as stock water. Direct and indirect impacts to the groundwater system resulting from mining the five LBA tracts included in this analysis would add to the cumulative impacts that will occur due to mining existing leases. As discussed above, under the Proposed Action and Action Alternatives, these LBA tracts would be leased as maintenance tracts to existing mines. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS There have been drawdowns in the coal and overlying aquifers as a result of this existing approved mining. As discussed in Sections 3.3 and 3.11, CBM wells have been and are being drilled and are producing on and/or near each of the LBA tracts in the General Analysis Area. These CBM wells are currently dewatering the coal in the vicinity of the LBA tracts. These potential overlapping impacts of these existing activities with mining the LBA tracts are considered in more detail in Section 4.5.5. The probable groundwater impacts from the leasing and subsequent mining of each of the LBA tracts under the Proposed Action or Action Alternatives are described in the following paragraphs. Some or all of the impacts to the groundwater levels in the coal aquifer described below may occur prior to the mining of the LBA tracts, if they are leased, as a result of currently approved surface coal mining adjacent to the LBA tracts and development of CBM resources on and adjacent to the LBA tracts. NARO North and South LBA Tracts Mining the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts would remove shallow aquifers on an additional 6,700 acres (Proposed Action configuration for NARO North and NARO South), 7,945 acres (Proposed Action configuration for NARO North and Alternative 2 configuration for NARO South), 4,863 acres (Proposed Action configuration for NARO North and Alternative 3 configuration for NARO South), or 7,700 acres (BLM’s Preferred Alternative for both tracts) and replace the separate aquifer units 4-53

4.0 Environmental Consequences with backfill composed of an unlayered mixture of the existing Wasatch Formation overburden and Fort Union Formation interburden. Overburden monitor wells for the existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex that were farther than 3,000 ft from the active pits recorded less than seven ft of drawdown from 1980 to 1999. No substantial water level changes were observed from 1999 to 2000 in 15 overburden wells monitored by the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex (HydroEngineering 2000). Monitoring of the existing mining operations has indicated that water level drawdowns have propagated much farther in the Wyodak coal seam aquifer than in the overburden. Coal drawdowns from 1980 to 1995 were generally in excess of five ft within four miles of the active pits at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex (HydroEngineering 1996a). In 1999, PRCC monitored water levels in 37 monitor wells completed in the Wyodak coal seam and the maximum drawdown measured at that time was approximately 115 ft in a well located roughly 1,600 ft west of the active pit (Hydro-Engineering 2000). The maximum drawdown measured in 2001 was 123 ft at a well located less than 500 ft west of the active pit (PRCC 2001a). The extent and magnitude of drawdown in the coal seam aquifer have been greatest in the areas west and north of the mine. Drawdowns recorded in monitor wells located within one mile west of the active pit are generally between 50 to 100 feet. Water levels and maps showing drawdowns in the vicinity of 4-54 the pit are included in the annual report for the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex which is sent to WDEQ/LQD each year. PRCC used the MODFLOW model to predict the extent of water level drawdown in the Wyodak coal seam as a result of mining the existing leases at North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. The results of the groundwater modeling are reported in Appendix D6, Addendum D6-G of the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex 569-T5 permit document (PRCC 1999b). The predicted extent of drawdown (five ft contour) over the life of the mine if the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts are mined is shown on Figure 4-9. This prediction is approximate and based on extrapolation of PRCC’s earlier predictions by extending the drawdowns westward and northward by the dimensions of the NARO North and South LBA Tracts. More precise predictions of the extent of drawdowns would be required in order to amend the NARO North and South LBA Tracts into the WDEQ/LQD permit area, if PRCC acquires the tracts. In July 2003, the Wyoming SEO records indicated a total of 452 permitted water wells are located within three miles of the NARO North LBA Tract and 433 permitted water wells are located within three miles of the NARO South LBA Tract. The majority (662) are owned by coal mining companies and are used for groundwater monitoring and water supply. The other 223 non minerelated wells, which include 122 wells South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences
R. 74 W. T. 45 N. R. 73 W. R. 72 W.
59

R. 71 W.

R. 70 W.

R. 69 W. T. 45 N.

T. 44 N.

T. 44 N.
Campbell County Weston County

WRIGHT

BNSF + UP Double Tracks

T. 43 N.

T. 43 N.
450

387

T. 42 N.

T. 41 N. Campbell County
Converse County

T. 41 N.

T. 40 N.

T. 40 N.
59

R. 74 W.

R. 73 W.

R. 72 W.

R. 71 W.

R. 70 W.

R. 69 W.

LEGEND
North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Permit Boundary Approximate Wyodak Coal Outcrop Line Extent of Worst-Case Modeled and Extrapolated Life of Mine Drawdown (5 ft) with NARO North and South LBA Tracts, as Applied for. Existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Federal Coal Leases NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2 Area Removed Under Alternative 3 Leases Relinquished by PRCC
0 15000 30000 60000

Clinker

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 4-9. North Antelope/Rochelle Complex Life of Mine Drawdown Map, Resulting from Currently Approved Mining and the Proposed Action.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4-55

4.0 Environmental Consequences permitted for uses related to CBM development, are apportioned into the following use categories: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 72 CBM development only 60 livestock only 38 CBM development and livestock 17 monitoring and miscellaneous 10 CBM development and miscellaneous 8 livestock and domestic 7 monitoring only 3 CBM development, livestock, and miscellaneous 3 miscellaneous only 1 domestic only 1 industrial only 1 CBM development and dewatering 1 livestock and irrigation 1 livestock and miscellaneous applicant, water would be produced from these wells for a longer period of time, but PRCC would not require additional sub-coal wells to mine the LBA tracts. Groundwater quality within the backfill aquifer at the NARO North and South LBA Tracts would be expected to be similar to groundwater quality measured in existing wells completed in the backfill at North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. To date, nine wells have been installed to monitor water levels and water quality in backfill at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. In October 1999, TDS concentrations in the nine monitoring wells ranged from 780 to 14,200 mg/L (HydroEngineering 2000) with a geometric mean of 3,070 mg/L. TDS concentrations observed in the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex backfill are generally higher than those found in the undisturbed Wasatch Formation overburden or Wyodak coal aquifers. The hydraulic properties of the backfill aquifer at the NARO North and South LBA Tracts would be expected to be similar to the hydraulic properties measured in existing wells completed in the backfill at North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. The backfill aquifer has been tested at four wells, and the average hydraulic conductivity of 36 ft/day exceeds the average hydraulic conductivity (9.5 ft/day) reported for the Wyodak coal seam in the vicinity of the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Four of these permitted water wells are located within the expanded fiveft drawdown contour with completion depths that indicate they may produce water from the Wyodak coal seam. These wells are shown in Table 4-8. During the permitting process, the mine operator would be required to update the list of potentially impacted wells and predict impacts to these and other water-supply wells within the five-ft drawdown contour. The operator would be required to commit to replacing these water supplies with water of equivalent quality and quantity if they are affected by mining. PRCC has three water supply wells completed in aquifers below the coal. If the LBA tracts are leased by the 4-56

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-8.
SEO Permit Number P25606P P12754P P44330W P84792W Note:

Water Supply Wells Possibly Subject to Drawdown if NARO North and South LBA Tracts are Mined.
Applicant Paul & Edith Ruth Wilkinson USDA-FS USDA-FS PRCC Use Stock/ Domestic Stock Stock Domestic Yield (gpm) 2.5 4 3 5 Well Depth (ft) 220 122 163 280 Depth to Water (ft) 100 unknown 94 unknown

Wells in this table are believed from their completion depths to be completed in the Wyodak coal seam, and are within the additional area of five ft or more drawdown caused by mining the NARO North and South LBA Tracts. Wells impacted by the No Action Alternative are already addressed in the State mine permit document.

Little Thunder LBA Tract Mining the LBA tract would remove shallow aquifers on an additional 5,424 acres (Proposed Action configuration), 6,577 acres (Alternative 2 configuration, which is BLM’s Preferred Alternative), 1,382 acres (Alternative 3, north tract configuration), or 5,195 acres (Alternative 3, south tract configuration), and replace the separate aquifer units with backfill composed of an unlayered mixture of the existing Wasatch Formation overburden and Fort Union Formation interburden. Overburden water levels have been monitored and recorded by Black Thunder Mine since 1980 at 11 monitor wells (Hydro-Engineering 2000). Data recorded during that period do not indicate mining has necessarily caused water levels in the overburden to be depressed in proportion to distance and direction from the active pits or in time since mining began. The maximum drawdown measured to date in the South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

overburden is approximately 39 ft at a monitor well located about 0.5 mile west of the active pit. Impacts to overburden water levels recorded to date by other monitor wells located within 1.5 miles of the pit have ranged from a decrease of 19 ft to an increase of 30 ft, with some areas basically unchanged. Because of the varied nature of the aquifer units within the Wasatch Formation overburden, water level drawdowns are variable as well. Water level drawdowns have propagated much farther and in a more consistent manner in the Wyodak coal seam aquifer than in the overburden. Coal drawdowns from 1980 to 1995 were generally in excess of five ft within five miles west and one mile north of the active pit at the Black Thunder Mine (HydroEngineering 1996a). Since 1995, coal monitor wells located over two miles west of the active pits recorded an increased rate of drawdown as a result of dewatering associated with CBM production. Coal water levels recorded by monitor wells located 4-57

4.0 Environmental Consequences between two and 4.5 miles west of the pit declined between 21 and 67 ft from 1995 to 1999. During that same time period, coal water levels less than two miles west of the active Black Thunder Mine pits declined between 10 and 28 ft. In 1999, TBCC monitored water levels in 10 monitor wells completed in the Wyodak coal seam and the maximum drawdown measured at that time was approximately 80 ft in a well located roughly three miles west the active pit (Hydro-Engineering 2000). Coal monitor wells within 0.5 mile west of the pit have recorded an overall decline of about 60 feet. Water levels and maps showing drawdowns in the vicinity of the pit are included in the annual report that the Black Thunder Mine submits to WDEQ/LQD each year. TBCC used the MODFLOW model to predict the extent of water level drawdown in the Wyodak coal seam as a result of mining the existing leases at Black Thunder Mine. The results of the groundwater modeling, which was updated in July 1999 to predict impacts associated with the development of the Thundercloud Amendment Area, are presented in Addendum MP-3.3.4 of the Black Thunder Mine 233-T6 permit document (TBCC 2000a). The predicted extent of drawdown (five ft contour) over the life of the mine if the Little Thunder LBA Tract is mined is shown on Figure 4-10. This prediction is approximate and based on extrapolation of TBCC’s earlier predictions by extending the drawdowns westward and northward by the dimensions of the Little 4-58 Thunder LBA Tract. More precise predictions of the extent of drawdowns would be required in order to amend the Little Thunder LBA Tract into the WDEQ/LQD permit area, if ALC acquires the tract. In July 2003, the Wyoming SEO records indicated a total of 735 permitted water wells are located within three miles of the Little Thunder LBA Tract. Of this total, 197 are owned by coal mining companies and are used for groundwater monitoring and water supply. The other 538 non mine-related wells, which include 457 wells permitted for uses related to CBM development, are apportioned into the following use categories: • • • • • • • • • • • 282 CBM development only 167 CBM development and livestock 57 livestock only 9 livestock and domestic 9 monitoring only 6 CBM development and miscellaneous 3 monitoring and miscellaneous 2 CBM development, livestock and miscellaneous 2 domestic only 1 monitoring, livestock and miscellaneous 2 domestic only

Two of these permitted water wells are located within the expanded fiveft drawdown contour with completion depths that indicate they may produce water from the Wyodak coal seam. These wells are shown in Table 4-9. During the permitting process, South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences
R. 74 W. T. 46 N. R. 73 W. R. 72 W. R. 71 W. R. 70 W. R. 69 W. T. 46 N.
Campbell County Weston County

T. 45 N.
59

T. 45 N.

BNSF + UP Double Tracks

T. 44 N.

5'
WRIGHT

T. 44 N.

T. 43 N.
450

T. 43 N.

387

T. 42 N.

T. 41 N.

59
Campbell County Converse County

T. 41 N.

R. 74 W.

R. 73 W.

R. 72 W.

R. 71 W.

R. 70 W.

R. 69 W.

LEGEND
Black Thunder Mine Permit Boundary Approximate Wyodak Coal Outcrop Line Extent of Worst-Case Modeled and Extrapolated Life of Mine Drawdown (5 ft) with Little Thunder LBA Tract, as Applied for. Existing Black Thunder Mine Federal Coal Leases Little Thunder LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternatives 2 & 3 North Tract Under Alternative 3 South Tract Under Alternative 3
0 15000 30000 60000

Clinker

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 4-10. Black Thunder Mine Life of Mine Drawdown Map, Resulting from Currently Approved Mining and the Proposed Action.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4-59

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-9.
SEO Permit Number P13289P P92738W Note:

Water Supply Wells Possibly Subject to Drawdown if Little Thunder LBA Tract is Mined.
Applicant Durham Meat Co. James R. & Irene Stuart Use Stock Stock Yield (gpm) 4 6 Well Depth (ft) 108 100 Depth to Water (ft) 66 40

Wells in this table are believed from their completion depths to be completed in the Wyodak coal seam, and are within the additional area of five ft or more drawdown caused by mining the Little Thunder LBA Tract. Wells impacted by the No Action Alternative are already addressed in the State mine permit document.

the mine operator would be required to update the list of potentially impacted wells and predict impacts to these and other water-supply wells within the five-ft drawdown contour. The operator would be required to commit to replacing these water supplies with water of equivalent quality and quantity if they are affected by mining. TBCC has two water supply wells completed in aquifers below the coal. If the LBA tract is lease by the applicant, water would be produced from these wells for a longer period of time, but TBCC would not require additional sub-coal wells to mine the LBA tract. Groundwater quality within the backfill aquifer at the Little Thunder LBA Tract would be expected to be similar to groundwater quality measured in existing wells completed in the backfill at Black Thunder Mine. To date, six wells have been installed to monitor water levels and water quality in the backfill at Black Thunder Mine. In October 1999, TDS concentrations in five of the backfill monitoring wells (one well can not be sampled due to a lack of saturation) ranged from 1,090 to 5,440 mg/L 4-60

(Hydro-Engineering 2000) with a geometric mean of 2,140 mg/L. TDS concentrations observed in the Black Thunder Mine backfill are generally higher than those found in the undisturbed Wasatch Formation overburden or Wyodak coal aquifers. The hydraulic properties of the backfill aquifer at the Little Thunder LBA Tract would be expected to be similar to the hydraulic properties measured in existing wells completed in the backfill at Black Thunder Mine. The hydraulic conductivities of 0.12 ft/day and 0.86 ft/day determined by testing two of the backfill wells are lower than the hydraulic conductivity (1.2 ft/day) reported for the Wyodak coal seam within the Little Thunder LBA Tract. West Roundup LBA Tract Mining the LBA tract would remove shallow aquifers on an additional 3,161 acres (Proposed Action configuration), 3,161 acres (Alternative 2), 4,105 acres (Alternative 3), or 3,865 acres (BLM’s Preferred Alternative), and replace the separate aquifer units with backfill composed of an unlayered mixture of the existing Wasatch Formation South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences overburden and Fort Formation interburden. Union proportion to distance and direction unknown from the active pits or in time since mining began. The maximum drawdown measured to date in the overburden is approximately 14 ft at a monitor well located nearly one mile east of the active pit. Another overburden monitor well located approximately 1,500 ft west of the active pit has recorded an overall drawdown of 10 Water levels and maps showing drawdowns in the vicinity of the pit are included in the annual report filed by the North Rochelle Mine with WDEQ/LQD each year. TCC used the MODFLOW model to predict the extent of water level drawdown in the Wyodak coal seam as a result of mining the existing leases at North Rochelle Mine. The results of the groundwater modeling, which was updated in January 2000 to predict impacts associated with the development of the North Roundup Amendment, are presented in Addendum MP-E of the North Rochelle Mine 550-T5 permit document (TCC 2000a). The predicted extent of drawdown (five ft contour) over the life of the mine if the West Roundup LBA Tract is mined is shown on Figure 4-11. This prediction is approximate and based on extrapolation of TCC’s earlier predictions by extending the drawdowns westward and northward by the dimensions of the West Roundup LBA Tract. More precise predictions of the extent of drawdowns would be required in order to amend the West Roundup LBA Tract into the WDEQ/LQD permit area, if the North Rochelle 4-61

Overburden water levels have been monitored and recorded by North Rochelle Mine since 1981 at five monitor wells (Hydro-Engineering 2000). Data recorded during that period do not indicate mining has necessarily caused water levels in the overburden to be depressed in ft, 4.5 ft of that decline occurred from 1998 to 1999 (Hydro-Engineering 2000). No substantial water level changes were observed during 1998 to 1999 at the other three overburden wells monitored by TCC. Because of the varied nature of the aquifer units within the Wasatch Formation overburden, water level drawdowns are variable as well. Water level drawdowns have propagated much farther and in a more consistent manner in the Wyodak coal seam aquifer than in the overburden. Coal drawdowns from 1980 to 1995 were generally in excess of 20 ft within one mile of the active pit at North Rochelle Mine (HydroEngineering 1996a). TCC monitored water levels at five wells completed in the coal from 1980 to 1995. The mining operation then removed two coal wells, leaving three coal monitoring wells from 1995 to 1998. In 1999, TCC monitored and recorded water levels in two Wyodak coal wells after a third was removed by mining. From 1998 to 1999, the two remaining coal monitor wells recorded drawdowns of 8.08 ft and 29.99 ft and both wells are located approximately 0.5 mile west of the active pit (Hydro-Engineering 2000). South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences
R. 73 W. T. 45 N. R. 72 W. R. 71 W. R. 70 W. R. 69 W. R. 68 W. T. 45 N.

BNSF + UP Double Tracks

T. 44 N.

WRIGHT

T. 43 N.

387

5'
450

T. 43 N.

5'
T. 42 N. T. 42 N.

Campbell County

5'
T. 41 N.

Weston County

Campbell County Converse County

T. 41 N.

T. 40 N.

R. 73 W.

R. 72 W.

R. 71 W.

R. 70 W.

R. 69 W.

R. 68 W.

LEGEND
North Rochelle Mine Permit Boundary Approximate Wyodak Coal Outcrop Line Extent of Worst-Case Modeled and Extrapolated Life of Mine Drawdown (5 ft) with West Roundup LBA Tract, as Applied for.

15000

30000

60000

Clinker

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 4-11. North Rochelle Mine Life of Mine Drawdown Map, Resulting from Currently Approved Mining and the Proposed Action.

4-62

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Mine acquires the West Roundup LBA Tract. In July 2003, the Wyoming SEO records indicated a total of 488 permitted water wells are located within three miles of the West Roundup LBA Tract. Of this total, 260 are owned by coal mining companies and are used for groundwater monitoring and water supply. The other 228 non minerelated wells, which include 156 wells permitted for uses related to CBM development, are apportioned into the following use categories: • • • • • • • • • • 113 CBM development only 35 livestock only 31 CBM development and livestock 31 monitoring only 9 monitoring and miscellaneous 3 industrial only 2 CBM development, livestock and miscellaneous 2 livestock and domestic 1 domestic only 1 miscellaneous only replacing these water supplies with water of equivalent quality and quantity if they are affected by mining. TCC has two water supply wells completed in aquifers below the coal. If the LBA tract is lease by the applicant, water would be produced from these wells for a longer period of time, but TCC would not require additional sub-coal wells to mine the LBA tract. Groundwater quality within the backfill aquifer at the West Roundup LBA Tract would be expected to be similar to groundwater quality measured in existing wells completed in the backfill at nearby mines. Due to the absence of saturated backfill at North Rochelle Mine, no site-specific data are available yet for the quality of groundwater within the mine’s backfill. TDS concentrations observed in the backfill at nearby mines are generally higher than those found in the undisturbed Wasatch Formation overburden or Wyodak coal aquifer. At the Black Thunder Mine, which is located north of and adjacent to the North Rochelle Mine, October 1999 TDS concentrations of groundwater from the backfill were varied and ranged from 1,090 to 5,440 mg/L (Hydro-Engineering 2000) with a geometric mean of 2,140 mg/L. The hydraulic properties of the backfill aquifer at the West Roundup LBA Tract would be expected to be similar to the hydraulic properties measured in existing wells completed in the backfill at nearby mines. Again, 4-63

Four of these permitted water wells are located within the expanded fiveft drawdown contour with completion depths that indicate they may produce water from the Wyodak coal seam. These wells are shown on Table 4-10. During the permitting process, the mine operator would be required to update the list of potentially impacted wells and predict impacts to these and other watersupply wells within the five-ft drawdown contour. The operator would be required to commit to South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-10. Water Supply Wells Possibly Subject to Drawdown if West Roundup LBA Tract is Mined.
SEO Permit Number P12757P P101801W P25608P Applicant USDA-FS Bridle Bit Ranch Company Paul & Edith Ruth Wilkinson Use Stock Stock Stock Yield (gpm) 4 20 4 Well Depth (ft) 165 264 110 Depth to Water (ft) unknown 80 flowing

P5848W Paul Wilkinson Stock 2.5 140 0 Note: Wells in this table are believed from their completion depths to be completed in the Wyodak coal seam, and are within the additional area of five ft or more drawdown caused by mining the West Roundup Tract. Wells impacted by the No Action Alternative are already addressed in the State mine permit document.

due to the minimal areal extent of backfill and consequently a lack of saturation at North Rochelle Mine to date, no site-specific data are available for the hydraulic properties of the mine’s backfill. At Black Thunder Mine, the backfill has been tested at two wells, and the hydraulic conductivities of 0.12 ft/day and 0.86 ft/day are slightly lower than the hydraulic conductivity (1.2 ft/day) reported for the Wyodak coal seam within the nearby Little Thunder LBA Tract. West Antelope LBA Tract Mining the LBA tract would remove shallow aquifers on an additional 3,200 acres (Proposed Action configuration), 3,500 acres (Alternative 2 configuration), or 2,467 acres (Alternative 3 configuration, which is BLM’s Preferred Alternative) and replace the separate aquifer units with backfill composed of an unlayered mixture of the existing Wasatch Formation overburden and Fort Union Formation interburden.

Of the three overburden wells that are currently monitored by ACC, no substantial water level declines were observed from 1979 to 2001 (ACC 2001). One of the three overburden monitor wells exhibited a water level decline of approximately six ft in 1999, probably due to an active pit encroaching to within 0.5 mile of the well. Of the three interburden wells that are currently monitored by ACC, one well has exhibited about six ft of overall drawdown, one well has recorded no drawdown, and the other well has recorded roughly a two ft increase in water level from 1979 to 2001 (ACC 2001). Two underburden wells are currently being monitored and have recorded between 35 and 40 ft of drawdown. Decreases in water levels in underburden monitoring wells are thought by ACC to be caused by depressurization associated with dewatering of the overlying coal seams. Water level drawdowns have propagated much farther in the Wyodak/Anderson and Canyon coal seam aquifer than in the overburden. Coal drawdowns from 1980 to 1995 South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4-64

4.0 Environmental Consequences were generally in excess of five ft within four miles of the active pits at the Antelope Mine (Hydro-Engineering 1996a). In 2000 and 2001, ACC monitored water levels in 12 monitor wells completed in the Anderson coal seam and nine monitor wells in the Canyon coal seam. The maximum drawdown measured at that time in an Anderson monitor well was about 32 feet. That well is located approximately 3,500 ft northwest of the active pit. The maximum drawdown measured to date in the Canyon coal seam is about 100 ft at a monitor well located within 1,000 ft of the active pit (ACC 2001). Prior to 1993, mining occurred in relatively dry portions of the Anderson coal seam and little to no drawdown occurred within that aquifer. The water level in the Canyon coal seam has shown a drawdown trend in most monitor wells starting in 1988, apparently due to mining activities to the north of the Antelope Mine. The downward trend has accelerated from 1988 to the present as a result of mining a fully saturated Canyon coal seam in the northeastern part of the Antelope Mine. Those Canyon coal monitor wells within 0.5 mile north and west of the active pits have recorded an overall decline of about 80 to 90 feet. Drawdowns in both seams have resulted not only from mining, but also from a series of dewatering wells that have been used to lower water levels in advance of the pit since 1993. Water levels and maps showing drawdowns in the vicinity of the pit are included in the annual report for the Antelope Mine filed by ACC with WDEQ/LQD each year. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS ACC used the MODFLOW model to predict the extent of water level drawdown in the Anderson and Canyon coal seam aquifers as a result of mining the existing leases at Antelope Mine. The results of the groundwater modeling are reported in the Mine Plan, Section MP5, Addendum MP-C of the Antelope Mine 525-T6 permit document (ACC 1998). The predicted extent of drawdown (five ft contour) in the AndersonCanyon coal seam over the life of the mine if the Antelope Mine acquires the West Antelope LBA Tract is shown on Figure 4-12. This prediction is approximate and is based on extrapolation of ACC’s earlier predictions by extending the drawdowns westward and northward by the dimensions of the West Antelope LBA Tract. More precise predictions of the extent of drawdowns would be required in order to amend the West Antelope LBA Tract into the WDEQ/LQD permit area, if the Antelope Mine acquires the West Antelope LBA Tract. In July 2003, the Wyoming SEO records indicated a total of 427 permitted water wells are located within three miles of the West Antelope LBA Tract, 207 of which are owned by coal mining companies and are used for groundwater monitoring, dewatering, and water supply. The other 220 non mine-related wells, which include 156 wells permitted for uses related to CBM development, are apportioned into the following use categories: • 141 CBM development only 4-65

4.0 Environmental Consequences
R. 75 W. T. 44 N. R. 74 W. R. 73 W. R. 72 W.
59

R. 71 W.
BNSF & UP Double Tracks

R. 70 W. T. 44 N.

WRIGHT

5'
T. 43 N. T. 43 N.

387

T. 42 N.

T. 41 N.

Campbell County Converse County

T. 41 N.

5'
T. 40 N. T. 40 N.

T. 39 N.

R. 75 W.

R. 74 W.

R. 73 W.

R. 72 W.

R. 71 W.

R. 70 W.

LEGEND
Antelope Mine Permit Boundary Approximate Wyodak Coal Outcrop Line Extent of Worst-Case Modeled and Extrapolated Life of Mine Drawdown (Canyon Seam, 5 ft) with Antelope LBA Tract, as Applied for.
0 15000 30000 60000

Existing Antelope Mine Federal Coal Leases West Antelope LBA Tract as Applied for Area Added Under Alternative 2 Clinker

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 4-12. Antelope Mine Life of Mine Drawdown Map, Resulting from Currently Approved Mining and the Proposed Action.

4-66

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences • • • • • • • • • • 32 livestock only 23 CBM development and livestock 8 domestic and livestock 6 monitoring and miscellaneous 4 miscellaneous only 2 livestock and miscellaneous 1 livestock and reservoir supply 1 livestock, CBM development and miscellaneous 1 domestic only 1 industrial only Groundwater quality within the backfill aquifer at the West Antelope LBA Tract would be expected to be similar to groundwater quality measured in existing wells completed in the backfill at Antelope Mine. To date, seven wells have been installed to monitor water levels and water quality in backfill at the Antelope Mine. Four of these backfill monitoring wells are located in the southern part of the mine and have not yet been sampled due to a lack of saturation. Three backfill monitoring wells that were added to ACC’s monitoring program in 2000 are located in the northeastern part of the mine and had sufficient saturation to be sampled in 2001. TDS concentrations in these three monitoring wells ranged from 1,990 to 5,120 mg/L in August 2001 (ACC 2001). The hydraulic properties of the backfill aquifer at the West Antelope LBA Tract would be expected to be similar to the hydraulic properties measured in existing wells completed in the backfill at nearby mines. To date, no site-specific data are available for the hydraulic properties of the mine’s backfill. The hydraulic properties measured in existing wells completed in the backfill at North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, located northeast of the Antelope Mine, are variable but in general comparable to the Wasatch Formation overburden and Wyodak coal. At North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, the backfill aquifer has been tested at four wells, and the average hydraulic conductivity is 36 ft/day, which exceeds the average hydraulic 4-67

Five of these permitted water wells are located within the expanded fiveft drawdown contour with completion depths that indicate they produce water from the Anderson or Canyon coal seam (this excludes wells constructed for monitoring, mine dewatering or CBM production). These wells are shown on Table 4-11. During the permitting process, the mine operator would be required to update the list of potentially impacted wells and predict impacts to these and other water-supply wells within the five-ft drawdown contour. The operator would be required to commit to replacing these water supplies with water of equivalent quality and quantity if they are affected by mining. ACC has one water supply well completed in aquifers below the coal. If the LBA tract is lease by the applicant, water would be produced from this well for a longer period of time, but ACC would not require additional sub-coal wells to mine the LBA tract. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-11. Water Supply Wells Possibly Subject to Drawdown if West Antelope LBA Tract is Mined.
SEO Permit Number P23600P P50638W P76179W P109953W P5612P Applicant Patricia L. Isenberger Patricia L. Isenberger Wyoming State Highway Department Patricia L. Isenberger Litton Patricia L. Isenberger Litton Use Stock Stock Monitoring, Miscellaneous Miscellaneous Stock Yield (gpm) 7 15 0 1 5 Well Depth (ft) 300 210 300 350 350 Depth to Water (ft) 100 35 33 60 60

P23601P Patricia L. Isenberger Stock 7 250 unknown Note: Wells in this table are believed from their completion depths to be completed in the Canyon or Anderson coal seam, and are within the additional area of five ft or more drawdown caused by mining the West Antelope Tract. Wells impacted by the No Action Alternative are already addressed in the State mine permit document.

conductivity (9.5 ft/day) reported for the Wyodak coal seam in the vicinity of the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. The data available indicate that the hydraulic conductivity of the backfill would be greater than or equal to premining coal values, suggesting that wells completed in the backfill would provide yields greater than or equal to premining coal wells. 4.1.6 Alluvial Valley Floors Impacts to designated AVFs are generally not permitted if the AVF is determined to be significant to agriculture. AVFs that are not significant to agriculture can be disturbed during mining, but they must be restored as part of the reclamation process. In order to restore the AVF, the physical and hydrologic characteristics of the AVF must be determined. AVF investigations conducted within the General Analysis Area have identified AVFs that occur along Porcupine Creek, Antelope Creek, Little Thunder 4-68

Creek, and North Prong Little Thunder Creek downstream of the LBA tracts. Within the General Analysis Area, one flood irrigated hay meadow near the confluence of Porcupine Creek and Antelope Creek has been determined by the WDEQ/LQD to be significant to agriculture. The NARO North and Little Thunder LBA Tracts have been evaluated and declared non-AVF by WDEQ/LQD. The NARO South LBA Tract, West Roundup LBA Tract, and portions of the West Antelope LBA Tract have not yet been formally evaluated for the presence of AVFs. No unconsolidated stream laid deposits are found within the NARO South LBA Tract; therefore, it is unlikely an AVF declaration would be made. Based on previous non-AVF declarations made on Olson Draw downstream of the West Roundup LBA Tract, it is unlikely that this South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences channel would receive an AVF declaration upstream on the LBA tract where the drainage is smaller and AVF characteristics are negligible. Antelope Creek within and extending two miles upstream from the existing Antelope Mine permit boundary has been declared an AVF by WDEQ/LQD, and a portion of this declared AVF is within the West Antelope LBA Tract. ACC’s approved mining and reclamation plan avoids disturbing Antelope Creek and an adjacent designated buffer zone. Therefore, portions of the Antelope Creek valley within the West Antelope LBA Tract would not be mined, if the Antelope Mine acquires the tract. Spring Creek within and extending two miles upstream from the existing Antelope Mine permit boundary has also been investigated for the presence of an AVF by ACC, although no specific declarations have been made by the WDEQ/LQD. If ACC acquires the West Antelope LBA Tract, those portions of the tract and surrounding area that would be amended into the Antelope Mine permit that have not had specific declarations of the presence or absence of AVFs would be investigated as part of the mine permitting process. The WDEQ/LQD has determined that the declared and potential AVFs within the current Antelope Mine permit boundary are not significant to agriculture (ACC 2001). With the exception of an unsuccessful attempt at flood irrigation on Spring Creek, there is no present or historical record of South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS agricultural use, other than undeveloped rangeland, of the stream laid deposits within the West Antelope LBA Tract. If WDEQ determines that an AVF is present on the portion of Spring Creek included in the tract, it is reasonable to assume that mining would be permitted in those areas because the lack of agricultural development in this area precludes a determination of significance to agriculture. Streamflows in Spring Creek would be diverted around the active mining areas in a temporary diversion channel. Consequently, disruptions to streamflows that might supply AVFs on Antelope Creek downstream of the Antelope Mine would not be expected to be substantial. Streamflows in the other LBA tracts would be diverted around the active mining areas in temporary diversion ditches or captured in flood control reservoirs above the pit. If flood control impoundments are used, it would be necessary to evacuate them following major runoff events to provide storage volume for the next flood. Consequently, disruptions to streamflows that might supply downstream AVFs are expected to be negligible. Groundwater intercepted by the mine pits would be routed through settling ponds to meet state and federal quality criteria, and the pond discharges would likely increase the frequency and amount of flow in these streams, thereby increasing surface water supplies to downstream AVFs.

4-69

4.0 Environmental Consequences If the LBA tracts are mined as extensions of existing operations, the mining would extend upstream on streams already in active mine areas. Therefore, no direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts are anticipated to off-site AVFs through mining of any of the LBA tracts included in this analysis. 4.1.7 Wetlands PRCC, TBCC, TCC, and ACC have completed wetland inventories identifying the acres of jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional wetlands on each of the LBA tracts as applied for and lands added under BLM alternative configurations. Table 4-12 presents the inventory results for each LBA tract. Based on these inventories, a maximum of 62.16 acres of jurisdictional and 51.58 acres of non-jurisdictional wetlands would be disturbed if each of the LBA tracts is leased and subsequently mined under the largest Action Alternative configuration. COE has not yet reviewed or confirmed the wetland inventories covering portions of the LBA tracts, but formal wetlands delineations would be completed prior to mining, as part of the mining permit and approval process, if some or all of the LBA tracts are leased. Many of the existing wetlands on the LBA tracts would be destroyed by currently approved mining operations at the existing adjacent mines. The exception may be riverine wetlands associated with Antelope Creek and wetlands association with other streams that cross the LBA tracts that would not be disturbed during 4-70 currently approved mining operations. As stated previously, ACC’s approved mining and reclamation plan avoids disturbing Antelope Creek and an adjacent designated buffer zone. Therefore, portions of the Antelope Creek valley within the West Antelope LBA Tract and any associated wetlands would not be mined, if the Antelope Mine acquires the tract. COE requires replacement of all impacted jurisdictional wetlands in accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Replacement of non-jurisdictional wetlands may be required by the surface land owner. Surface land ownership on the five LBA tracts is primarily private; however, as discussed in Section 3.11, the NARO North, Little Thunder, and West Roundup LBA Tracts include up to approximately 4,076 acres of public lands administered by USDA-FS as part of the TBNG. Under the Preferred Alternatives for each tract, approximately 3,580 acres of TBNG lands are included. USDA-FS requires replacement of all wetlands on lands they administer. WDEQ/LQD allows and sometimes requires mitigation of nonjurisdictional wetlands affected by mining, depending on the values associated with the wetland features. During the period of time after mining and before replacement of wetlands, all wetland functions would be lost. The replaced wetlands may not duplicate the exact function and landscape features of the premine wetlands, but replacement plans would be evaluated by COE and replacement would be in accordance South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-12. Maximum Wetland Impacts in the NARO North and South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts.
LBA Tract NARO North and South Little Thunder West Roundup West Antelope Jurisdictional Wetlands1 (acres) 18.40 5.19 6.80 31.77 62.16 Non-Jurisdictional Wetlands1 (acres) 28.50 2.87 20.21 0.00 51.58

Total
1

Includes the area of each LBA tract as applied for, lands added under BLM alternatives, and the additional area that would be disturbed by mining and reclaiming the tract as part of the existing mining operation.

with the requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as determined by COE. As a result of recent court directives, playas may no longer be identified as jurisdictional waters of the U.S. under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. These non-jurisdictional wetland features, having significant biological and hydrological features, cover portions of the NARO North and South, Little Thunder, and West Roundup LBA Tracts. WDEQ/LQD requires replacement of playas with hydrologic significance. Although COE and WDEQ may not require their replacement, the applicant mines plan to continue establishing playa/depression features within the reclaimed topography if the LBA tracts are mined as extensions of existing operations. If no special segregation and placement of overburden and soils are necessary, reclamation costs do not increase if playa/depressional features are restored. However, if special handling of materials is necessary, the reclamation costs associated with restoration of playa/depressional South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

features are generally higher on a site-specific basis. 4.1.8 Vegetation Under the Proposed Actions, mining of the five LBA tracts would progressively remove the native vegetation on 18,485 acres on and near the LBA tracts. Under the Preferred Alternatives, mining of the five LBA tracts would progressively remove the native vegetation on 20,609 acres on and near the LBA tracts. Vegetation removal at each LBA tract under the Proposed Actions and Action Alternatives is presented as the additional mine disturbance areas in Tables 4-1 through 4-4. Short-term impacts associated with the removal of vegetation from the LBA tracts would include increased soil erosion and habitat loss for wildlife and livestock. Potential longterm impacts include loss of habitat for some wildlife species as a result of reduced plant species diversity, particularly big sagebrush, on reclaimed lands. However, grasslanddependent wildlife species and 4-71

4.0 Environmental Consequences livestock would benefit from the increased grass cover and production. Reclamation, including revegetation of these lands, would occur contemporaneously with mining on adjacent lands, i.e., reclamation would begin once an area is mined. Estimates of the time elapsed from topsoil stripping through reseeding of any given area range from two to four years. This would be longer for areas occupied by stockpiles, haulroads, sediment-control structures, and other mine facilities. Some roads and facilities would not be reclaimed until the end of mining. No new life-ofmine facilities would be located on any of the LBA tracts under the Proposed Actions or Action Alternatives, in which each LBA tract would be mined as an extension of an existing mine. Grazing restrictions prior to mining and during reclamation would remove up to 100 percent of the LBA areas from livestock grazing. This reduction in vegetative production would not seriously affect livestock production in the region, and longterm productivity on the reclaimed land would return to premining levels within several years following seeding with the approved final seed mixture. Wildlife use of the area would not be significantly restricted throughout the operations. Reestablished vegetation would be dominated by species mandated in the reclamation seed mixtures (to be approved by WDEQ). The majority of the approved species are native to the LBA tracts. Initially, the reclaimed 4-72 lands would be dominated by grassland vegetation, which would be less diverse than the premining vegetation. At least 20 percent of the area would be reclaimed to native shrubs at a density of one per square meter as required by current regulations. Estimates for the time it would take to restore shrubs to premining density levels range from 20 to 100 years. An indirect impact of this vegetative change could be decreased big game habitat carrying capacity. Following completion of reclamation (seeding with the final seed mixture) and before release of the reclamation bond (a minimum of 10 years), a diverse, productive, and permanent vegetative cover would be established on the LBA tracts. The decrease in plant diversity would not seriously affect the potential productivity of the reclaimed areas, and the proposed postmining land use (wildlife habitat and rangeland) should be achieved even with the changes in vegetation composition and diversity. Private landowners (Figures 3-11 through 3-14) would have the right to manipulate the vegetation on their lands as they desire once the reclamation bond is released. On average, approximately 3,600 to 4,000 acres would be disturbed each year that mining occurs if all five proposed lease areas are mined concurrently. This disturbance would occur regardless of which Action Alternatives are selected. By the time mining ceases, over 75 percent of these disturbed lands would have been reseeded. The remaining 25 percent would be reseeded during the South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences following two to three years as the life-of-mine facilities areas are reclaimed. The reclamation plans for the existing mines include steps to control invasion by weedy (invasive nonnative) plant species. The reclamation plans for each LBA tract would also include steps to control invasion from such species. Native vegetation from surrounding areas would gradually invade and become established on the reclaimed land. The climatic record of the western U.S. suggests that droughts could occur periodically during the life of the mines. Such droughts would severely hamper revegetation efforts, since lack of sufficient moisture would reduce germination and could damage newly established plants. Same-aged vegetation would be more susceptible to disease than would plants of various ages. Severe thunderstorms could also adversely affect newly seeded areas. Once a stable vegetative cover is established, however, these events would have similar impacts as would occur on native vegetation. Changes expected in the surface water network on each LBA tract as a result of mining and reclamation would affect the reestablishment of vegetation patterns on the reclaimed areas to some extent. The postmining maximum overland slope would be 20 percent in accordance with WDEQ policy. The average reclaimed overland slope on each LBA tract would not be known until WDEQ’s technical review of each permit South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS revision application is complete. No significant changes in the average overland slope are predicted. Following reclamation, the LBA tracts would be primarily a mixture of prairie grasslands with graminoid/forb-dominated areas. An overall reduction in species diversity, especially for the shrub component, would occur. As indicated previously, following reclamation bond release, management of the privately-owned surface areas would revert back to the private surface owners, who would have the right to manipulate the reclaimed vegetation. Jurisdictional wetlands would fall under the jurisdiction of the COE. Detailed wetland mitigation plans would be developed at the permitting stage to ensure no net loss of jurisdictional wetlands within the General Analysis Area. Functional wetlands may be restored in accordance with the requirements of the surface landowner. The decrease in plant diversity would not seriously affect productivity of the reclaimed areas, regardless of the Action Alternatives selected, and the proposed postmining land use (wildlife habitat and rangeland) would be achieved even with the changes in vegetative species composition and diversity. 4.1.9 Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Plant Species, USDA-FS Region 2 Sensitive Species, and BLM Sensitive Species Refer to Appendices G through K. 4-73

4.0 Environmental Consequences 4.1.10 Wildlife Local wildlife populations are directly and indirectly impacted by mining. These impacts are both short-term (until successful reclamation is achieved) and long-term (persisting beyond successful completion of reclamation). The direct impacts of surface coal mining on wildlife occur during mining and are therefore short-term. They include road kills by mine-related traffic, restrictions on wildlife movement created by fences, spoil piles, and pits, and displacement of wildlife from active mining areas. Displaced animals may find equally suitable habitat that is not occupied by other animals, occupy suitable habitat that is already being used by other individuals, or occupy poorer quality habitat than that from which they were displaced. In the second and third situations, the animals may suffer from increased competition with other animals and are less likely to survive and reproduce. The indirect impacts are longer term and may included a reduction in big game carrying capacity and microhabitats on reclaimed land due to flatter topography, less diverse vegetative cover, and reduction in sagebrush density. These impacts are currently occurring on the existing leases as mining occurs. If the LBA tracts are leased under the Proposed Actions or Action Alternatives, the areas of mining disturbance would extend onto the LBA tracts. Mining would be extended by up to 6 years at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, 4-74 10.1 years at the Black Thunder Mine, and 8.8 years at the North Rochelle Mine. Mining of the West Antelope LBA Tract by ACC is not expected to extend the current mining life. Under the Proposed Actions and Action Alternatives, big game would be displaced from portions of the LBA tracts to adjacent ranges during mining. Pronghorn would be most affected; however, none of the areas within two miles of the LBA tracts has been classified as crucial or critical pronghorn habitat. Mule deer would not be substantially impacted, given their infrequent use of these lands and the availability of suitable habitat in adjacent areas. None of the land within the General Analysis Area is considered by WGFD to be an elk use area, although elk have been observed wintering on reclaimed grasslands within the General Analysis Area in recent years. Big game displacement would be incremental, occurring over several years and allowing for gradual changes in distribution patterns. Big game residing in the adjacent areas could be impacted by increased competition with displaced animals. Noise, dust, and associated human presence would cause some localized avoidance of foraging areas adjacent to mining activities. On the existing leases, however, big game have continued to occupy areas adjacent to and within active mining operations, suggesting that some animals may become habituated to such disturbances.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Big game animals are highly mobile and can move to undisturbed areas. There would be more restrictions on big game movement on or through the tracts, however, due to the construction of additional fences, spoil piles, and pits related to mining. During winter storms, pronghorn may not be able to negotiate these barriers. WDEQ guidelines require fencing to be designed to permit pronghorn passage to the extent possible. In 1999, the WGFD reviewed monitoring data collected on mine sites for big game species and the monitoring requirements for big game species on those mine sites. Their findings concluded that the monitoring had demonstrated the lack of impacts to big game on existing mine sites. No severe minecaused mortalities have occurred and no long-lasting impacts on big game have been noted on existing mine sites. The WGFD therefore recommended that big game monitoring be discontinued on all existing mine sites. New mines will be required to conduct big game monitoring if located in crucial winter range or in significant migration corridors, neither of which are present within the LBA tracts within the General Analysis Area. If the LBA tracts are leased, road kills related to mine traffic would be extended within the General Analysis Area by up to six years for the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, 10.1 years for Black Thunder Mine, and 8.8 years for North Rochelle Mine. The life of the Antelope Mine would South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS not be extended if the West Antelope lease is mined. After mining and reclamation, alterations in the topography and vegetative cover, particularly the reduction in sagebrush density, would cause a decrease in carrying capacity and diversity on the LBA tracts. Sagebrush would gradually become reestablished on the reclaimed land, but the topographic changes would be permanent. Medium-sized mammals (such as rabbits, coyotes, and foxes) would be temporarily displaced to other habitats by mining, potentially resulting in increased competition and mortality. However, these animals would rebound on reclaimed areas, as forage is developed and small mammal prey species are recolonized. Direct losses of small mammals would be higher than for other wildlife, since the mobility of small mammals is limited and many retreat into burrows when disturbed. Therefore, populations of such prey animals as voles, mice, and prairie dogs would decline during mining. However, these animals have a high reproductive potential and tend to reinvade and adapt to reclaimed areas quickly. A research project on habitat reclamation on mined lands within the PRB for small mammals and birds concluded that reclamation objectives to encourage the recolonization of small mammal communities are being achieved (Shelley 1992). Upland game birds known to occur within the General Analysis Area 4-75

4.0 Environmental Consequences include mourning doves, wild turkey, gray partridge, sharp-tailed grouse, and sage grouse. Although mourning doves are common seasonal residents of the General Analysis Area, the primary upland game species within the area is the sage grouse. Sage grouse are yearlong residents and are found to regularly occur in suitable habitats in the General Analysis Area. Following is a description of sage grouse occurrences within each of the LBA tracts. NARO North and South LBA Tracts The sage grouse is a yearlong resident in the general North Antelope/Rochelle Complex area and is found on lands within and adjacent to the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts; however, no historic or active sage grouse leks are located on or within approximately 1.3 miles of the NARO North tract as proposed and approximately 4.5 miles of the NARO South tract as proposed. Four sage grouse leks (Wilson, Rochelle, Kort, and Payne) have been discovered in the wildlife monitoring survey area for the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. These four leks, which are all located in the eastern portion of the mine’s current permit area, comprise the Rochelle lek complex. Only the Kort and Payne leks are currently active. TWC provided the following information after conducting their spring 2003 field survey for North Antelope/Rochelle Complex (TWC 2003). WGFD personnel discovered the Wilson lek in 1975. This inactive lek 4-76 site is located approximately 2.5 miles east of the NARO North tract and 5.4 miles northeast of the NARO South tract. Although the lek was monitored sporadically from 1975 through 1985, attendance appeared to be relatively high. Attendance declined throughout the 1980s but peaked again from 1989 to 1991. Attendance gradually declined again through 1997, the last year grouse attended the lek. Active mining was still more than 2.5 miles from the lek in the early 1990s, when the most recent decline in attendance began, and was approximately 1.5 miles away when the lek was finally abandoned. At present, the inactive Wilson lek site is approximately 6,000 ft east of the active mining operation and 4,500 ft away from a topsoil stockpile. The Rochelle lek was discovered in spring 1990. This inactive lek site is located approximately 3.6 miles southeast of the NARO North tract and 4.5 miles northeast of the NARO South tract. Male attendance declined rapidly from a peak count of 21 in 1990 to one in 1993, and very few females were ever recorded. Between 1993 and 1998, only one grouse was observed at the lek annually. Coincident with a small region-wide increase in grouse populations, the Rochelle lek was attended again in 1999 (by five males and two females); however, no attendance has been documented since then. It appears that the Rochelle lek may be a satellite lek that is only attended when the area population is relatively high or increasing. The Rochelle lek location South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences was recently reached by the mining operation. The Kort lek was first identified in spring 1998. This active lek site is located in the SE¼ SW¼ of Section 31, T.42N., R.69W., and is approximately 3.5 miles eastsoutheast of the NARO North tract and 5.5 miles northeast of the NARO South tract. Male attendance has fluctuated between peaks of 13 in 2000 to four in spring 2003. For unknown reasons, grouse apparently shifted their breeding activities from the Wilson lek and formed the Kort lek. At present, the Kort lek site is approximately 6,000 ft from the active mining operation and 3,000 ft away from a topsoil stockpile. The Payne lek was discovered in spring 2001, after the 2000 NARO wildlife baseline survey was conducted (TWC 2000). This active lek site is located in the NE¼ NW¼ of Section 26, T.42N., R.70W., and is approximately 1.3 miles east of the NARO North tract and 5.9 miles northeast of the NARO South tract. Peak male counts of 21, 18, and 7 in 2001, 2002, and 2003, respectively, have been recorded. The Payne lek now appears to be the primary lek for the Rochelle lek complex and it is approximately 9,000 ft north of active mining operations. To date, mining has not physically disturbed any of the leks in the Rochelle lek complex. The direct and indirect impacts of mining encroachment on the grouse population in the lek complex are not clear at this time. An independent South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS research project is underway to investigate how sage grouse use the landscape in the vicinity of active coal mines and how lands can be reclaimed to benefit those populations. Grouse from the Rochelle lek complex population are the focus of this study. The research is being conducted by TWC and is funded by PRCC, TBCC, TCC, AML Research Program, and WGFD. Little Thunder LBA Tract Sage grouse currently do not appear to frequent the Little Thunder LBA Tract. No active sage grouse leks were observed during the 2001 survey on or within two miles of the LBA tract. One inactive sage grouse lek (Black Thunder lek) was discovered within the Black Thunder Mine permit area in 1984. The Black Thunder lek is located approximately 2,000 ft east of the southeast corner of the Little Thunder LBA Tract as proposed. The two-mile radius around the lek extends onto the LBA tract. Annual monitoring of the Black Thunder lek began in 1985, and no sage grouse have been observed at the lek since 1994. Sage grouse were not observed using the LBA tract or adjacent lands during the 2001 or 2002 wildlife field surveys. West Roundup LBA Tract Sage grouse commonly occur in the vicinity of the West Roundup LBA Tract. One inactive lek (Black Thunder lek, discussed above) is located approximately 0.5 mile north of the proposed lease area, and the two-mile radius around the lek 4-77

4.0 Environmental Consequences extends onto the LBA tract. Grouse have not been observed using this lek since 1994. No new leks were found and no sage grouse were observed to be within or adjacent to the LBA tract during the 2001 field survey. West Antelope LBA Tract Sage grouse do not appear to frequent the West Antelope LBA Tract. No sage grouse leks were observed on or near the Antelope Mine during baseline studies (1978-1979) or have been observed during annual wildlife monitoring surveys (1982-2002), which have included most of the LBA tract under the Proposed Action and Alternative 3 and the entire area added in Alternative 2. No sage grouse have been observed within the vicinity of the Antelope Mine or West Antelope LBA wildlife study area since 1986. Areas of suitable habitat for nesting and strutting grounds are needed to sustain sage grouse populations. Mining results in the temporary loss of potential nesting habitat and some disturbance to breeding activities when mining operations are within close proximity to sage grouse leks. Monitoring of sage grouse activities has indicated that the birds frequently change lek sites. It is likely that if mining activities disturb a lek, sage grouse will use an alternate lek site for breeding activities. Currently, none of the LBA tracts include any active sage grouse leks, and only one tract (NARO North) is located within two miles of an active lek, which research has indicated is the area within which 4-78 most hens will nest. Should sage grouse establish a lek on any of the proposed lease areas prior to mining, the lessee would be required to take appropriate mitigation steps prior to mining. The mines would continue to reestablish shrubs on reclaimed lands, grade reclaimed lands to create swales and depressions, and monitor sage grouse activity in the area before, during, and after mining. These and other measures would be further developed within the WDEQ/LQD permit approval process, if the tracts are leased. There is some evidence that grouse populations do repopulate areas after reclamation for the species, but there is no evidence that populations attain their previous levels and reestablishment in reclaimed areas may take 20 to 30 years, or longer (Braun 1998). As discussed above, an independent research project, funded by PRCC, TBCC, TCC, AML Research Program, and WGFD, is being conducted by TWC to investigate how sage grouse use the landscape in the vicinity of active coal mines and how lands can be reclaimed to benefit those populations. Mining the LBA tracts would not impact regional raptor populations; however individual birds or pairs may be impacted. Raptor species that commonly nest in the General Analysis Area are the golden eagle, ferruginous hawk, red-tailed hawk, Swainson’s hawk, great horned owl, and burrowing owl. Despite the lack of suitable nesting habitat (cliffs and tall trees), numerous raptor species have been observed nesting on or near the proposed lease areas. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Following is a description of raptor occurrences on each of the LBA tracts. NARO North and South LBA Tracts Nine active raptor nests were observed during the 2000 survey in the NARO North and South LBA Tracts. These included four ferruginous hawk nests, one redtailed hawk nest, and four Swainson’s hawk nests. Little Thunder LBA Tract A total of five raptor species have been identified nesting within two miles of the Little Thunder LBA Tract as proposed and the area added by Alternative 2, including the golden eagle, ferruginous hawk, red-tailed hawk, Swainson’s hawk, and burrowing owl. The golden eagle, ferruginous hawk, and Swainson’s hawk had intact nest sites on the LBA tract during the 2001 survey. West Roundup LBA Tract A total of four raptor species (golden eagle, ferruginous hawk, Swainson’s hawk, and burrowing owl) have been identified nesting within the raptor survey area, which includes the West Roundup LBA Tract as proposed, areas added under Alternatives 2 and 3, and a two-mile radius. The 2001 survey recorded 28 intact nest sites within this raptor survey area, including three golden eagle nests, 17 ferruginous hawk nests, two Swainson’s hawk nests, two burrowing owl nests, three Swainson’s hawk/ferruginous hawk South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS nests, and one golden eagle/ferruginous hawk nest. One intact nest (ferruginous hawk) is within the LBA tract as proposed, and one nest (ferruginous hawk) is within the area added under Alternative 3. West Antelope LBA Tract A total of five raptor species (golden eagle, ferruginous hawk, red-tailed hawk, great horned owl, and burrowing owl) have been identified nesting within the raptor survey area, which includes the West Antelope LBA Tract as proposed, lands added by Alternative 2, and a two-mile radius. The 2000 survey recorded nine nests within this raptor survey area: seven nests on the LBA tract as proposed and two nests on lands added under Alternative 2. Nests on the LBA tract include two red-tailed hawk nests, one great horned owl nest, two burrowing owl nests, one golden eagle/great horned owl nest, and one red-tailed hawk/golden eagle nest. Nests on the Alternative 2 area included two ferruginous hawk nests, which have been inactive since at least 1978. Mining activity could cause raptors to abandon nests proximate to disturbance. USFWS recommends a one-mile buffer around all ferruginous hawk nests. USFWS and WDEQ/LQD approval would be required before mining would occur within buffer zones for future or adjacent active raptor nests. Each of the four applicant mines annually monitors territorial occupancy and nest productivity on and around their existing leases. Raptor nesting 4-79

4.0 Environmental Consequences activity has frequently occurred in active mining and construction areas and the four applicant mines have successfully executed state-of-the-art mitigation techniques to protect nest productivity. There is an approved raptor mitigation plan for each of the existing applicant mines. These monitoring and mitigation plans would be amended to include the NARO North and South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts if they are leased. The amended raptor mitigation plans would be subject to review and approval by USFWS before the amended mining plan is approved. Any nests that would be impacted by mining operations would have to be relocated in accordance with that plan. Prior to the disturbance of any raptor nest, special purpose permits would have to be secured from the USFWS and WGFD. All active raptor nests within the mine permit areas would be protected further by buffer zones. Mine-related disturbances are not allowed to encroach in the near vicinity of any active raptor nest from March until hatching, and disturbances near raptor nests containing nestlings is strictly limited to prevent danger to, or abandonment of, the young. These required mitigation measures are included in the existing mining and reclamation permits and would be included in the amended mining and reclamation plans, if the LBA tracts are leased. Mining near raptor territories would minimally impact availability of raptor forage species. At each of the applicant mines, lack of nesting 4-80 habitat, not a lack of forage area, has been determined to be the most important factor limiting raptor density. During mining, nesting habitat is created by the excavation process (highwalls), as well as through enhancement efforts (nest platforms and boxes). After mining, the reclamation plan would reestablish the ground cover necessary for the return of a suitable prey base. As discussed in Section 3.10.5, between 19 and 21 of the Migratory Bird Species of Management Concern in Wyoming have historically been observed in the General Analysis Area. Of these, the Level 1 species (those identified as needing conservation action) commonly observed nesting in the area include the ferruginous hawk, burrowing owl, Brewer’s sparrow, Swainson’s hawk, and McCown’s longspur. Level 1 species that do not have abundant nesting habitat available in the General Analysis Area, but have been documented to nest include mountain plover, short-eared owl, upland sand piper and greater sage grouse. Potential impacts to mountain plover, greater sage grouse, and raptors, and measures in place to mitigate impacts to these species for existing mining operations are included in the preceding discussions or in Appendices G though K. Each mine’s current reclamation practices are designed to provide a mosaic of upland grass and sagebrush habitats that would potentially host most of these species. Impacts of habitat loss would be short-term for grassland species, but would last longer for South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences tree- and shrub-dependent species. Other habitat enhancement practices include the restoration of diverse landforms, direct topsoil replacement, and the construction of brush piles, snags and rock piles. A research project on habitat reclamation on mined lands within the PRB for small mammals and birds concluded that the diversity of song birds on reclaimed areas was less than on adjacent undisturbed areas, although their overall numbers were greater (Shelley 1992). The mines would continue to conduct annual surveys for Migratory Bird Species of Management Concern on and near the permits areas. If additional species are documented nesting or using the area regularly, a mitigation plan would be developed in cooperation with the USFWS to protect those birds and their habitat. Under current natural conditions, waterfowl and shorebird habitat on the LBA tracts is minimal, and production of these species is very limited. Mining the LBA tracts would thus have a negligible effect on migrating and breeding waterfowl. Sedimentation ponds created during mining would provide interim habitat for these fauna. WDEQ and COE would also require mitigation of any disturbed wetlands during reclamation, which would minimize impacts. If the replaced wetlands on the LBA tracts do not duplicate the exact function and/or landscape features of the premine wetlands, waterfowl and shorebirds could be beneficially or adversely affected as a result. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS Under natural conditions, habitat for aquatic species is limited or not present on the five LBA tracts. Mining the NARO North and South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts would affect limited sections of the ephemeral streams that cross those tracts (see Figure 3-10). The portions of the creeks that cross those LBA tracts are upstream of currently approved mining operations on those creeks. Habitat for aquatic species is present on the West Antelope LBA Tract, but is limited by the intermittent nature of Antelope Creek in this area. Three fish species tolerant of intermittent stream flows were found in Antelope Creek near the Spring Creek confluence during a baseline aquatic survey conducted by the Antelope Mine in 1980: sand shiner (Notropis stramineus), fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas), and plains killifish (Fundulus kansae). ACC’s approved mining plan avoids disturbing Antelope Creek and an adjacent designated buffer zone. Since ACC would not disturb Antelope Creek during mining, the existing fish habitat would not be affected if the West Antelope LBA Tract is leased by the applicant mine. The impacts discussed above would apply to each Action Alternative for each applicant mine. The assessment of impacts to wildlife by mining the LBA tracts would be addressed during the WGFD and WDEQ/LQD review of each mine’s permit application, and within the WDEQ/LQD permit approval process.

4-81

4.0 Environmental Consequences 4.1.11 Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Wildlife Species, USDA-FS Region 2 Sensitive Species, and BLM Sensitive Species Refer to Appendices G through K. 4.1.12 Land Use and Recreation The major adverse environmental consequences of the Proposed Actions and Action Alternatives on land use would be the reduction of livestock grazing (cattle and sheep), loss of wildlife habitat (particularly big game), and curtailment of oil and gas development during mining of the coal and reclamation, including removal of all existing oil and gas surface and downhole production and transportation equipment and facilities. Wildlife and livestock use would be displaced while the tracts are being mined and reclaimed. Access for recreational and other (i.e., ranching, oil and gas development) activities would be restricted during mining operations. Estimated disturbance areas for each LBA tract and for each alternative configuration are presented in Tables 4-1 through 4-4. Sections 3.11 and 4.1.2 and Appendix L of this document address the total number of producing, abandoned, or shut in oil and gas (conventional and CBM) wells that presently exist on the LBA tracts under the Proposed Actions and Alternatives 2 and 3. Well location information, federal oil and gas ownership, and federal oil and gas lessee information are presented in Figures 3-15 through 318 and Tables 3-10 through 3-13. 4-82 BLM manages federal lands on a multiple use basis, in accordance with the regulations. In response to conflicts between oil and gas and coal lease holders, BLM policy advocates optimizing the recovery of both coal and CBM resources to ensure that the public receives a reasonable return for these publicly owned resources. Optimal recovery of both coal and oil and gas resources requires negotiation and cooperation between the oil and gas lessees and the coal lessees. Negotiations between some of the applicant mines and some of the existing oil and gas lessees have resulted in agreements that will allow development of both resources on portions of the LBA tracts. Drilling has occurred on the Little Thunder LBA Tract and portions of NARO North and West Roundup LBA Tracts. Currently, the NARO South LBA Tract is the only proposed LBA tract within the General Analysis Area that does not currently include producing CBM wells, and the West Antelope LBA Tract does not include any producing CBM wells under the Proposed Action or Preferred Alternative. Royalties have been and would be lost to both the state and federal governments if conventional oil and gas wells are abandoned prematurely, if the federal CBM is not recovered prior to mining, or if federal coal is not recovered due to conflicts. State and federal governments can also lose bonus money when the costs of the agreements between the lessees are factored into the fair market value determinations.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences As discussed in Section 3.11 of this document, the NARO North, Little Thunder, and West Roundup LBA Tracts include federal lands, which are administered by the USDA-FS. According to the USDA-FS Douglas Ranger District, each mine can close access in areas that are currently actively being mined for human health and safety reasons (Homuth 2003). Public access to as many as 4,076.4 acres of federal lands would be affected if these LBA tracts were leased under the maximum tract area configurations. Under the Preferred Alternatives for these tracts, access to approximately 3,580 acres of federal surface would be affected during mining operations. The loss of accessibility to federal lands is long term (during mining and reclamation), but is not permanent. Public access to federal lands would be restored after mining and reclamation are complete. A number of federal/non-federal lands exchanges between the USDAFS and private interests have been completed on the TBNG. These exchanges have helped to eliminate isolated parcels of federal lands, create more contiguous blocks of National Forest System lands, and improve public access to federal and state lands in the area. Some of the PRB coal mines have participated and are continuing to participate in partnerships with USDA-FS in facilitating some of these exchanges. Hunting on the LBA tracts would be eliminated during mining and reclamation. Pronghorn, mule deer, and elk occur on and adjacent to the South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS LBA tracts. Sage grouse, mourning dove, waterfowl, rabbit, and coyote also inhabit these tracts. Mining the NARO North, Little Thunder, and West Roundup LBA Tracts would remove public access to as much as 4,076 acres of public land in pronghorn Hunt Area 27, mule deer Hunt Area 10, and elk Hunt Area 113. According to comments received from WGFD on the SPRB Coal Draft EIS, these lands represent a significant portion of the currently accessible public surface lands for recreational opportunity within antelope Hunt Area 27, mule deer Hunt Area 10, and small/upland game Hunt Area 36, which may decrease the ability of WGFD to manage big game species toward objective levels. None of the lands included in NARO South or West Antelope LBA Tracts are managed by the USDA-FS; thus, no federal lands would be removed from public access if either of these LBA tracts were leased. Following reclamation, the land would be suitable for grazing and wildlife uses, which are the historic land uses. The reclamation standards required by SMCRA and Wyoming State Law meet the standards and guidelines for healthy rangelands for public lands administered by the BLM in the State of Wyoming. Following reclamation bond release, management of the privately owned surface would revert to the private surface owner and management of the federally owned surface would revert to the federal surface managing agency (USDA-FS). 4-83

4.0 Environmental Consequences 4.1.13 Cultural Resources All portions of the LBA tracts as applied for, lands added under BLM alternatives, and the applicant mines’ anticipated permit amendment study areas were subjected to Class I and Class III cultural resource inventories in 1999 and 2001. The results of these inventories are summarized in Section 3.12. Data recovery plans are required for all sites recommended eligible to the National Register following testing and consultation with the SHPO. Until consultation with SHPO has occurred and agreement regarding NRHP eligibility has been reached, all sites would be protected from disturbance. Full consultation with SHPO must be completed prior to approval of the MLA mining plan. At that time, those sites determined to be unevaluated or eligible for the NRHP through consultation would receive further protection or treatment. Impacts to eligible or unevaluated cultural resources cannot be permitted. If unevaluated sites cannot be avoided, they must be evaluated prior to disturbance. If eligible sites cannot be avoided, a data recovery plan must be implemented prior to disturbance. Ineligible properties may be destroyed without further work. The eligible sites on each LBA tract that cannot be avoided or that have not already been subjected to data recovery action would be carried forward in the mining and reclamation plan as requiring 4-84 protective stipulations until a testing, mitigation, or data recovery plan is developed to address the impacts to the sites. The lead federal and state agencies would consult with Wyoming SHPO on the development of such plans and the manner in which they are carried out. Cultural resources adjacent to the mine areas may be impacted as a result of increased access to the areas. There may be increased vandalism and unauthorized collecting associated with recreational activity and other pursuits outside of but adjacent to mine permit areas. 4.1.14 Native American Concerns No sites of Native American religious or cultural importance have been identified within the General Analysis Area. If such sites or localities are identified at a later date, appropriate action must be taken to address concerns related to those sites. 4.1.15 Paleontological Resources No unique or significant paleontological resources have been identified within the NARO North and South, Little Thunder, or West Antelope LBA Tract. One fossilized bone fragment was found within the West Roundup LBA Tract study area; however, the likelihood of encountering any significant paleontological resources during mining activities is small. Lease and permit conditions require that should previously unknown, potentially significant paleontological sites be discovered, work in that area shall South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences stop and measures be taken to assess and protect the site (see Appendix D). 4.1.16 Visual Resources Most mining activities on the LBA tracts would not be visible from any major travel routes because the tracts are not close to major highways and because of the variable terrain in the General Analysis Area. However, much of the Little Thunder LBA Tract would be visible from State Highway 450, which bisects the tract. Existing mining operations at the Black Thunder and Jacobs Ranch Mines are currently visible from this highway. Portions of each LBA tract would also be visible from State Highway 59, Hilight Road, Edwards Road, Reno Road, Antelope Road, and/or Converse County Road 37. Due to existing mining activities in the five southern mines, the predominant BLM VRM class in the General Analysis Area is IV. This classification would not be altered by the leasing and subsequent mining of the five LBA tracts under any of the Action Alternatives. The USDA-FS visual quality objectives for the General Analysis Area allow facilities and landscape modifications to be visible but call for reasonable mitigation to blend and harmonize with natural features. After reclamation of the LBA tracts and adjoining mines, the VRM classification would improve. No visual resources that are unique to this area have been identified on or near the LBA tracts. Reclaimed terrain would be almost indistinguishable from the South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS surrounding undisturbed terrain. Slopes might appear smoother (less intricately dissected) than undisturbed terrain, and sagebrush would not be as abundant for several years; however, within a few years after reclamation, the mined land would not be distinguishable from the surrounding undisturbed terrain except by someone very familiar with landforms and vegetation. 4.1.17 Noise Noise levels on the LBA tracts would be increased considerably by mining activities such as blasting, loading, hauling, and possibly in-pit crushing. Since the LBA tracts would be mined as extensions of existing operations under the Proposed Actions or Action Alternatives, no rail car loading would take place on the LBA tracts. The Noise Control Act of 1972 indicates that a 24-hour equivalent level of less than 70 dBA prevents hearing loss and that a level below 55 dBA, in general, does not constitute an adverse impact. OSM prepared a noise impact report for the Caballo Rojo Mine (OSM 1980) that determined that the noise level from crushers and a conveyor would not exceed 45 dBA at a distance of 1,500 ft. Explosives would be used during mining to fragment the overburden and coal and facilitate their excavation. The air overpressure created by such blasting is estimated to be 123 dBA at the location of the blast. At a distance of approximately 1,230 ft, the intensity of this blast would be reduced to 40 dBA. Following is a description of the 4-85

4.0 Environmental Consequences dwellings located near each LBA tract. NARO North and South LBA Tracts The nearest occupied dwelling to the NARO North and South LBA Tracts is located at the west side and immediately adjacent to the southern edge of the NARO North tract. Since this occupied dwelling is separated from the LBA tract by a distance of less than 200 yards, significant noise impacts are expected. The occupants of this dwelling will be moving in the near future. Little Thunder LBA Tract The nearest occupied dwelling to the Little Thunder LBA Tract is located approximately one mile from the western edge of the tract as proposed and 0.5 mile from the area added under Alternatives 2 and 3. Since this occupied dwelling is at least 0.5 mile (approximately 2,640 ft) from the LBA tract under any configuration, there should be no major noise impacts. The owners of this property are currently living out of state, and ALC is negotiating for the purchase of this property. West Roundup LBA Tract The nearest occupied dwelling to the West Roundup LBA Tract is located just over three miles from the southern edge of the tract. No major noise impacts are expected for this dwelling. West Antelope LBA Tract The nearest occupied dwelling to the West Antelope LBA Tract is located approximately one mile from the western edge of the tract. No major noise impacts are expected for this dwelling. Because of the remoteness of the LBA tracts and because mining is already ongoing in the area, noise would have few off-site impacts. Wildlife in the immediate vicinity of mining may be adversely affected; however, observations at surface coal mines in the area indicate that wildlife have generally adapted to increased noise associated with coal mining activity. After mining and reclamation are completed, noise would return to premining levels. 4.1.18 Transportation Facilities No new or reconstructed transportation facilities would be required under the Proposed Action or Action Alternatives. Essentially all of the coal mined on the LBA tracts would be transported by the existing rail system. Vehicular traffic to and from the mines would continue at existing or slightly higher levels for an extended period of time, depending on which LBA tracts are leased and which alternatives are selected. Active pipelines and power transmission lines currently cross the LBA tracts. Any relocation of these pipelines and utility lines would be handled according to specific agreements between the coal lessee and the pipeline and utility owners if South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4-86

4.0 Environmental Consequences the need arises. The Wyoming Department of Transportation routinely monitors traffic volumes on area highways, and if traffic exceeds design standards improvements are made. BNSF & UP have upgraded and will continue to upgrade their rail capacities to handle the increasing coal volume projected from the PRB, with or without the leasing of the proposed SPRB LBA Tracts. Likewise, the DM&E Railroad is proposing an expansion into the SPRB area which is not dependent on leasing the tracts evaluated in this EIS. 4.1.19 Socioeconomics Socioeconomic impacts resulting from the leasing and subsequent mining of the LBA tracts would include increasing federal, state, and local revenues, extending the lives of the affected mines, and increasing employment. Increases in federal and state revenues generated by the leasing and mining of the LBA tracts would depend on which alternatives are selected and the sale price of the coal. Although spot prices in 2001 were often higher than recent previous years, spot prices in 2002 returned to previous levels and WSGS is predicting that coal prices will fall in the $5.50 to $6.00 per ton range through 2008 (WSGS 2003a). A conservatively low estimate for coal prices over the lives of the leases is $5.00 per ton. The federal government would collect a royalty at the time the coal is sold in the amount of 12.5 percent of the South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS sales price. In addition, the federal government receives a bonus payment at the time the federal coal is leased. Bonus payments on the federal coal leases issued in the PRB since 1990 have ranged from 11.1 cents per ton to 70.6 cents per ton and have averaged 26 cents per ton. Additional federal fees include the AML reclamation fee (35 cents per ton sold) and the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund fee (four percent of the sales price). Royalty and bonus bid payments are divided equally with the State of Wyoming, while half of Wyoming’s AML contributions are earmarked for later use in the state. Projected federal revenues for each LBA tract are presented in Tables 413 through 4-16 and Figure 4-13, assuming an average coal price of $5.00 per ton recovered and a bonus payment on the leased (in-place) coal of 26 cents per ton. If the five LBA tracts were leased and mined under the Proposed Actions, cumulative federal revenues would be about $1.13 billion. According to a study done by the University of Wyoming (UW 1994), the State of Wyoming received about $1.10 per ton from the sale of PRB coal produced in 1991. The taxes and royalties included in this calculation were severance taxes, ad valorem taxes, sales and use taxes, and the state’s share of federal royalty payments on production. Although severance tax rates have been reduced from 10.5 percent to seven percent since 1991, Section 3.18 demonstrates that Wyoming revenues remain at or above $1.10 per ton due to increased bonus bid revenues. 4-87

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-13. Projected Socioeconomic Impacts from Leasing the NARO North and South LBA Tracts under the Proposed Action or Action Alternatives.
Item State Revenues Federal Revenues Increased Mine Life Additional Employees Proposed Action $ 557.6 mm $ 421.8 mm 5 yrs 10 Alternative 2 $ 675.3 mm $ 514.4 mm 6 yrs 10 BLM’s Preferred Alternative $ 635.0 $ 483.7 5.5 10 Alternative 3 $ 478.4 mm $ 359.4 mm 4 yrs 10

Table 4-14. Projected Socioeconomic Impacts from Leasing the Little Thunder LBA Tract under the Proposed Action or Action Alternatives.
Item State Revenues Federal Revenues Increased Mine Life Additional Employees Proposed Action $ 484.0 mm $ 364.8 mm 7.5 yrs 0 Alternative 2 (BLM’s Preferred Alternative) $ 608.3 mm $ 470.6 mm 10.1 yrs 0 Alternative 3 (North Tract) $ 123.0 mm $ 97.2 mm 0 yrs 0 Alternative 3 (South Tract) $ 485.2 mm $ 373.4 mm 7.5 yrs 0

Table 4-15. Projected Socioeconomic Impacts from Leasing the West Roundup LBA Tract under the Proposed Action or Action Alternatives.
Item State Revenues Federal Revenues Increased Mine Life Additional Employees Proposed Action $ 190.6 mm $ 144.2 mm 5 yrs 150 Alternative 2 $ 254.4 mm $ 192.4 mm 6.6 yrs 150 Alternative 3 $ 339.1 mm $ 256.5 mm 8.8 yrs 150 BLM’s Preferred Alternative $ 316.3 mm $ 239.2 mm 8.2 yrs 150

Table 4-16. Projected Socioeconomic Impacts from Leasing the West Antelope LBA Tract under the Proposed Action or Action Alternatives.
Item State Revenues Federal Revenues Increased Mine Life Additional Employees Proposed Action $ 251.2 mm $ 195.2 mm 0 yrs 0 Alternative 2 $ 279.7 mm $ 216.7 mm 0 yrs 0 Alternative 3 (BLM’s Preferred Alternative) $ 187.4 mm $ 143.4 mm 0 yrs 0

4-88

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS 4-89

Figure 4-13. Estimated Wyoming and Federal Revenues from the Leasing and Subsequent Mining of the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts.

NARO North and South LBA Tracts
$700 $675 $600 $558 $500 $400 $300 $200 $100 $0 Proposed Action Alternative 2 $422 $359 $300 $200 $514 $500 $484 $478 $400 $365 $484 $635 $600 $700

Little Thunder LBA Tract

$608

$471

$485

$373

$123 $100 $0 Alternative 3 Proposed Action $97 Alternative 2 (BLM's Preferred Alternative) Alternative 3 (North Tract) Alternative 3 (South Tract)

BLM's Preferred Alternative

West Roundup LBA Tract
$400

4.0 Environmental Consequences

West Antelope LBA Tract
$300 $200 $191 $100 $0 Proposed Action Alternative 2 Alternative 3 $144 $254 $192 $100 $0 Proposed Action Alternative 2 $339 $257 $316 $239 $300 $280 $200 $251 $195 $217 $188 $143

BLM's Preferred Alternative

Alternative 3 (BLM's Preferred Alternative)

State Revenues (millions of dollars) Federal Revenues (millions of dollars)

4.0 Environmental Consequences Projected state revenues for each LBA tract are presented in Tables 4-13 through 4-16 and Figure 4-13. If the five LBA tracts were leased and mined under the Proposed Actions, cumulative state revenues would be about $1.48 billion. As indicated by Tables 4-13 through 4-16, leasing and subsequently mining the LBA tracts would extend the life of each mine by 0 to 10.1 years, depending on which alternatives are selected. In addition, the leases would result in the need for 0 to 150 additional employees at each mine, with a cumulative increase of up to 160 employees. The 2002 unemployment in Campbell and Converse Counties averaged 1,056 (Wyoming Department of Employment 2003). It is likely that the additional employees would be available from the existing workforce in Campbell and Converse Counties. No additional demands on the existing infrastructure or services in these communities would be expected because no influx of new residents would be needed to fill new jobs. The economic stability of the communities of Douglas, Wright, and Gillette would benefit by having the current North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mine employees living in their communities employed for up to 10 additional years. Issues relating to the social, cultural, and economic wellbeing and health of minorities and low-income groups are termed Environmental Justice issues. In reviewing the impacts of the Proposed Actions and Alternatives 2 4-90 and 3 for each LBA tract on socioeconomic resources, surface water and groundwater quality, air quality, hazardous materials, or other elements of the human environment in this chapter, it was determined that potentially adverse impacts do not disproportionately affect Native American tribes, minority groups, or low-income groups. With regard to Environmental Justice issues affecting Native American tribes or groups, the General Analysis Area contains no tribal lands or Native American communities, and no treaty rights or Native American trust resources are known to exist for this area. Implementing any of the alternatives would have no effects on Environmental Justice issues, including the social, cultural, and economic wellbeing and health of minorities and low-income groups within the General Analysis Area. 4.1.20 Hazardous and Solid Waste If the applicant mines acquire the five LBA tracts, the wastes that would be generated in the course of mining the tracts would be similar to those currently being generated by the existing mining operations. The procedures that are used for handling hazardous and solid waste at the existing mines are described in Chapter 2. Wastes generated by mining the LBA tracts would be handled in accordance with the existing regulations using the procedures currently in use at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mines, as described in Chapter 2. 4.2 No Action Alternative There are five No Action Alternatives, one for each LBA tract. Under the No Action Alternative for each LBA tract, the coal lease application for that tract would be rejected and the area included in that tract would not be offered for lease at this time. If a decision is made to reject an application for an LBA tract included in this analysis, the tract could be nominated for lease again in the future but, for the purposes of this analysis, the No Action Alternative assumes that a tract would never be mined if the decision is to reject the application at this time. If an application is rejected for a tract, the approved mining operations for the existing applicant mine would not be changed. If the No Action Alternative is selected for any of the tracts included in this analysis, the impacts described on the preceding pages and in Table 2-5 to topography and physiography, geology and minerals, soils, air quality, water resources, alluvial valley floors, wetlands, vegetation, wildlife, threatened, endangered and candidate species, land use and recreation, cultural resources, Native American concerns, paleontological resources, visual resources, noise, transportation, and socioeconomics would occur on the existing adjacent coal leases under the No Action Alternative, but coal removal would not occur on the rejected LBA tract. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS The general nature and magnitude of cumulative impacts as summarized in Table 2-5, which would occur from implementation of all five of the Proposed Actions or respective Alternatives 2 or 3, would not be substantially different under one or more of the No Action Alternatives. Under the No Action Alternatives for the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts, coal removal and associated disturbance and impact would not occur on 6,700, 7,945, 4,863, or 7,700 acres adjacent to the existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex under the Proposed Action, Alternative 2, Alternative 3, or the Preferred Alternative, respectively. Portions of the NARO North and South LBA Tracts adjacent to the existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex would be disturbed to recover the coal in the existing leases. The economic benefits that would be derived from mining the NARO North and South LBA Tracts during an additional 5.5 years (under the Preferred Alternative) of mining would be lost. Under the No Action Alternative for the Little Thunder LBA Tract, coal removal and associated disturbance and impact would not occur on 5,424 or 6,577 acres adjacent to the existing Black Thunder Mine under the Proposed Action or Alternative 2 (the Preferred Alternative) and Alternative 3 (north and south tracts), respectively. Portions of the Little Thunder LBA Tract adjacent to the existing Black Thunder Mine would be disturbed to recover the coal in the existing leases. The economic 4-91

4.0 Environmental Consequences benefits that would be derived from mining the Little Thunder LBA Tract during an additional 10.1 years (under the Preferred Alternative) of mining would be lost. Under the No Action Alternative for the West Roundup LBA Tract, coal removal and associated disturbance and impact would not occur on 3,161, 3,161, 4,105, or 3,865 acres adjacent to the North Rochelle Mine under the Proposed Action, Alternative 2, Alternative 3, or the Preferred Alternative, respectively. Portions of the West Roundup LBA Tract adjacent to the existing North Rochelle Mine would be disturbed to recover the coal in the existing leases. The economic benefits that would be derived from mining the West Roundup LBA Tract during an additional 8.2 years (under the Preferred Alternative) of mining would be lost. Under the No Action Alternative for the West Antelope LBA Tract, coal removal and associated disturbance and impact would not occur on 3,200, 3,500, or 2,467 acres in adjacent to the existing Antelope Mine under the Proposed Action, Alternative 2, or Alternative 3 (the Preferred Alternative), respectively. Portions of the West Antelope LBA Tract adjacent to the existing Antelope Mine would be disturbed to recover the coal in the existing leases. The economic benefits that would be derived from mining the West Antelope LBA Tract would be lost. If a decision is made to reject one or more of the five lease applications at 4-92 this time, the rejected tract or tracts could be leased and mined as maintenance leases in the future, while the existing adjacent mines are in operation. If they are not leased while the existing adjacent mines are in operation, the coal could also potentially be leased by a new mining operation in the future. 4.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation, and Monitoring

In the case of surface coal mining, SMCRA and state law require mitigation and monitoring designed to ensure that reclamation standards are met following mining. Measures that are required by regulation are considered to be part of the Proposed Actions and the alternatives considered in this EIS for the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts. These requirements, mitigation plans, and monitoring plans are in place for the No Action Alternative, as part of the current approved mining and reclamation plans for the existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mines. These requirements, mitigation plans, and monitoring plans would be included in the mining and reclamation plan amendment that would be required for each respective LBA tract that is leased. This mining and reclamation plan revision would have to be approved before mining could occur on each tract that is leased, regardless of who acquires the tract. The major mitigation measures and monitoring measures that are South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences required by state or federal regulation are summarized in Table 4-17. More specific information about some of these mitigation and monitoring measures and their results at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mines are described in the following sections of this document: • • • Section 3.5.5, control measures for particulate emissions; Section 3.5.6, control measures for blasting emissions; Section 4.1.2, handling of unsuitable overburden material and backfill monitoring plans; Section 4.1.3, structures to control soil erosion; Section 4.1.4, air quality monitoring and modeling practices and results and application of BACT for mitigation of air quality impacts; Section 4.1.5, surface water hydrologic control measures; Section 4.1.5, groundwater quantity and quality monitoring measures and results; Section 4.1.5, groundwater drawdown modeling requirements; Section 4.1.5, mitigation for interruption, discontinuation, or diminishment of existing water well rights by mining operations; Section 4.1.6, restoration of AVFs impacted by mining; Section 4.1.7, identification and replacements of wetlands impacted by mining; • Section 4.1.8, mandated reclamation seed mixtures and plans for control of invasive, nonnative plant species; Section 4.1.10, fencing designed to permit pronghorn passage; Section 4.1.10, big game monitoring results and requirements; Section 4.1.10, notification and mitigation measures to protect active raptor nests and nest productivity; Section 4.1.10, mitigation measures to minimize habitat loss impacts to songbirds; Section 4.1.13, protection of cultural resources that are recommended eligible for or of undetermined eligibility for the NRHP; and Appendices G through J, protection of threatened, endangered, proposed, and candidate species.

•

• •

•

• •

•

• •

If impacts are identified during the leasing process that are not mitigated by existing required mitigation measures, BLM can include additional mitigation measures, in the form of stipulations on the new lease, within the limits of its regulatory authority. In general, the levels of mitigation and monitoring required for surface coal mining by SMCRA and Wyoming State law are more extensive than those required for other surface disturbing activities; however, concerns are periodically identified that are not monitored or mitigated under existing procedures.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4-93

Resource Topography & Physiography Geology & Minerals

Soil

Air Quality

Dispersion modeling of mining plans for annual average particulate pollution impacts on ambient air; Using particulate pollution control technologies; Using work practices designed to minimize fugitive particulate emissions; Using EPA- or state-mandated BACT, including: Fabric filtration or wet scrubbing of coal storage silo and conveyor vents, Watering or using chemical dust suppression on haul roads and exposed soils, Containment of truck dumps and primary crushers, Covering of conveyors, Prompt revegetation of exposed soils, High efficiency baghouses on the crusher, conveyor transfer, storage bin and train loadout, meeting a standard of 0.01 grains per dry standard cubic foot (dscf) of exit volume, Watering of active work areas, Reclamation plan to minimize surface disturbances subject to wind erosion, Paving of access roads, Haul truck speed limits, Limited material drop heights for shovels and draglines.

These requirements, mitigation plans, and monitoring plans are in place for the existing North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mines in their current approved mining and reclamation plans (the No Action Alternatives). If the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, or West Antelope LBA Tracts are leased, these requirements, mitigation plans, and monitoring plans would be part of a mining plan revision covering the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, or West Antelope LBA Tracts that must be approved before mining can occur on the tract under the Proposed Action, or Alternatives.

4-94

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Resource Air Quality (continued)

Surface Water

Monitoring storage capacity in sediment ponds; Monitoring quality of discharges; Monitoring stream-flow and water quality. Monitoring wells track water levels in overburden, coal, interburden, underburden, and backfill. Monitoring wells track water quality in overburden, coal, interburden, underburden, and backfill. Monitoring to determine restoration of essential hydrologic functions of any declared AVF.

Groundwater Quantity Groundwater Quality

Evaluating cumulative impacts to water quantity associated with proposed mining; Replacing existing water rights that are interrupted, discontinued, or diminished by mining with water of equivalent quantity. Evaluating cumulative impacts to water quality associated with proposed mining; Replacing existing water rights that are interrupted, discontinued, or diminished by mining with water of equivalent quality. Identifying all AVFs that would be affected by mining; Determining significance to agriculture of all identified AVFs affected by mining (WDEQ); Protecting downstream AVFs during mining; Restoring essential hydrologic function of all AVFs affected by mining. Identifying all wetlands that would be affected by mining; Identifying jurisdictional wetlands (COE); Replacing all jurisdictional wetlands that would be disturbed by mining; Replacing functional wetlands as required by surface managing agency, surface landowner, or WDEQ/LQD.

Alluvial Valley Floors

Wetlands

Monitoring of reclaimed wetlands using same procedures used to identify pre-mining jurisdictional wetlands.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4-95

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-17. Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation, and Monitoring Measures for Surface Coal Mining Operations Required by SMCRA and State Law (including each Proposed Action, Alternative 1 (No Action), Alternative 2, or Alternative 3) (Continued).
Regulatory Compliance or Mitigation Required by Stipulations or Required by State or Federal Law1 Permanently revegetating reclaimed areas according to a comprehensive revegetation plan using approved permanent reclamation seed mixtures consisting predominantly of species native to the area; Reclaiming 20 percent of reclaimed area with native shrubs at a density of one per square meter; Controlling erosion on reclaimed lands prior to seeding with final seed mixture using mulching, cover crops, or other approved measures; Chemically and mechanically controlling weed infestation; Direct hauling of topsoil; Selectively planting shrubs in riparian areas; Planting sagebrush; Creating depressions and rock piles; Using special planting procedures around rock piles; Posting reclamation bond covering the cost of reclamation. Restoring pre-mining topography to the maximum extent possible; Planting a diverse mixture of grasses, forbs, and shrubs in configurations beneficial to wildlife; Designing fences to permit wildlife passage; Raptor-proofing power transmission poles; Creating artificial raptor nest sites; Increasing habitat diversity by creating rock clusters and shallow depressions on reclaimed land; Cottonwood plantings along reclaimed drainages; Replacing drainages, wetlands, and AVFs disturbed by mining; Reducing vehicle speed limits to minimize mortality; Instructing employees not to harass or disturb wildlife; Following approved raptor mitigation plans. Avoiding bald eagle disturbance; Restoring bald eagle foraging areas disturbed by mining; Restoring mountain plover habitat disturbed by mining; Using raptor safe power lines; Surveying for Ute ladies'-tresses; Monitoring1 Monitoring of revegetation growth & diversity until release of final reclamation bond (minimum 10 years); Monitoring of erosion to determine need for corrective action during establishment of vegetation; Use of controlled grazing during revegetation evaluation to determine suitability for post-mining land uses.

Resource Vegetation

Wildlife

Baseline and annual wildlife monitoring surveys; Monitoring for Migratory Bird Species of Management Concern in Wyoming.

Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Species
1

Baseline and annual wildlife monitoring surveys.

4-96

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-17. Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation, and Monitoring Measures for Surface Coal Mining Operations Required by SMCRA and State Law (including each Proposed Action, Alternative 1 (No Action), Alternative 2, or Alternative 3) (Continued).
Regulatory Compliance or Mitigation Required by Stipulations or Required by State or Federal Law1 Surveying for mountain plover; Searching for black-footed ferrets if prairie dog colonies are on or move onto tract; Surveying for black-tailed prairie dog; Same as Wildlife Resource above. Suitably restoring reclaimed area for historic uses (grazing and wildlife); Following USDA-FS guidelines regarding access to National Forest system lands. Conducting Class I & III surveys to identify cultural properties on all state and federal lands and on private lands affected by federal undertakings; Consulting with SHPO to evaluate eligibility of cultural properties for the NRHP; Avoiding or recovering data from significant cultural properties identified by surveys, according to an approved plan; Notifying appropriate federal personnel if historic or prehistoric materials are uncovered during mining operations; Instructing employees of the importance of and regulatory obligations to protect cultural resources. Notifying Native American tribes with known interest in this area of leasing action and request for help in identifying potentially significant religious or cultural sites. Notifying appropriate federal personnel if potentially significant paleontological sites are discovered during mining. Restoring landscape character during reclamation through return to approximate original contour and revegetation with native species. Protecting employees from hearing loss. Relocating existing pipelines, if necessary, in accordance with specific agreement between pipeline owner and coal lessee. Paying royalty and taxes as required by federal, state, and local regulations. Monitoring1 Baseline and annual wildlife monitoring surveys.

Resource Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Species (continued) Land Use Cultural Resources

Monitoring of controlled grazing prior to bond release evaluation. Monitoring of mining activities during topsoil stripping; cessation of activities and notification of authorities if unidentified sites are encountered during topsoil removal.

Native American Concerns Paleontological Resources Visual Resources Noise Transportation Facilities Socioeconomics

No specific monitoring program.

No specific monitoring program. No specific monitoring program. MSHA inspections. No specific monitoring program. Surveying and reporting to document volume of coal removed.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4-97

Resource Hazardous & Solid Waste

4-98

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences An example of this type of issue is the concern about the release of NOx from blasting, and the resulting formation of low-lying orange clouds that can be carried outside the mine permit areas by wind. After this was identified as a potential health concern in the area of the Wyoming PRB surface coal mines, a monitoring program measuring NO2 concentrations in areas accessible to the public near PRB coal mining operations was conducted in 1999 (see discussion in Section 4.1.4). In addition, WDEQ has directed some PRB mines to take steps designed to mitigate the effects of NO2 emissions occurring from overburden blasting. The steps that may be required include: public notifications (in the form of warning signs along public roadways for example); temporary closure of public roadways near a mine during and after a blast; establishment of safe set-back distances from blasting areas; prohibiting blasting when wind direction is toward a neighbor; prohibiting blasting during temperature inversions; establishment of monitoring plans; estimation of NO2 concentrations; and development of blasting procedures that will protect public safety and health. After reviewing the required mitigation and monitoring in the current North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mine’s Mining and Reclamation Permits and the historical monitoring results in the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mine’s annual mine reports South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS to the WDEQ, the BLM has not identified additional special stipulations that should be added to the BLM lease or areas where additional or increased monitoring measures are recommended. 4.4 Residual Impacts

Residual impacts are unavoidable impacts that cannot be mitigated and would therefore remain following mining and reclamation. 4.4.1 Topography and Physiography Topographic moderation is a permanent consequence of mining. The indirect impacts of topographic moderation on wildlife habitat diversity would also be considered permanent. 4.4.2 Geology and Minerals Geology from the base of the coal to the surface would be subject to significant, permanent change. CBM resources not recovered prior to mining would be vented to the atmosphere and permanently lost. 4.4.3 Soils Existing soils would be mixed and redistributed, and soil-forming processes would be disturbed by mining. This would result in longterm alteration of soil characteristics. 4.4.4 Air Quality No residual impacts to air quality would occur following mining. 4-99

4.0 Environmental Consequences 4.4.5 Water Resources The area of coal and overburden removal and replacement of overburden and associated groundwater drawdowns would be increased under the Action Alternatives compared with the area of coal and overburden removal and overburden replacement and associated groundwater drawdowns if one or more of the five LBA tracts is not leased and mined. The postmining backfill may take in excess of 100 years to reach equilibrium water levels and water quality. Less time would be required near the mining boundaries. Water level and water quality in the backfill would be suitable to provide water to wells for livestock use, but would be different from premining conditions. 4.4.6 Alluvial Valley Floors No residual impacts to AVFs would occur following mining. 4.4.7 Wetlands Replaced wetlands (jurisdictional or functional) may not duplicate the exact function and landscape features of the premining wetland, but all wetland replacement plans would be approved by COE. 4.4.8 Vegetation Reclaimed vegetative communities may never completely match the surrounding native plant community. 4.4.9 Wildlife Although the LBA tracts would be reclaimed to be as near original condition as possible, there would be some residual wildlife impacts. The topographic moderation would result in a permanent loss of habitat diversity and a potential decrease in slope-dependent shrub communities. This would reduce the carrying capacity of the land for shrub-dependent species. Reclamation standards may limit replacement of habitat for some species, such as mountain plover. Some species, such as sage grouse, may repopulate reclaimed areas but populations may not attain premining levels. 4.4.10 Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Species, USDA-FS Region 2 Sensitive Species, and BLM Sensitive Species No direct residual impacts to T&E, proposed, or candidate species, to USDS-FS Region 2 Sensitive Species, or to BLM Sensitive Species are expected. If habitats are not restored for listed, proposed, candidate, or sensitive species, such as mountain plover or black-tailed prairie dogs, that could delay future repopulation of reclaimed areas by those species or could affect potential future population levels of those species in reclaimed areas. 4.4.11 Land Use and Recreation No residual impacts to land use and recreation are expected. 4-100 South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences 4.4.12 Cultural Resources Cultural sites that are determined to be eligible for the NRHP would be avoided if possible. Eligible sites that cannot be avoided would be destroyed by surface coal mining after data from those sites is recovered. Sites that are not eligible for the NRHP would be lost. 4.4.13 Native American Concerns No residual impacts to Native American concerns have been identified. 4.4.14 Paleontological Resources No residual impacts to significant paleontological resources are expected. 4.4.15 Visual Resources No residual impacts resources are expected. 4.4.16 Noise No residual impacts to noise are expected. 4.4.17 Transportation Facilities No residual impacts to transportation facilities are expected. 4.4.18 Socioeconomics No residual impacts socioeconomics are expected. to to visual This section briefly summarizes the cumulative impacts that are occurring as a result of existing development in the area of the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder Mine, North Rochelle Mine, and Antelope Mine and considers how those impacts would change if the NARO North and South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts are leased and mined as proposed and if other proposed development in the area occurs. Since decertification of the Powder River Federal Coal Region in 1990, the Wyoming State Office of the BLM has held 15 competitive coal lease sales and issued 11 new federal coal leases containing approximately 3.178 billion tons of coal using the LBA process (Table 1-1). In 1992 and 1993, this leasing process underwent the scrutiny of two appeals to the Interior Board of Land Appeals and one audit by the General Accounting Office. The Wyoming BLM has pending applications for eight additional maintenance tracts for existing mines containing about 2.1 billion tons of 4-101 4.5 Cumulative Impacts Cumulative impacts result from the incremental impacts of an action added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless of who is responsible for such actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor, but collectively significant, actions occurring over time.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences coal (Table 1-2). All of the pending applications have been reviewed and recommended for processing by the PRRCT. BLM completed one exchange in the PRB in 2000, authorized by Public Law 95-554. Under this exchange, EOG resources (formerly Belco) received a federal lease for a 106million ton portion of the Hay Creek Tract adjacent to the Buckskin Mine in exchange for the rights to a 170million ton coal lease near Buffalo, Wyoming that is unmineable due to construction of Interstate Highway 90 (BLM 1999b). A coal exchange proposed by Pittsburg and Midway Coal Mining Company is also currently being evaluated. As proposed, federal coal in Sheridan County, Wyoming would be exchanged for privately owned lands and minerals in Lincoln, Carbon, and Sheridan Counties, Wyoming. Four regional EISs evaluating surface coal development in the PRB in Wyoming were previously prepared. They are: Final Environmental Impact Statement, Eastern Powder River Basin of Wyoming, BLM, October 1974; Final Environmental Impact Statement, Proposed Development of Coal Resources in the Eastern Powder River Basin of Wyoming, BLM, March 1979; Final Powder River Regional Coal Environmental Impact Statement, BLM, December, 1981; and Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Round II Coal Lease Sale in the Powder River Region, BLM, January 1984. Since 1989, coal production in the PRB has increased by an average of 6.8 percent per year. The increasing state production is primarily due to increasing sales of low-sulfur, lowcost PRB coal to electric utilities who must comply with Phase I requirements of Title III of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. Electric utilities account for 97 percent of Wyoming's coal sales. In 2002, approximately 33 percent of the coal mined in the U.S. came from the PRB. The currently operational surface coal mines in the Wyoming PRB are shown in Figure 1-1. Recently, active surface coal mines in Sheridan County (the Big Horn Coal Mine, which has relinquished all federal coal leases) and southern Converse County (the Dave Johnston Mine) have ended mining operations and have reclaimed, or are currently reclaiming areas of disturbance. BLM estimates that the active surface coal mines shown in Figure 1-1 currently have approximately 103,615 acres of federal coal leased in Campbell and Converse Counties. This represents approximately 3.4 percent of Campbell County, which is where the majority of the leases are located. Approximately 4.0 percent of Campbell County and less than 1.0 percent of Converse County are included in the existing mine permit boundaries. The Dave Johnston Mine has approximately 4,395.7 acres of federal coal leased, which means that South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4-102

4.0 Environmental Consequences there are approximately 108,010.9 acres of federal coal currently leased in the Wyoming PRB. This represents approximately 1.9 percent of the combined areas of Campbell and Converse Counties. If the five LBA tracts are leased under BLM’s Preferred Alternatives, approximately 16,000 additional acres would be added. The acres of leased federal coal would increase to approximately 2.2 percent of the combined areas of Campbell and Converse Counties. The current status and ownership of the mines shown on Figure 1-1 are shown in Table 4-18. There have been numerous changes in mine ownership during the last decade, and this has resulted in mine consolidations and mine closings within the basin. The existing federal coal leases and surface coal mines are concentrated near the outcrop of the Wyodak Coal bed, where the coal is at the shallowest depth. The coal operations along the Wyodak outcrop had disturbed an estimated 62,200 acres as of 2001. Approximately 16,100 of those acres of disturbance are occupied by “permanent” mine facilities, such as roads, buildings, coal handling facilities, etc., which are not available for reclamation. Of the remaining 46,100 acres of disturbance available for reclamation, approximately 24,300 acres had been reclaimed. This information is compiled from BLM lease and WDEQ/LQD mining and reclamation permit databases. The mines in Campbell and Converse Counties currently produce over 96 percent of the coal produced in Wyoming each year. Table 4-19 summarizes predicted coal mining activity (from the 1979 and 1981 regional EISs) with actual activity that has occurred since the EISs were prepared. According to the WOGCC, there are approximately 15,040 oil and gas wells currently producing in the Wyoming PRB. Most (approximately 12,530) of those wells are CBM wells, the remainder (approximately 2,510) are conventional oil or gas wells (WOGCC 2003). Additional wells have been drilled in the basin but have been abandoned or are not yet producing. Campbell and Converse Counties’ oil production decreased to 13.0 million barrels of oil in 2002 from 32.8 million barrels in 1992, a 60.4 percent decrease. Oil production throughout Wyoming is expected to continue to decline, since exploration and production drilling has been very weak and old oil fields with declining production produce most of Wyoming’s oil (WSGS 2002a). Oil production for the short term may be bolstered by some planned carbon dioxide flood projects in the PRB (WSGS 2003b). Natural gas production has been increasing, particularly in Campbell County, due to the development of shallow CBM resources west of the coal mines. CBM exploration and development is currently ongoing throughout the PRB in Wyoming. 4-103

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-18. Status of Wyoming PRB Coal Mines.
Coal Production1 2002 Mine Buckskin Clovis Point 1994 Mine Operator SMC (Zeigler) Kerr-McGee 1993 Actual2 11.18 0.00 3.28 16.70 0.06 9.86 3.03 44.11 15.59 15.42 21.01 0.11 52.13 7.29 34.32 18.39 32.94 0.02 92.96 189.2 1994 Permitted4 24.0 4.0 15.0 29.6 9.3 24.0 10.0 115.9 25.0 40.0 44.0 18.0 127.0 12.0 36.0 25.0 50.0 8.0 131.0 373.9 2001 Mine Operator Vulcan Capital Mgmt5 Wyodak Resources WFA RAG American Kennecott/KFx Peabody Wyodak Resources RAG American Peabody Kennecott Arch Kennecott Arch Kennecott Peabody Vulcan Capital Mgmt5 Coal Production1 2002 Actual3 18.33 0.00 4.89 24.89 0.00 3.48 4.05 55.64 17.45 25.97 38.23 0.00 81.65 26.81 65.12 31.73 74.79 23.88 222.33 359.62 2002 Permitted4 27.5 0.0 15.0 35.0 9.4 24.0 12.0 122.9 45.0 40.0 65.0 18.0 168.0 30.0 100.0 50.0 85-105.0 35.0 300-320.0 590.9610.9 Status/Comments Active Leases relinquished or sold; facilities sold Active Active Inactive Active Active Active Active/Caballo Mine + former Rocky Butte & West Rocky Butte leases Active/Cordero + Caballo Rojo Mines Standby Active Active Active Active/North Antelope Mine + Rochelle Mine Active

Dry Fork Phillips/WFA Eagle Butte Cyprus-Amax Fort Union Fort Union Ltd Rawhide Carter (Exxon) Wyodak Wyodak Resources NORTHERN MINE GROUP TOTALS Belle Ayr Cyprus-Amax Caballo Carter (Exxon)/ Western Energy Cordero-Rojo Kennecott/ Complex Drummond Coal Creek ARCO CENTRAL MINE GROUP TOTALS Antelope Kennecott Black Thunder ARCO Jacobs Ranch Kerr-McGee N. Antelope/ Peabody Rochelle Complex N. Rochelle SMC (Zeigler) SOUTHERN MINE GROUP TOTALS TOTALS FOR 3 MINE GROUPS
1 2 3 4 5

Actual production (million tons) on left, permitted production (million tons) on right. Source: Wyoming State Geological Survey GEO-NOTES, August 1994. Source: Wyoming State Inspector of Mines ANNUAL REPORT for 2002. Source: Judy Shamley, WDEQ/AQD, personal communication March 28, 2002. Figures are permitted capacity as of October 1, 2000. Vulcan Capital Mgmt is being purchased by Arch Coal, Inc.

4-104

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-19. Coal Production and Development Levels, Campbell and Converse Counties, Wyoming.
Coal Production (Million Tons) 174.3 318.4 162.6 246.5 323.1 354.1 Number of Active Coal Mines 15 37 18 19 12 13 Number of Existing Coal-Fired Power Plants 2 3 3 4 4 5 Number of Active Coal Enhancement Facilities 1 1 1 1 2 0

1979 Predictions for 1990 1981 Predictions for 1990 Actual Actual Actual Actual 1990 1995 2000 2002

Direct Coal Employment 3,889 11,900 2,862 3,177 3,335

Average Price-NE Wyoming na na $6.86 $5.60 $4.93

Existing Power Plants:

PP&L Dave Hills Power Black Hills natural gas

Johnston, PP&L and Black Hills Power and Light Wyodak, Black and Light Simpson #1, Black Hills Power and Light Simpson #2, Corporation Wygen I, Black Hills Power and Light also has two power plants (40Mw each) at Wyodak site.

Proposed New Power Plants:

Reasonably Foreseeable: NAPG Two Elk and Black Hills Corporation Wygen II. Other Proposed: NAPG Two Elk Unit Two and NAPG Middle Bear.

Existing Coal Enhancement:

SGI International ENCOAL Plant - Buckskin Mine (inactive), KFx K-Fuels Coal Pellet Plant - Fort Union Mine (inactive), and Wyodak Eartheo (inactive).

Sources:

1979 and 1981 BLM PRB Regional EISs, Wyoming State Geological Survey GEO-NOTES-1996-2003, and Wyoming State Inspector of Mines ANNUAL REPORTS, 1990-2002. Donald R. McKenzie, WDEQ/LQD, personal communication March 29, 2002.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4-105

4.0 Environmental Consequences Since the early 1990s, the Wyoming BLM has completed numerous EAs and three EISs analyzing CBM projects. The most recent of these is the Final Environmental Impact Statement and Proposed Plan Amendment for the Powder River Basin Oil and Gas Project (BLM 2003a), which was mailed to the public in January 2003. It analyzes the potential impacts of constructing and operating about 39,400 new CBM wells and 3,200 new conventional wells and associated facilities, starting in 2002 and continuing for 10 years. The project area for this analysis encompasses approximately eight million acres, and includes all or portions of Campbell, Converse, Sheridan, and Johnson Counties in northeastern Wyoming. Total projected short term and long term disturbance associated with the development under the Preferred Alternative was estimated at 211,643 acres and 102,658 acres respectively. With the completion of this EIS and the Montana Statewide Final EIS and Proposed Amendment of the Powder River and Billings Resource Management Plans (BLM 2003b), it is likely that the rate of CBM development will increase in the PRB in Wyoming and Montana. CBM wells can be drilled on private and state oil and gas leases after approval by the WOGCC and the Wyoming SEO. BLM must analyze the individual and cumulative environmental impacts of all drilling (federal, state, and private), as required by NEPA, before CBM drilling on the federal oil and gas 4-106 leases can be authorized. BLM does not authorize drilling on state or private leases but must consider the impacts from those wells in their NEPA analyses. In many areas of the PRB the coal estate is federally owned, but the oil and gas estate is privately owned. A June 7, 1999 Supreme Court decision (98-830) assigned the rights to develop CBM on a piece of land to the owner of the oil and gas estate. Other mineral development levels in the Wyoming PRB are currently lower than predicted in the regional EISs. In the 1970s, significant uranium development was anticipated in southwest Campbell County and northwest Converse County. This development did not materialize because the price of uranium dropped in the early 1980s. There are currently two in situ uranium recovery operations in Converse County, but no mines and no mills. There were three active in situ operations in the PRB in 1999, but one of them, located in southeastern Johnson County, has since ceased operations. The spot market price for uranium increased from a low of $7.10 per pound of yellowcake on December 13, 2000 to $9.90 per pound in the fourth quarter of 2002 (WSGS 2003b). Scoria is quarried for use as road surfacing material, primarily by coal mines but also by a few excavation and construction firms. Bentonite is mined in parts of the Wyoming PRB, but not in Campbell or Converse Counties. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences The five LBA tracts included in this EIS are situated within a nearly continuous corridor of five coal mines in southern Campbell and northern Converse Counties, Wyoming (Figures 1-1 and 3-1). This southern mine corridor is approximately 24 miles long and eight miles wide. Production of coal in this southern mine group began in 1977 at the Black Thunder Mine. The current maximum permitted production rate for these five mines is 300 to 320 mmtpy (Table 4-18). Nine maintenance leases, including approximately 25,935 acres of federal coal, have been issued to mines in this southern group since decertification (Jacobs Ranch, West Black Thunder, North Antelope/Rochelle, Antelope, North Rochelle, Powder River, Thundercloud, Horse Creek, and North Jacobs Ranch--see Table 1-1). CBM wells have been drilled around all five mines in the southern mine corridor. CBM drilling and production is expected to continue in the areas around the coal mines, and on the LBAs. Due to the proximity of the coal mining and CBM production operations, cumulative impacts to groundwater, surface water, air quality, and wildlife have occurred and are likely to continue as more CBM resources are developed adjacent to existing surface coal mines. These impacts are included in the following cumulative impact discussion for these resources. In addition to the ongoing coal mining and leasing and the CBM development, there are other projects which are in progress or have been South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS proposed in the Wyoming PRB. These projects include: • the Two Elk 300-Mw coal-fired power plant proposed for construction by NAPG east of the Black Thunder Mine; the Wygen II 500-Mw coal-fired power plant proposed for construction by Black Hills Corporation near the Wyodak Mine east of Gillette; the proposed DM&E rail line; the Two Elk Unit Two 500-Mw coal-fired power plant, which NAPG also proposes to build east of the Black Thunder Mine; and construction and operation by NAPG of another 500-Mw coalfired power plant, the Middle Bear facility, near the CorderoRojo Mining Complex.

•

• •

•

Some of these projects have advanced farther along in their respective planning and permitting processes than others and are therefore more likely to be completed in the foreseeable future. At this time, based on the status of their planning and permitting efforts, the Black Hills Corporation Wygen II coal-fired power plant, the NAPG Two Elk coal-fired power plant, and the proposed DM&E rail line are considered reasonably foreseeable developments. The NAPG Two Elk Unit Two coal-fired power plant and the NAPG Middle Bear coalfired power plant are proposals which are not reasonably foreseeable at this time. The two NAPG Two Elk coal-fired power plants and the DM&E railroad 4-107

4.0 Environmental Consequences project, due to their locations, could have directly overlapping impacts with the impacts of mining the five proposed SPRB LBA Tracts. The proposed Wygen II coal-fired power plant would be located at the Black Hills Corporation energy complex near Gillette, and the proposed NAPG Middle Bear coal-fired power plant would be located at the Cordero Rojo Complex. The impacts of mining the five proposed SPRB LBA Tracts would not be expected to directly overlap with the impacts of building and operating these power plants. The planned NAPG Two Elk power plant would be a coal-fired power plant located east of Black Thunder Mine and would generate 310-Mw. The plant would burn low-Btu “waste coal” and coal fines from nearby mines as well as sub-bituminous coal in a pulverized coal boiler. The ability to burn low Btu waste coal and fines would allow the Two Elk plant to recover fuel values that might otherwise be lost and thereby generate electric power more efficiently than existing coal-fired plants. Coal and waste coal would be transported from area mines to the power plant by direct truck haul on unpaved roads, and ash would be returned to the mines by enclosed, four-wheel off-highway trucks. According to NAPG, the project has all of the permits needed except for ROW permission from the USDA-FS to provide access for a transmission line to the power plant (Gillette NewsRecord 2002a). Construction has been delayed while NAPG has been 4-108 attempting to secure a partner to share the cost of constructing the plant. NAPG’s most recent estimates are that the project would employ a temporary construction workforce of up to 700 persons and a permanent workforce of 50. Construction could begin in 2002 (Casper Star Tribune 2002a). Black Hills Energy Capital, Inc., the independent power subsidiary of Black Hills Corporation, initiated the permitting process to build the 500Mw Wygen II power plant in 2002. The proposed plant would adjoin its other generating plant (Wygen I) near Gillette. It would be similar in features to the existing 360-Mw Wyodak power plant at the same location. Construction could begin on the Wygen II plant in 2003 (Gillette News-Record 2002c), and it could be operational by mid-2005 (Black Hills Corporation 2001). The Surface Transportation Board preliminarily approved the DM&E Railroad expansion plan (to build 280 miles of new track in the PRB and to rehabilitate approximately 600 miles of track across South Dakota and Minnesota) on December 11, 1998. The approval was made pending the completion of an analysis of the environmental impacts of the project. The Surface Transportation Board released the DEIS for public comment in September 2000, and the FEIS for the DM&E PRB Expansion Project was issued November 19, 2001. On January 30, 2002 the Surface Transportation Board announced its final approval for the DM&E PRB Expansion Project, subject to a South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences number of environmental mitigation conditions and the requirement that DM&E use an environmentally preferable route that avoids sensitive areas along the Cheyenne River. DM&E’s originally proposed route in Wyoming generally followed along the Cheyenne River valley. DM&E had originally proposed to start construction in 1999 and complete the new railroad line in 2001; however, final approval and construction could not take place until after the environmental analysis was completed. DM&E must still obtain permits or approvals from other agencies including the BLM, USDA-FS, and COE, and several lawsuits were filed against the proposal following the Surface Transportation Board’s approval of the project (WSGS 2002b). The DM&E railroad is planning to start service out of the PRB by the end of 2006. The railroad wants to begin construction of the expansion line in the spring of 2004 provided they resolve three major hurdles: 1) resolve the court cases that currently have been launched by opponent groups, 2) finish arranging partnership and complete financing for the project; and 3) successfully deal with a number of regulatory issues (WSGS 2003a). NAPG has also announced plans to build the Two Elk Unit Two power plant, a 500-Mw facility, near the Two Elk plant adjacent to the Black Thunder Mine and the Middle Bear power plant, also a 500-Mw facility, next to the Cordero-Rojo Complex (Casper Star-Tribune 2001). The Two South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS Elk Unit Two plant, like the Two Elk plant, would burn “waste coal” from nearby mines, while the Middle Bear plant would burn commercial-grade coal from nearby mines. If all the necessary permits and funding can be secured, NAPG originally anticipated that construction of the Two Elk Unit Two plant, which would burn about three million tons of coal per year, would occur from 2006 to 2009, and construction of the Middle Bear plant would occur from 2003 to 2006. These NAPG-proposed power plants would employ up to 1,500 temporary construction workers each (Pederson Planning Consultants 2001). The rate of reclamation is one aspect of the surface coal mining operations where the actual levels reached in 1990 and 1995 did not meet the levels predicted for 1990 and 1995 in the regional EISs. According to the “Annual Evaluation Summary Report for the Coal Regulatory Program Administered by the Land Quality Division of the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality for Evaluation Year 2001” (OSM 2002a), in 1997, the Casper Field Office of OSM and WDEQ/LQD reviewed four mine sites in Wyoming for compliance with contemporaneous reclamation requirements and compared on-theground reclamation with the approved reclamation plan in the respective permit for each of those mines. In that review, OSM and WDEQ/LQD found that the mine permits they reviewed did not set clear and concise time schedules and requirements for contemporaneous reclamation. In response to those findings, WDEQ/LQD agreed to 4-109

4.0 Environmental Consequences review required reclamation schedules in all permits and revise the annual reporting format to include information about contemporaneous reclamation progress. In 2001, contemporaneous reclamation was evaluated at four randomly assigned mines. According to the OSM report cited above, the 2001 evaluation of contemporaneous reclamation “showed that reclamation was following mining disturbance at a reasonable rate. The reclamation rate at all four mines was at least 90 percent for the areas disturbed for the previous twelve months. In addition, the standards for measuring reclamation contained in the four permits were reasonably clear and concise”. However, OSM’s 2001 annual evaluation summary report also indicated that different conditions were found during inspections of other mine sites and indicated that some problems with contemporaneous reclamation standards still persist at certain mines. The “Annual Evaluation Summary Report for the Coal Regulatory Program Administered by the Land Quality Division of the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality for Evaluation Year 2002” (OSM 2002b) also expressed concern that the rate at which lands are being reclaimed in Wyoming is decreasing when compared to the rate of disturbance. A similar concern is expressed in OSM’s 2003 Evaluation Report (OSM 2003). OSM tracks the ratio of acres of permanent reclamation each year to acres of net disturbance available for 4-110 reclamation each year. The area of net disturbance available for reclamation includes all disturbance areas that are not being used for long-term approved disturbances. Areas not available for reclamation include things such as stockpiles, active pits, access roads, haul roads, railroad ROWs, coal preparation and loading sites, offices, shops, sediment ponds, and other long-term approved uses. The ratio of reclamation to net disturbance for the 2001 evaluation year was 1.43, for the 2002 evaluation year, the ratio was 1.68, and for the 2003 evaluation year, the ratio was 0.98. When the ratio is greater than 1.0, the reclamation is greater than the net disturbance. Since 1990, the ratio of reclamation to net disturbance has ranged from a low of 0.40 in 1997 to a high of 1.68 in 2002 (OSM 2002b and 2003). Some of the factors that affect achievement of contemporaneous reclamation standards include changing strip ratios which create material surpluses or deficits, using stockpiles to provide material to fill final pit voids or to store new pit boxcut material, changing the direction of mining pits to conform to lease configuration, changing plans to accommodate production growth, and changes in technology or mining method. Currently, WDEQ/LQD suggests to operators that only large, contiguous areas such as drainage basins be considered for bond release, with the assurance that the area will not be disturbed in the future. Because many mine plans cross a drainage South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences basin several times during the life of mine, final reclamation of some drainage basins may not occur until late in the life of mine. 4.5.1 Topography and Physiography Following surface coal mining and reclamation, topography will be modified in an elongated corridor east of and paralleling Highway 59 from just north of Gillette, south for about 75 miles. The topography in the PRB is characterized by relatively flat or rolling topography. After reclamation, these characteristics will be emphasized in the reclaimed area. In general, in the mining corridor, premining features that were more topographically unique (e.g., steeper hills, gullies, and rock outcrops) will be smoothed. As indicated in Section 4.1.1, the premining topography of the LBA tracts is relatively flat to gently rolling, and the expected postmining topography for these tracts is expected to be similar to the premining topography. The carrying capacity for big game may be lower in the mining corridor as a result of the overall reduction in topographic diversity following reclamation. Big game ranges are generally large and extend outside of the mining corridor. Also, mining activities are, in general, not located in habitats defined as crucial; no crucial habitat is included in any of the LBA tracts considered in this EIS. The overall flattening and lowering of the topography would result in increased infiltration of surface water and reduced peak flows from the drainages. These changes would be limited because the streams typically flow from west to east across South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS the area rather than north to south along the entire corridor. Therefore, only a small part of each stream’s drainage area would be disturbed (see Section 4.5.5). There would be no substantial cumulative impacts to topography and physiography due to the proximity of CBM development and the proposed railroad line and power plants to the coal mining operations in this area because the construction and operation of those projects would cause minimal topographic and/or physiographic changes. 4.5.2 Geology and Minerals The PRB coalfield encompasses an area of about 12,000 square miles. Finley and Goolsby (2000) estimate that there are approximately 587 billion tons of coal in beds thicker than 20 ft and deeper than 200 ft in the basin. The remaining strippable Wyodak coal reserves (with 200 ft or less of overburden) are estimated at 15.5 billion short tons (WSGS 2002b). Converse County has a total area of 4,050 square miles of which slightly less than one percent is within current mine permit boundaries. Campbell County has a total area of about 4,760 square miles, of which approximately four percent is within current mine permit boundaries. Coal mining in this area currently disturbs about 3,000 acres annually. Mining and reclamation rates are expected to continue to increase through the year 2015. In the PRB, the coal reserves currently leased represent a small percentage of the total coal reserves but a large percentage of the shallowest (hence 4-111

4.0 Environmental Consequences the most economical to recover) coal reserves. Within the southern group of five mines, approximately 47,500 acres of federal coal are currently leased. This is about a 75 percent increase over the 27,160 acres of federal coal that were leased in the southern group of mines in 1990, prior to decertification. Under the Proposed Actions, approximately 13,365 additional acres of federal coal would be leased, which would represent a 28 percent increase in the area of leased federal coal in the southern group of five mines. Under the Preferred Alternative for each tract, approximately 16,031 acres would be leased, which would represent a 33.75 percent increase in the area of leased federal coal in this mine group. The area of disturbance associated with mining these leases, which would be greater than the leases themselves, is discussed in other parts of this analysis (e.g., Section 4.5.3). Coal and CBM are non-renewable resources that form as organic matter decays and undergoes chemical changes over geologic time. The CBM and coal resources that are removed to generate heat and power would not be available for use in the future. No potential damages to the coal resulting from removal of the CBM and water prior to mining have been identified. The CBM operators generally do not completely dewater the coal beds to produce the CBM because that could damage fractures in the coal and limit CBM production. Construction of the proposed railroad line and power plants would not impact the geology or mineral 4-112 resources in the area, so there would be no overlapping impacts related to these projects. 4.5.3 Soils The five existing southern mines would disturb approximately 66,582 acres throughout their combined lives (they would disturb approximately 2,000 acres annually during active mining at the currently planned mining rates). The annual disturbance rate would remain at approximately 2,000 acres if the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts are leased. If all five LBA tracts are leased and mined under the Proposed Actions, the disturbance area in the southern group of mines would increase to approximately 85,067 acres. This would represent an additional 27.8 percent increase in disturbance. Assuming 10 years from initial disturbance to utilization of parcels of reclaimed land by domestic livestock, approximately 20,000 acres (16.0 percent disturbed by Jacobs Ranch Mine, 31.9 percent by North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, 28.1 percent by Black Thunder Mine, 9.9 percent by North Rochelle Mine, and 14.1 percent by Antelope Mine) would be unavailable for such use at any given time during active mining. The replaced topsoil would support a stable and productive native vegetation community adequate in quantity and quality to support planned postmining land uses (i.e., rangeland and wildlife habitat).

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Additional, more widespread but less intensive, soil disturbance would be associated with the proposed CBM development west of the mines, and with construction of the proposed power plants and railroad line. 4.5.4 Air Quality The EPA CALPUFF dispersion model was used with meteorological data generated by the MM5 (mesoscale model) and CALMET models to perform air pollutant dispersion modeling to quantify potential PM10 and SO2 impacts related to proposed oil and gas development, including CBM development, in the PRB in northeastern Wyoming and southeastern Montana. The modeling was conducted by Argonne National Laboratory at the request of the Wyoming and Montana BLM to analyze potential air quality impacts from the oil and gas development alternatives being considered in the Wyoming Final EIS and Proposed Plan Amendment for the Powder River Basin Oil and Gas Project (BLM 2003a) and the Montana Statewide Oil and Gas Final EIS and Proposed Amendment of the Powder River and Billings RMPs (BLM 2003b). These documents will be referred to as the “Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS” and the “Montana Statewide EIS,” respectively, in the following discussion. The Wyoming Project Area for this air quality analysis includes Campbell, Sheridan, Johnson, and northern Converse Counties. The Montana Project Area for this air quality analysis includes all of Carter, Powder River, Big Horn, Yellowstone, Carbon, Stillwater, South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS Sweetgrass, Wheatland, Golden Valley, Musselshell, and Treasure Counties and portions of Rosebud and Custer Counties. The General Analysis Area for this EIS is located in southern Campbell and northern Converse Counties, Wyoming, which lies near the southeast corner of the Wyoming Project Area. Surface coal mining operations in Montana and Wyoming were included in the air quality impact assessment as non-project emission sources (other reasonably foreseeable emission sources). Potential emissions from coal mining activities at each mine within the modeling domain were estimated for 2006, the projected peak emission year for CBM development. The coal mining emissions estimates were based on projected 2006 annual coal production estimates and mining locations provided by the Wyoming and Montana BLM and the reported emission rates per unit of coal production at each mine provided by the WDEQ/AQD and MDEQ/AWM. Construction emissions related to the proposed oil and gas development would occur during potential road and well pad construction, well drilling, and well completion testing. The Argonne air quality impact analysis was prepared solely under the requirements of NEPA to assess and disclose reasonably foreseeable impacts to the public and BLM and USDA-FS decision makers. The air quality impact assessment was based on the best available engineering data 4-113

4.0 Environmental Consequences and assumptions, meteorology data, and dispersion modeling procedures, as well as professional and scientific judgment. However, where specific data or procedures were not available, reasonable assumptions were incorporated. Potential direct project, indirect, and cumulative air quality impacts were analyzed to predict maximum potential near-field ambient air pollutant concentrations and potential HAP impacts, as well as to determine maximum far-field ambient air pollutant concentrations, visibility, and atmospheric deposition (acid rain) impacts. The methodologies used to predict and interpret potential air quality impacts are described in Appendix E. There are several differences between the cumulative air quality impact analysis conducted for the Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS and the Montana Statewide EIS by Argonne National Laboratory and the WDEQ/AQD air quality permit analyses discussed in Section 4.1.4. The Argonne National Laboratory analysis focuses on oil and gas and CBM development in the Wyoming and Montana PRB and includes other sources in the area, including surface coal mining, in a broad cumulative analysis. Each WDEQ/AQD permit analysis focuses on near-field coal mining impacts based on detailed information from surface coal mines in a specific area. The two analyses utilize different models (ISCLT for the WDEQ/AQD permit analyses versus CALPUFF for the Argonne analysis); different emission inventories (entire mine production for WDEQ/AQD permit versus projected production 4-114 increases for the Argonne analysis); different mine boundary representations (Lands Necessary to Conduct Mining for the WDEQ/AQD analyses versus representative rectangular area for the Argonne analysis); and different background concentrations and sources. The WDEQ/AQD permit analyses use background concentrations of 15 µg/m3 for PM10 and 20 µg/m3 for NO2 to represent background concentration in the air prior to any coal mining activity and then models all sources in the area regardless of when they were built. The Argonne National Laboratory analysis uses 17 µg/m3 for PM10 and 16.5 µg/m3 for NOx, which represents the ambient air concentrations as of a specified date. Only sources that were constructed or permitted after that date are used in the model. As a result of the differences in the scope and nature of these two analyses, there are differences in the results produced by each analysis. Air pollution impacts are limited by state, tribal, and federal regulations, standards, and implementation plans established under the CAA and administered by the applicable air quality regulatory agencies (including the WDEQ/AQD, the MDEQ/AWM, or the EPA). The Departments of Environmental Quality for adjacent states have similar jurisdiction over potential air pollutant emission sources in their respective states, which can have a cumulative impact with WDEQ/AQD and MDEQ/AWM approved sources. Air quality regulations require that proposed new, or modified existing air pollutant South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences emission sources undergo a permitting review before their construction can begin. Therefore, the applicable air quality regulatory agencies have the primary authority and responsibility to review permit applications and to require emission permits, fees, and control devices prior to construction and/or operations of new projects. The U.S. Congress (through the CAA Section 116) also authorized local, state, and tribal air quality regulatory agencies to establish air pollution control requirements more (but not less) stringent than federal requirements. As discussed in Chapter 1, BLM would not authorize mining by issuing leases for the tracts considered in this EIS, but the impacts of mining are considered because it is a logical consequence of issuing these leases. The NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts were applied for by existing mines with air quality permits that have been approved by WDEQ/AQD. If an LBA tract is leased as a maintenance tract to an existing mine, that mine would have to modify its existing approved air quality permit and that modified permit would have to be approved before the LBA Tract could be mined. Additional site-specific air quality analyses would be performed, and additional emission control measures (including a BACT analysis and determination) may be required by the WDEQ/AQD to ensure protection of air quality. The significance criteria for potential air quality impacts include state, tribal, and federally enforced legal requirements to ensure air pollutant concentrations will remain within specific allowable levels. These requirements include the NAAQS and WAAQS, which set maximum limits for several air pollutants, and PSD increments, which limit the incremental increase of certain air pollutants (including NO2, PM10, and SO2) above legally defined baseline concentration levels. These legal limits were presented in Table 4-7. Where legal limits have not been established, BLM uses the best available scientific information to identify thresholds of significant impacts. Thresholds have been identified for HAP exposure, incremental cancer risks, potential atmospheric deposition impacts to sensitive lakes, and a “just noticeable change” in potential visibility impacts. 4.5.4.1 Emission Sources The air quality impact analysis used market demand predictions in order to estimate levels of coal production in the PRB for modeling purposes. There is enough coal leased to the existing mines in the Wyoming and Montana PRB to supply this market demand during the time of maximum CBM development activity in the PRB, which is the time when the maximum overlapping impacts to air quality would occur. The air quality impact assessment considered production from existing surface coal mines in Wyoming and Montana, including the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, 4-115

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences the Black Thunder Mine, the North Rochelle Mine, and the Antelope Mine, at levels that would supply anticipated market demand for the years considered in the analysis, but potential production from the proposed Ash Creek Mine was not considered in the analysis because no coal production or other impacts to air quality are anticipated to occur during the time frame that was considered in the air quality impact assessment. As a result, the cumulative impacts predicted by the PRB air quality impact assessment would be the same under the Proposed Action and the alternatives for leasing or not leasing the federal coal included in the tracts being considered in this EIS. As discussed in Chapter 3, the major air pollutants emitted from surface coal mining activities are fugitive dust and tailpipe emissions from large mining equipment. Activities such as blasting, loading and hauling of overburden and coal, and the large areas of disturbed land all produce dust. Stationary or point sources are associated with coal crushing, storage, and handling facilities. In general, particulate matter (PM10) is the major significant pollutant from coal mine point sources. The measures that are being used to control air pollutant emissions from existing approved mining operations, which are also described in Chapter 3, include baghouse dust collection systems, PECs or atomizers/ foggers, paving mine access roads, applying water and chemical dust suppressants on all haul roads used by trucks and/or scrapers, limiting 4-116 haul truck speeds, limiting material drop heights for shovels and draglines (bucket to truck bed or backfill), utilizing permanent and temporary revegetation of disturbed areas to minimize wind erosion, and utilizing stilling sheds at coal truck dumps. In addition, some mines in the eastern PRB are participating in the control of fugitive emissions from some nearby unpaved county roads by applying dust suppressants. These measures would be continued under all of the alternatives being considered in this EIS. Air quality impacts related to oil and gas development would occur during construction (due to potential surface disturbance by earth-moving equipment, vehicle traffic fugitive dust, well testing, as well as drilling rig and vehicle engine exhaust) and production (including non-CBM well production equipment, booster [field] and pipeline [sales] compression engine exhausts). The amount of air pollutant emissions during construction would be controlled by watering disturbed soils and by air pollutant emission limitations imposed by applicable air quality regulatory agencies. Maximum construction impacts from fugitive dust (24-hour PM10) are estimated to be 55 g/m3, about one-third of the applicable WAAQS. Actual air quality impacts depend on the amount, duration, location, and emission characteristics of potential emissions sources, as well as meteorological conditions (wind speed and direction, precipitation, relative humidity, etc.). For additional information about the cumulative impact analyses and South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences assumptions used in the cumulative air quality impact assessment, refer to the Wyoming Oil and Gas Project EIS (BLM 2003a), the Montana Statewide EIS (BLM 2003b) and the Air Quality Impact Assessment Technical Support Document (Argonne 2002). 4.5.4.2 Predicted Air Quality Impacts The Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS evaluates four alternatives in detail. Alternative 1 is the Proposed Action, which assumes that there would be a total of 51,400 CBM wells in the Wyoming PRB by 2012 (39,400 new wells plus 12,000 wells that were in existence when the EIS was prepared). The Proposed Action also assumes drilling of an estimated 3,200 conventional oil and gas wells in the same time period. Alternatives 2A and 2B evaluate alternate emission levels and water handling scenarios. The BLM’s Preferred Alternative is a combination of Alternative 1 and Alternative 2A. Under Alternative 3 (the No Action Alternative), drilling would not occur on federal oil and gas leases but would continue on state and private oil and gas leases. BLM estimates that approximately 15,500 new CBM wells would be developed on state and private lands by 2012 under this alternative, in addition to the 12,000 existing wells. For the purposes of this EIS, the range of potential nearfield impacts predicted by the air quality analysis conducted by Argonne National Laboratory for all three Wyoming oil and gas Action Alternatives are shown in the following tables, as well as the South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS potential impacts predicted under the Wyoming No Action Alternative. Please refer to the Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS (BLM 2003a) to see the individual results for each oil and gas Action Alternative. Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS Alternatives 1, 2A, and 2B Under all three oil and gas Action Alternatives, potential direct project air quality impacts would not violate any local, state, tribal, or federal air quality standards under Alternative 1. Based on extensive air quality modeling of potential direct project air quality impacts (Argonne 2002), localized short-term increases in CO, NOx, PM10, and SO2 concentrations would occur, but all maximum concentrations are expected to be below applicable NAAQS and WAAQS. All maximum near-field direct project NO2, PM10 and SO2 concentrations are expected to be below applicable PSD Class II increments (Table 4-20), and all maximum far-field direct project concentrations are expected to be below applicable PSD Class I increments (Appendix E). Although potential direct project impacts to even the most sensitive far-field lakes would not be significant, a “just noticeable change” in visibility was predicted to occur at from nine to 11 mandatory federal Class I areas, ranging up to five days at the Washakie Wilderness Area. The maximum potential direct project visibility impacts were predicted to occur on from 14 to 20 days per year on the Crow Indian Reservation. A 4-117

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-20. Range of Predicted Maximum Potential Near-Field Impacts under Alternatives 1, 2A, and 2B of the Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS (with Montana Alternative E).
Averaging Time Annual Annual 24-hour 3-hour Annual 24-hour Annual 24-hour 8-hour 1-hour Project (µg/m3) 6 to 8 1 2 3 3 15 to 20 1 to 2 11 to 16 77 to 156 157 to 223 Non-Project (µg/m3)1 3 1 2 5 1 9 1 9 124 142 Cumulative (µg/m3) 9 to 10 1 3 5 4 25 to 31 2 12 to 24 132 to 156 170 to 224 PSD Class II (µg/m3) 25 20 91 512 17 30 --------Background (µg/m3) 17 3 8 8 17 42 8 19 1,500 3,500 Total (µg/m3)2 26 to 28 4 11 13 21 67 to 73 10 38 to 43 1,624 to 1,656 3,670 to 3,724 WAAQS (µg/m3) 100 60 260 1,300 50 150 15 65 10,000 40,000 NAAQS (µg/m3) 100 80 365 1,300 50 150 15 65 10,000 40,000

Pollutant NO2 SO2

PM10

PM2.5

CO
1 2

Non-Project sources include CBM sources in Montana and surface coal mining operations in Wyoming and Montana. The contributions from each source represent maxima and do not necessarily occur at the same location. Therefore the total concentrations will not always equal the sum of the monitored background, Project, and Non-Project concentrations.

4-118

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences detailed description of the air quality impact analysis is presented in Appendix E. Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS Alternative 3 Potential direct project air quality impacts would not violate any local, state, tribal, or federal air quality standards under Alternative 3 of the Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS, the No Action Alternative. Based on extensive air quality modeling of potential direct project air quality impacts (Argonne 2002), localized, short-term increases in CO, NOx, PM10, and SO2 concentrations would occur, but all maximum concentrations are expected to be below applicable NAAQS and WAAQS. All maximum near-field direct project NO2, PM10 and SO2 concentrations are expected to be below applicable PSD Class II increments (Table 4-21), and all maximum far-field direct project concentrations are expected to be below applicable PSD Class I increments Appendix E. Although potential direct project impacts to even the most sensitive far-field lakes would not be significant, a “just noticeable change” in visibility was predicted to occur one day per year at the mandatory federal Class I Bridger, Fitzpatrick, and Washakie Wilderness Areas. The maximum potential direct project visibility impacts were predicted to occur on 10 days per year on the Crow Indian Reservation. A detailed description of the air quality impact analysis is presented in Appendix E. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS 4.5.4.3 Cumulative Impacts The EPA CALMET/CALPUFF dispersion model system was also used to predict maximum far-field potential air quality impacts at downwind mandatory federal PSD Class I areas, and other sensitive receptors, to: 1) determine if the WAAQS, NAAQS, or PSD Class I increments might be exceeded; 2) calculate potential nitrate and sulfate atmospheric deposition (and their related impacts) in sensitive lakes; and 3) predict potential impacts to visibility (regional haze). Argonne National Laboratory also conducted this analysis at the request of the Wyoming and Montana BLM. Meteorological information was assembled to characterize atmospheric transport and dispersion from several data sources, including: 1) 4-km gridded wind field values derived from the MM5 (mesoscale model) with continuous fourdimensional data assimilation; and 2) hourly surface observations (wind speed, wind direction, temperature, cloud cover, ceiling height, surface pressure, relative humidity, and precipitation). Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS and Montana Statewide Oil and Gas EIS potential air pollutant project sources were combined with nonproject sources to determine the total potential cumulative air quality impacts. Coal mining operations in Wyoming and Montana were included as non-project sources.

4-119

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-21. Predicted Maximum Potential Near-Field Impacts under Alternative 3 of the Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS (with Montana Alternative E).
Average Time Annual Annual 24-hour 3-hour Annual 24-hour Annual 24-hour 8-hour 1-hour Project ( g/m3) 3 <1 1 1 1 7 <1 6 183 261 Non-Project ( g/m3)1 3 <1 2 5 1 9 0.7 9 124 142 Cumulative ( g/m3) 6 <1 2 5 2 16 1 13 183 261 PSD Class II ( g/m3) 25 20 91 512 17 30 --------Background ( g/m3) 17 3 8 8 17 42 8 19 1,500 3,500 Total ( g/m3)2 23 3 10 13 19 58 9 32 1,683 3,761 WAAQS ( g/m3) 100 60 260 1,300 50 150 15 65 10,000 40,000 NAAQS ( g/m3) 100 80 365 1,300 50 150 15 65 10,000 40,000

Pollutant NO2 SO2

PM10 PM2.5 CO
1 2

4-120

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Potential CO and NOx emissions were analyzed to predict potential maximum near-field PSD Class II impacts, as well as potential far-field impacts at 29 mandatory federal PSD Class I and other sensitive areas located in Wyoming, Montana, North and South Dakota, and Nebraska (Argonne 2002). Total concentrations are expected to be in compliance with applicable WAAQS and NAAQS (Appendix E). Table 4-22 presents the maximum predicted air pollutant concentrations at specified PSD Class I areas. Under the Alternatives considered in the Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS, potential cumulative annual NO2 concentrations and potential cumulative 24-hour PM10 concentrations were predicted to be above the PSD Class I increment within the Northern Cheyenne Reservation. Under the Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS Preferred Alternative, cumulative 24-hour PM10 concentrations were also predicted to be above the PSD Class I increment within the Washakie Wilderness Area. These impacts would be the same under all of the alternatives considered in this EIS. As described in Appendix E, other PSD Class I areas had predicted far-field impacts below applicable increments. All PSD Class II areas had predicted far-field impacts below applicable PSD increments. This NEPA analysis compares potential air quality impacts from the proposed development to applicable ambient air quality standards and PSD increments, but these comparisons to South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS the PSD Class I and II increments do not represent a regulatory PSD Increment Consumption Analysis. Even though most of the development activities would occur within areas designated PSD Class II, the potential impacts on regional Class I areas are to be evaluated. For a new source review air quality permit application for a major source, the applicable air quality regulatory agencies may require a regulatory PSD increment analysis. More stringent emission controls beyond BACT may be stipulated in the air quality permits if impacts are predicted to be greater than the PSD Class I or Class II increments. As discussed in Sections 3.5 and 4.1.4, existing surface coal mining operations in the PRB, including the General Analysis Area, are not currently affected by the PSD regulations. Several lakes within four USDA-FS designated wilderness areas were identified as being sensitive to atmospheric deposition and for which the most recent and complete data have been collected. The USDA-FS has also identified the following LAC regarding potential changes in lake chemistry: no more than a 10 percent change in ANC for those water bodies where the existing ANC is at or above 25 eq/L; and no more than a 1.0 eq/L change for those extremely sensitive water bodies where the existing ANC is below 25 eq/L. Based on a Rocky Mountain Region USDA-FS screening method (USDAFS 2000), Table 4–23 demonstrates that potential impacts to most sensitive lakes would be below 4-121

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-22. Maximum Predicted PSD Class I Area Cumulative Far-Field Impacts (in g/m3) under Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS Alternative 1 (Proposed Action) and all South PRB Coal EIS Alternatives.
Averaging Period
Annual 24-hour Annual SO2 3-hour 24-hour Annual Source: Argonne 2002

Pollutant
NO2 PM10

Class I Area
Northern Cheyenne Reservation Northern Cheyenne Reservation Northern Cheyenne Reservation Northern Cheyenne Reservation Absaroka-Beartooth Wilderness Northern Cheyenne Reservation

Maximum Modeled Concentration (Cumulative)
4.2 12.8 1.7 5.1 2.4 0.3

PSD Class I Increment
2.5 8 4 25 5 2

Table 4-23. Predicted Total Cumulative Change in Acid Neutralizing Capacity at Sensitive Area Lakes (percent change).
Wilderness Area Bridger Lake Black Joe Deep Hobbs Upper Frozen Ross Stepping Stone Twin Island Emerald Florence Lower Saddlebag Background ANC (µeq/L) 69 61 68 5.8a 61.4 27 36 55.3 32.7 55.5 Area (hectares) 890 205 293 65 4,455 26 45 293 417 155 Change (percent) 2.2 to 2.1 2.5 to 3.0 1.3 to1.5 1.5 to 1.8b 1.8 to 2.1 2.3 to 2.5 1.6 to 1.8 5.0 to 6.0 8.5 to 10.4 3.2 to 3.8 Thresholds (percent) 10 10 10 1b 10 10 10 10 10 10

Fitzpatrick AbsarokaBeartooth Cloud Peak Popo Agie
a

The background concentration is based on only six samples taken on four days between 1997 and 2001. b Since the background ANC value is less than 25 µeq/L, the potential ANC change is expressed in µeq/L, and the applicable threshold is 1.0 µeq/L. Source: Argonne 2002

4-122

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences applicable significance thresholds. However, under the Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS Action Alternatives, potential non-project ANC impacts were predicted to exceed the 1.0 µeq/L impact threshold at the very sensitive Upper Frozen Lake within the PSD Class I Bridger Wilderness Area. Cumulative ANC impacts ranged from 1.5 to 1.8 µeq/L. Nearly 13 to 28 percent of these impacts are due to direct contributions from Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS Action Alternatives alone. In addition, under Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS Alternative 1, cumulative ANC impacts were predicted to exceed the 10 percent impact threshold (up to 10.4 percent) at Florence Lake within the PSD Class II Cloud Peak Wilderness Area. Nearly 30 percent of these impacts are due to direct contributions from Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project. Potential impacts at all other sensitive lakes (and under all Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS Action Alternatives) were below the ANC threshold levels. No sensitive lakes were identified by either the NPS or USFWS. Since the development of the project and non-project air pollutant emission sources constitute many small sources spread out over a very large area, discrete visible plumes are not likely to affect the mandatory federal PSD Class I areas, but the potential for cumulative visibility impacts (increased regional haze) is a concern. Regional haze degradation is caused by fine particles and gases scattering and absorbing light. Potential changes to regional haze are South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS calculated in terms of a perceptible “just noticeable change” (1.0 dv) in visibility when compared to background conditions. A 1.0 dv change is considered a small but noticeable change in haziness as described in the Preamble to the EPA Regional Haze Regulations (Federal Register, Vol. 64 No. 126, dated July 1, 1999). A 1.0 dv change is defined as about a 10 percent change in the extinction coefficient (corresponding to a two to five percent change in contrast, for a black target against a uniform sky, at the most optically sensitive distance from an observer), which is a small but noticeable change in haziness under most circumstances when viewing scenes within mandatory federal Class I areas. It should be noted that a 1.0 dv change is not a “just noticeable change” in all cases for all scenes. Visibility changes less than 1.0 dv are likely to be perceptible in some cases, especially where the scene being viewed is highly sensitive to small amounts of pollution, such as due to preferential forward light scattering. Under other view-specific conditions, such as where the sight path to a scenic feature is less than the maximum visual range, a change greater than 1.0 dv might be required to be a “just noticeable change”. This NEPA analysis is not designed to predict specific visibility impacts for specific views in specific mandatory federal Class I areas based on specific project designs, but to characterize reasonably foreseeable visibility 4-123

4.0 Environmental Consequences conditions that are representative of a fairly broad geographic region, based on reasonable emission source assumptions. This approach is consistent with both the nature of regional haze and the requirements of NEPA. At the time of a preconstruction air quality PSD permit application, the applicable air quality regulatory agency may require a much more detailed visibility impact analysis. Factors such as the magnitude of dv change, frequency, time of the year, and the meteorological conditions during times when predicted visibility impacts are above the 1.0 dv threshold (as well as the modeling analyses assumptions) should all be considered when assessing the significance of predicted impacts. The USDA-FS, NPS, and USFWS have published their Final FLAG Phase I Report (Federal Register, Vol. 66 No. 2, dated January 3, 2001), providing “a consistent and predictable process for assessing the impacts of new and existing sources on AQRVs” including visibility. For example, the FLAG report states, “A cumulative effects analysis of new growth (defined as all PSD increment-consuming sources) on visibility impairment should be performed”, and further, “If the visibility impairment from the Proposed Action, in combination with cumulative new source growth, is less than a change in extinction of 10 percent [1.0 dv] for all time periods, the FLMs will not likely object to the Proposed Action.” Although the FLAG procedures were primarily designed to provide analysis guidance to PSD permit applicants, the following 4-124 analysis uses the Final FLAG Phase I Report procedures for this NEPA analysis. Based on multiple iterations of the non-steady state CALPUFF dispersion modeling system, including the CALMET meteorological model, for four different development alternatives, potential cumulative visibility impacts estimated by the seasonal FLAG screening method exceeded the impact thresholds (including the use of FLAG and WDEQ/AQD provided background extinction values) at all 29 sensitive areas analyzed. Therefore, potential maximum visibility impacts were estimated using the daily FLAG refined method (based on hourly optical extinction and relative humidity values measured at two IMPROVE monitoring locations) for each Class I and Class II sensitive area. Although the potential modeled impacts for each sensitive area were based on 1996 MM5 regional meteorology, these values were compared to hourly optical extinction and relative humidity data collected at two locations in the project area between 1989 and 1999. For example, since the 1.0 dv threshold was predicted to be reached within the mandatory federal PSD Class I Washakie Wilderness Area based on the seasonal FLAG screening methodology, the maximum modeled cumulative impacts at that area were also compared to representative hourly optical and relative humidity values measured at Bridger Wilderness Area between 1989 and 1999 using the daily FLAG South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-24. Predicted Visibility Impacts in the Mandatory Federal PSD Class I Washakie Wilderness Area from Direct Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS Alternative Sources - Daily FLAG Refined Method (Average Number of Days per Year Predicted to Equal or Exceed a 1.0 dv “Just Noticeable Change”).
Alternative 1 2A 2B 3 1989 4 2 1 1 1990 2 2 2 0 1991 7 6 6 4 1992 6 5 5 3 1993 4 4 3 1 1994 7 6 6 1 1995 4 4 4 2 1996 6 5 4 2 1997 7 5 5 2 1998 2 1 1 0 1999 6 4 3 0

Note:

Potential cumulative visibility impacts were predicted using daily background optical and relative humidity conditions for each of the years listed above. Source: Argonne 2002

refined method (Table 4–24). The range of impacts was then summarized as the annual average number of days over the 11-year period predicted to equal or exceed a 1.0 dv “just noticeable change” (Table 4–25). The prediction of potential visibility impacts based on the daily FLAG refined methodology using measured optical extinction conditions is not intended to be an air quality regulatory analysis. Such analysis would be conducted by the applicable air quality regulatory agencies before actual development could occur. The applicable air quality regulatory agencies (including the state, tribe, or EPA) would review specific air pollutant emissions pre-construction permit applications that examine source-specific air quality impacts. As part of these permits (depending on source size), the air quality regulatory agencies could require additional air quality impacts analyses or mitigation measures. Thus, before development occurs, additional site-specific air quality analyses would be performed to ensure protection of air quality.

For further mitigation information see Section 4.3 and Appendix E. Coal mines develop predictive models (i.e., FDM ISCLT3) to assess the potential air quality impacts of their mining operations. Based on these predictive models conducted for PRB mines, mining operations do not have significant off-site particulate pollution impacts, even when production and pollution from neighboring mines are considered. However, this prediction has been based on the assumptions that mining activities are sufficiently removed from the permit boundaries and that neighboring mines are not actively mining in the immediate vicinity (within 0.6-2.5 miles). Previous modeling (BLM 1992a) has shown that incremental particulate pollution impacts decrease to insignificant levels (<1.0 g/m3 PM10 annual average) within six miles of active mining. In cases where mines are in close proximity (within two miles), WDEQ/AQD follows a modeling protocol which accounts for all minegenerated particulate air pollutants 4-125

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Table 4-25. Predicted Visibility Impacts in Class I Areas - Daily FLAG Refined Method (Average Number of Days per Year Predicted to Equal or Exceed a 1.0 dv “Just Noticeable Change”) (Results shown are the predicted impacts under Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project Alternatives 1, 2A, 2B, and 3. Impacts related to coal mining under all South PRB Coal EIS Alternatives are included under “Non-Project Sources”).
Class I Area Badlands Wilderness Area Bridger Wilderness Area Fitzpatrick Wilderness Area Gates of the Mtns Wilderness Area Grand Teton National Park North Absaroka Wilderness Area Red Rock Lakes Wilderness Area Scapegoat Wilderness Area Teton Wilderness Area Theodore Roosevelt NMP2 (North Unit) Theodore Roosevelt NMP2 (South Unit) U.L. Bend Wilderness Area Washakie Wilderness Area Wind Cave National Park Yellowstone National Park Northern Cheyenne Reservation3
1 1

Alt 1 3 4 4 0 1 4 0 0 3 0 1 1 5 4 3 17

Alt 2A 3 4 3 0 1 3 0 0 3 0 0 1 4 3 2 16

Alt 2B 1 3 3 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 4 2 1 14

Alt 3 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 7

Non-Project Sources 13 to 17 7 to 9 6 to 9 3 to 4 3 to 5 9 to 13 0 to 1 2 to 2 6 to 9 1 to 1 1 to 3 4 to 5 10 to 14 17 to 21 8 to 11 27 to 82

Cum Sources 18 to 28 8 to 12 8 to 12 3 to 4 4 to 8 11 to 15 0 to 3 2 to 3 7 to 11 1 to 3 2 to 7 5 to 8 12 to 18 22 to 28 9 to 13 33 to 92

The U.S. Congress designated the Wilderness Area portion of Badlands National Park as a mandatory federal PSD Class I area. The remainder of Badlands National Park is a PSD Class II area. 2 NMP - National Memorial Park. 3 Although the Northern Cheyenne Reservation is a tribal designated PSD Class I Area, it is not a mandatory federal PSD Class I area subject to EPA’s Regional Haze Regulations. Non-Project Sources - The impact of all air pollutant emission sources not included in Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS Alt 1, Alt 2A, Alt 2B or Alt 3, including existing surface coal mines in Wyoming and Montana and the Montana Statewide EIS sources. The range of potential annual average days above a 1.0 dv “just noticeable change” in visibility corresponds to including Montana Alternative A (low) to Montana Alternative B/C/E (high). Cum Sources - The impact of all cumulative air pollutant emission sources combined, including Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS Alt 1, Alt 2A, Alt 2B, Alt 3, and Non-Project Sources (which include the South PRB Coal EIS Proposed Action and Alternatives and Montana Statewide EIS sources). The range of potential annual average days above a 1.0 dv “just noticeable change” in visibility corresponds to: including Non-Project, Wyoming Alternative 3 and Montana Alternative A sources (low); up to including Non-Project, Wyoming Alternative 1 and Montana Alternative B/C/E sources (high). Source: Argonne 2002

4-126

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences from all nearby mines to determine impacts to ambient air quality. Known as the Mine A/Mine B modeling procedure, this model evaluates the total impacts of a given mining operation, including those impacts from and on neighboring mines. Under each Proposed Action being evaluated in this EIS, each LBA tract is within two miles of either an existing mine or another LBA tract. Gaseous reddish-brown clouds, some containing concentrations of NOx, have been produced by overburden blasting at surface coal mines in the PRB. In 1995, 1998, and 1999, OSM received citizen complaints concerning NOx gases generated from blasting operations drifting off mine permit areas (OSM 2000). No citizen complaints were received by OSM or WDEQ during the 2001 evaluation year, which ended on September 30, 2001 (OSM 2002a) or the 2002 evaluation year, which ended on September 30, 2002 (OSM 2002b). These reddish-brown clouds generally do not overlap due to the distances between mines and the variation in blasting schedules. However, areas adjacent to the permit areas for this group of mines could be affected on different occasions by blasting clouds from several different mines, depending on the weather conditions. The nature of these blasting clouds and human health consequences resulting from short-term exposures to NOx are discussed in Section 4.1.4.3. There is no short-term ambient air standard for NO2 in Wyoming. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS In response to the public concern about these clouds and the potential consequences to human health, WDEQ and the mines have developed required and voluntary measures to protect the public from exposure to the clouds. These measures are described in Chapter 3 of this document. The mines in the eastern PRB have also been cooperating in efforts aimed at reducing blasting clouds, which are discussed in Section 3.5. This research has led to changes in blasting agents and the size of blasting shots that have reduced NOx emissions during blasting. As indicated above, no citizen complaints were received by OSM or WDEQ/LQD during the 2001 and 2002 evaluation years. Another air quality concern is the venting of methane that occurs when coal is mined. As discussed in Section 3.3.1 of this document, methane is generated from coal beds. When coal is mined, by surface or underground methods, the methane that is present in the coal is vented to the atmosphere. Methane is a greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming. According to the EIA/DOE, U.S. anthropogenic methane emissions totaled 28.0 million metric tons in 2001 (U.S. Department of Energy 2002). U.S. 2001 methane emissions from coal mining were estimated at 2.78 million metric tons (10 percent of the U.S. total anthropogenic methane emissions in 2001). According to Table 14 of that report, surface coal mining was estimated to be responsible for about 0.53 million metric tons of methane emissions in 4-127

4.0 Environmental Consequences 2001. This represents about 1.89 percent of the estimated U.S. anthropogenic methane emissions in 2001, and about 19.06 percent of the estimated methane emissions attributed to coal mining of all types. Based on the 2001 coal production figures, it is estimated that Wyoming and Montana PRB surface coal mines were responsible for approximately 0.98 percent of the estimated U.S. anthropogenic methane emissions in 2001. In many areas, including the PRB, CBM is being recovered from coal and sold. On a large scale, recovery of CBM from the coal prior to mining by both surface and underground methods could potentially gradually reduce U.S. emissions of CBM to the atmosphere. In the PRB, CBM is being produced from the coal areas adjacent to and generally downdip of the mines. CBM is currently being produced from the same coal seams that would be mined in all five of the LBA tracts considered in this EIS. As discussed in Section 4.1.2 of this EIS, BLM estimates that a large portion of the CBM reserves could be recovered prior to initiation of mining activity on the LBA tracts under the Proposed Action and other alternatives considered in this EIS. CBM reserves that are not recovered prior to mining would be vented to the atmosphere. 4.5.5 Water Resources Surface Water Streamflows may be reduced during surface coal mining because SMCRA and Wyoming State regulations 4-128 require capture and treatment of all runoff from disturbed areas in sedimentation ponds before it is allowed to flow off the mine permit areas. Also, the surface coal mine pits in the PRB are large, and these pits, together with ponds and diversions built to keep water out of the pits, can intercept the runoff from significant drainage areas. Changes in drainage patterns and surface disturbance related to surface coal mining are decreasing and will continue to decrease flows in most of the ephemeral and intermittent drainages exiting at the mine sites. Most of the streams in the area are ephemeral under natural conditions; they are dry throughout most of each year. Development of CBM resources in the area west of the mines could potentially increase surface flow in some drainages. Currently, there is methane production occurring in the General Analysis Area. The amount of CBM produced water that ultimately reaches the major channels is reduced by evapotranspiration, infiltration into the ground, and surface landowners, who sometimes divert the produced water into reservoirs for livestock use because it is of relatively good quality. For purposes of analysis, the Wyoming PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS (BLM 2003a) assumed that the discharged CBM produced water conveyance losses would be 20 percent due to infiltration and evapotranspiration.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences The PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS estimates that the total number of CBM wells in the Upper Cheyenne River and Antelope Creek drainages, in which the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mines are located, will be approximately 2,900 wells by 2011. The estimated impacts to Antelope Creek and Upper Cheyenne River flow as a result of the projected CBM development include increasing the annual average flow at the Antelope Creek gaging station near Teckla by 7.0 to 13.0 cfs and increasing the annual average flow of the Cheyenne River at the Riverview gaging station by 12.0 to 19.0 cfs during 2002 through 2017. Flow impacts would be greater in the Antelope Creek and Cheyenne River tributaries within the LBA tracts, since the tracts are closer to the CBM water discharge locations, and conveyance losses are therefore less than at the downstream gaging stations. These CBM water discharges would be constant, as opposed to naturally occurring flows that fluctuate widely on a seasonal and annual basis. The U.S. Geological Survey has predicted that, after reclamation, major streams in the PRB will exhibit increased runoff ranging from 0.4 percent in the Cheyenne River to 4.3 percent in Coal Creek due to cumulative disturbance as a result of existing surface coal mining (Martin et al. 1988). This is based on the assumption that unit runoff rates will be increased after reclamation due to soil compaction, and the percentage changes in runoff are based on South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS permitted mine acreages in 1981. The additional leases issued since that time have increased the permitted acreage by about 40 percent and would, under the same assumptions, increase the U.S. Geological Survey’s estimated runoff increase by the same incremental amount. This level of increase in runoff is small compared to seasonal and annual variability of runoff in the PRB. Drainage from all five southern mines combines where Black Thunder Creek enters the Cheyenne River. The drainage area of the Cheyenne River at this point is approximately 2,430 square miles. The entire area of disturbance from these five mines as currently permitted would impact approximately four percent of the drainage basin of the Cheyenne River, and this disturbance would occur over about 50 years. Leasing the five proposed LBA tracts would raise this disturbance acreage to roughly six percent of the Cheyenne River drainage basin at Black Thunder Creek confluence. Sediment concentrations should not increase significantly in area streams even with the addition of mining operations on the five proposed LBA tracts because, as discussed in Section 4.1.5, state and federal regulations require that all surface runoff from mined lands pass through sedimentation ponds or other sediment control structures. The CBM water discharges could result in erosion and degradation of small drainages, which could affect 4-129

4.0 Environmental Consequences water quality and channel hydraulic characteristics. From a surface water standpoint, the increased flows due to surface CBM water discharges and the reduced flows due to surface coal mining would tend to offset each other. However, conflicts could also result. The CBM development takes place upstream from the mines. Provisions the mines have taken to prevent water from entering the pits (e.g., storage ponds or diversions) could be adversely affected by flows that were not included in designs or that change conditions for future designs. Groundwater As a result of statutory requirements and concerns, several studies and a number of modeling analyses have been conducted to help predict the impacts of surface coal mining on groundwater resources in the Wyoming portion of the PRB. Some of these studies and modeling analyses are discussed below. In 1987, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the WDEQ and OSM, conducted a study of the hydrology of the eastern PRB. The resulting description of the cumulative hydrologic effects of all current and anticipated surface coal mining (as of 1987) was published in 1988 in the U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigation Report entitled “Cumulative Potential Hydrologic Impacts of Surface Coal Mining in the Eastern Powder River Structural Basin, Northeastern Wyoming”, also known as the “CHIA” (Martin, et al. 1988). This report 4-130 evaluates the potential cumulative groundwater impacts of surface coal mining in the area and is incorporated by reference into this EIS. The CHIA analysis included the proposed mining of all the 1987 leases at all five of the existing mines in the southern mine group (Jacobs Ranch Mine, Black Thunder Mine, North Rochelle Mine, North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, and Antelope Mine). It did not evaluate potential groundwater impacts related to additional coal leasing in this area and it did not consider the potential for overlapping groundwater impacts from coal mining and CBM development. Each mine must assess the probable hydrologic consequences of mining as part of the mine permitting process. The WDEQ/LQD must evaluate the cumulative hydrologic impacts associated with each proposed mining operation before approving the mining and reclamation plan for each mine, and they must find that the cumulative hydrologic impacts of all anticipated mining would not cause material damage to the hydrologic balance outside of the permit area for each mine. As a result of these requirements, each existing approved mining permit includes an analysis of the hydrologic impacts of the surface coal mining proposed at that mine. If revisions to mining and reclamation permits are proposed, then the potential cumulative impacts of the revisions must also be evaluated. If one or more of the LBA tracts are leased to the applicants, the existing mining and reclamation permit for each respective mine must be revised South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences and approved to include each new lease before it can be mined. Additional groundwater impact analyses have also been conducted to evaluate the potential cumulative impacts of coal mining and CBM development. One example of these analyses is the report entitled “A Study of Techniques to Assess Surface and Groundwater Impacts Associated with Coal Bed Methane and Surface Coal Mining, Little Thunder Creek Drainage, Wyoming” (Wyoming Water Resources Center 1997). This study was prepared as part of a cooperative agreement involving WDEQ/LQD, the Wyoming SEO, the WSGS, BLM, OSM, and the University of Wyoming. The Wyodak CBM Project DEIS (BLM 1999a) and FEIS (BLM 1999c) presented the results of a modeling analysis of the potential cumulative impacts of coal mining and CBM development on groundwater in the coal and overlying aquifers as a result of coal mining and CBM development. The technical report for the Wyodak CBM Project EIS modeling analyses is available for public review at the BLM Field Office in Buffalo, Wyoming (Applied Hydrology Associates, Inc. 1999). The results of these previously prepared analyses are incorporated by reference into this EIS document. The PRB Oil and Gas Project FEIS (BLM 2003a), which was distributed to the public January 2003, includes an updated modeling analysis of the groundwater impacts if an additional 39,000 new CBM wells are drilled in the PRB by the end of 2011. The project area for this EIS covers all of Campbell, Sheridan, and Johnson South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS Counties, as well as the northern portion of Converse County. Another source of data on the impacts of surface coal mining on groundwater is the monitoring that is required by WDEQ/LQD and administered by the mining operators. Each mine is required to monitor groundwater levels and quality in the coal and in the shallower aquifers in the area surrounding their operations. Monitoring wells are also required to record water levels and water quality in reclaimed areas. The coal mine groundwater monitoring data is published each year by GAGMO, a voluntary group formed in 1980. Members of GAGMO include most of the companies with operating or proposed mines in the Wyoming PRB, WDEQ, the Wyoming SEO, BLM, U.S. Geological Survey, and OSM. GAGMO contracts with an independent firm each year to publish the annual monitoring results. In 1991, GAGMO published a report summarizing the water monitoring data collected from 1980 to 1990 in the Wyoming PRB (Hydro-Engineering 1991b). In 1996, they published a report summarizing the data collected from 1980 to 1995 (HydroEngineering 1996a). In 2001, GAGMO published a report summarizing the water monitoring data collected from 1980 to 2000 (Hydro-Engineering 2001). The southern group of mines uses about 1,736 ac-ft of water per year for drinking, sanitation, washing equipment, and dust control. 4-131

4.0 Environmental Consequences Sources of this water include seepage into the mine pits, sediment- and flood-control impoundments, as well as production from the aquifers below the coal. The five southern mines pump an estimated 1,400 ac-ft per year from the pits and dewatering wells. The major groundwater issues related to surface coal mining that have been identified are: • the effect of the removal of the coal aquifer and any overburden aquifers within the mine area and replacement of these aquifers with spoil material; the extent of the temporary lowering of static water levels in the aquifers around the mine due to dewatering associated with removal of these aquifers within the mine boundaries; the effects of the use of water from the subcoal Fort Union Formation by the mines; changes in water quality as a result of mining; and potential overlapping drawdown in the coal due to proximity of coal mining and CBM development. The effects of replacing the coal aquifer and overburden with a backfill aquifer is the first major groundwater concern. The following discussion of recharge, movement, and discharge of water in the backfill aquifer is excerpted from the CHIA (Martin et al. 1988:24): Postmining recharge, movement and discharge of groundwater in the Wasatch aquifer and Wyodak coal aquifer will probably not be substantially different from premining conditions. Recharge rates and mechanisms will not change substantially. Hydraulic conductivity of the spoil aquifer will be approximately the same as in the Wyodak coal aquifer allowing groundwater to move from recharge areas where clinker is present east of mine areas through the spoil aquifer to the undisturbed Wasatch aquifer and Wyodak coal aquifer to the west. Monitoring data from 1990 to 2000 verify that recharge has occurred and is continuing in the backfill (HydroEngineering 1991a, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996b, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, and ACC 2001). The water monitoring summary reports prepared each year by GAGMO list current water levels in the monitoring wells completed in the backfill and compare them with the 1980 water levels, as estimated from the 1980 coal water-level contour maps. In the 1991 GAGMO 10-year report, some recharge had occurred South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

•

The impacts of large scale surface coal mining on a cumulative basis for each of these issues are discussed in the following paragraphs.

4-132

4.0 Environmental Consequences in 88 percent of the 51 backfill wells reported at that time. In the GAGMO 20-year report, 79 percent of the 82 backfill wells measured contained water. Coal companies are required by state and federal law to mitigate any water rights that are interrupted, discontinued, or diminished by mining. The cumulative size of the backfill area in the PRB and the duration of mining activity would be increased by mining of the recently issued leases and the currently proposed LBA tracts. Since the mined-out areas are being backfilled and the monitoring data demonstrate that recharge of the backfill is occurring, substantial additional impacts are not anticipated as a result of any of the pending leasing actions. Through September 2001 more than 41 percent of the area disturbed at the entire southern group of mines had been backfilled and regarded (Humphrey 2002). Backfill monitoring wells installed to date at four of the five southern mines indicate that recharge is occurring in the backfill. Clinker or scoria, the baked and fused rock formed by prehistoric burning of the Wyodak-Anderson coal seam, occurs all along the coal outcrop area (Figure 4-14) and is believed to be the major recharge source for the spoil aquifer, just as it is for the coal. However, not all clinker is saturated. Some clinker is mined for road-surfacing material, but saturated clinker is not generally mined since abundant clinker exists South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS above the water table and does not present the mining problems that would result from mining saturated clinker. Therefore, the major recharge source for the spoil aquifer is not being disturbed by current mining. Clinker does not occur on four of the five LBA tracts being considered in this EIS. The second major groundwater issue is the extent of water level drawdown in the coal and shallower aquifers in the area surrounding the mines. In this EIS, assessment of cumulative impacts to groundwater related to surface coal mining in the southern group of mines is based on impact predictions made by JRCC, ALC, TCC, PRCC, and ACC for mine-related drawdown at the Jacobs Ranch Mine, Black Thunder Mine, North Rochelle Mine, North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, and Antelope Mine, respectively, and extrapolating those drawdowns to consider mining of the five LBA tracts included in this EIS. Figure 4-14 depicts the extrapolated worst-case extent of the five-ft cumulative drawdown contour within the Wyodak coal aquifer resulting from the five southern mine operations, including the five LBA tracts included in this EIS. The extent of the five-ft drawdown contour is used by WDEQ/LQD to assess the cumulative extent of impact to the groundwater system caused by mining operations. In Figure 4-14, these drawdown predictions are compared to the actual monitoring information after 20 years of mining and to modeled predictions in the CHIA. Figure 4-14 shows only the predicted drawdowns in the coal 4-133

4.0 Environmental Consequences
R. 75 W. T. 45 N. R. 74 W. R. 73 W. R. 72 W. R. 71 W. R. 70 W. R. 69 W. T. 45 N.

CBM Production has Significantly Affected the Extent of Drawdown in this Area Campbell County

Weston County

5'
T. 44 N.

5' 5'

T. 44 N.

Jacobs Ranch Mine T. 43 N. Black Thunder Mine North Rochelle Mine T. 42 N. North Antelope/ Rochelle Complex T. 41 N. West Antelope LBA

T. 43 N.

Little Thunder LBA West Roundup LBA NARO North LBA

T. 42 N.

5'
NARO South LBA

5' 5'
T. 41 N. Campbell County Converse County

Antelope Mine T. 40 N.

T. 40 N.

T. 39 N.

R. 75 W.

R. 74 W.

R. 73 W.

R. 72 W.

R. 71 W.

R. 70 W.

R. 69 W.

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Figure 4-14. Extrapolated Worst-Case Wyodak Coal Aquifer Drawdown Scenarios Showing Extent of Actual 20-Year Drawdowns and USGS Modeled Cumulative Drawdowns.

4-134

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences aquifer due to mining. The limited extent of the saturated sand aquifers in the Wasatch Formation overburden in the southern group of mines dictates that drawdowns in the Wasatch Formation are much smaller and cover much less area than the coal drawdowns. The GAGMO 20-year report provides actual groundwater drawdown information after 20 years of mining. Most of the monitoring wells included in the GAGMO 20-year report (488 wells out of 570 total) are completed in the coal beds in the overlying sediments, or in sand channels or interburden between the coal beds at 16 active and proposed mine sites. Since 1996, some BLM monitor wells have been included in the GAGMO reports. The measured changes in water levels in the coal seams after 20 years of monitoring shown on Figure 4-14, were adapted from the 2001 GAGMO 20-year report (HydroEngineering 2001). This map shows the area where actual drawdown in the coal seam was five ft or greater after 20 years of mining. CBM production has significantly affected the extent of drawdown in the General Analysis Area. Figure 4-14 indicates that the drawdowns observed after 20 years of mining were largely beyond the extent of cumulative drawdown due to all anticipated mining sources predicted in the CHIA. The addition of the pending LBA tracts, including the five LBA tracts included in this EIS, would extend the predicted cumulative extent of the five-ft drawdown caused by coal mining South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS even farther beyond the cumulative drawdown prediction in the 1988 CHIA. The CHIA predicted the approximate area of five ft or more water level decline in the Wyodak coal aquifer which would result from “all anticipated coal mining”. “All anticipated coal mining” included 16 surface coal mines operating at the time the report was prepared and six additional mines proposed at that time. All of the currently producing mines, including the Jacobs Ranch Mine, Black Thunder Mine, North Rochelle Mine, North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, and Antelope Mine were considered in the CHIA analysis (Martin et al. 1988). The study predicted that water supply wells completed in the coal may be affected as far away as eight miles from mine pits, although the effects at that distance were predicted to be minimal. As drawdowns propagate to the west, available drawdown in the coal aquifer increases. Available drawdown is defined as the elevation difference between the potentiometric surface (elevation to which water will rise in a well bore) and the bottom of the aquifer. Proceeding west, the coal depth increases faster than the potentiometric surface declines, so available drawdown in the coal increases. Since the depth to coal increases, most stock and domestic wells are completed in units above the coal. Consequently, with the exception of methane wells, few wells are completed in the coal in the areas west of the mines. Those wells 4-135

4.0 Environmental Consequences completed in the coal have considerable available drawdown, so it is unlikely that surface coal mining would cause adverse impacts to wells outside the immediate mine area. Wells in the Wasatch Formation were predicted to be impacted by drawdown only if they were within 2,000 ft of a mine pit (Martin et al. 1988). Drawdowns occur farther from the mine pits in the coal than in the shallower aquifers because the coal is a confined aquifer that is areally extensive. The area in which the shallower aquifers (Wasatch Formation, alluvium, and clinker) experience a five-ft drawdown would be much smaller than the area of drawdown in the coal because the shallower aquifers are generally discontinuous, of limited areal extent, and often unconfined. Of the 1,200 water supply wells within the maximum impact area defined in the CHIA study, about 580 are completed in Wasatch aquifers, about 100 in the Wyodak coal aquifer, and about 280 in strata below the coal. There are no completion data available for the remainder of these wells (about 240). If the five LBA tracts included in this EIS are leased and mined, the groundwater drawdown would be extended into areas surrounding the proposed new leases. The predicted cumulative worst-case drawdown effect from the five southern mines, including the five LBA tracts included in this EIS, is depicted on Figure 414. Currently, coal drawdowns from the Jacobs Ranch, Black Thunder 4-136 and North Rochelle Mines have coalesced, and drawdowns from the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex and Antelope Mine have coalesced. The areas of drawdown from the five southern mines will coalesce in the future with or without the addition of mining activity on the five LBA tracts considered in this EIS. When a lease is issued to an existing mine for a maintenance tract, the mine must revise its existing mining permit to include the new tract in its mine plan. In order to do that, each lessee would be required to conduct a detailed groundwater analysis to predict the extent of drawdown in the coal and overburden aquifers caused by mining each LBA tract that is leased. WDEQ/LQD would use the revised drawdown predictions to update the CHIA for this portion of the PRB. The applicants have installed monitoring wells which would be used to confirm or refute drawdowns predicted by analysis. This analysis would be required as part of the WDEQ mine permitting procedure discussed in Section 1.2. Potential water-level decline in the subcoal Fort Union Formation is the third major groundwater issue. According to the Wyoming SEO records as of July 1999, 14 PRB mines held permits for 42 wells between 400 ft and 10,000 ft deep. The zones of completion of these wells were not specified, and not all of the wells were producing (for example, three of the permits were held by an inactive mine, and one of the wells permitted by Black Thunder Mine has not been used since 1984). South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Water level declines in the Tullock Aquifer have been documented in the Gillette area. According to Crist (1991), these declines are most likely attributable to pumpage for municipal use by Gillette and for use at subdivisions and trailer parks in and near the city of Gillette. Most of the water-level declines in the subcoal Fort Union wells occur within one mile of the pumped wells (Crist 1991, Martin et al. 1988). The mine facilities in the PRB are separated by a distance of one mile or more, so little interference between mine supply wells would be expected. In response to concerns voiced by regulatory personnel, several mines have conducted impact studies of the subcoal Fort Union Formation. The OSM commissioned a cumulative impact study of the subcoal Fort Union Formation to address the effects of mine facility wells on this aquifer unit (OSM 1984). Conclusions from all these studies are similar and may be summarized as follows: • Because of the discontinuous nature of the sands in this formation and because most large-yield wells are completed in several different sands, it is difficult to correlate completion intervals between wells. In the Gillette area, water levels in this aquifer are probably declining because the city of Gillette and several subdivisions are utilizing water from the formation (Crist 1991). (Note: Gillette is mixing this water with water from wells completed in the Madison Formation at this time. Also, because drawdowns have occurred, some operators are able to dispose of CBM water by injecting it into the subcoal Fort Union Formation near the City of Gillette.) • Because large saturated thicknesses are available (locally) in this aquifer unit, generally 500 ft or more, a drawdown of 100 to 200 ft in the vicinity of a pumped well would not dewater the aquifer.

•

The four applicant mines adjacent to the five LBA tracts included in this EIS have permits from the Wyoming SEO for eight subcoal Fort Union Formation water supply wells. Extending the life of one or more of the mines with an LBA tract would result in additional water being withdrawn from the subcoal Fort Union Formation (Tullock Member). The additional water withdrawal would not be expected to extend the area of water level drawdown over a substantially larger area due to the discontinuous nature of the sands in the Tullock Member and the fact that drawdown and yield reach equilibrium in a well due to recharge effects. Due to the distances separating subcoal Fort Union Formation wells used for mine water supply, these wells have not experienced interference and are not likely to in the future. The North Antelope/Rochelle Complex wells would be in use for roughly four to six more years if the NARO North and 4-137

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences South LBA Tracts are leased, depending on which alternative is selected. Their annual water production may increase, though not directly in proportion to annual coal production, which could increase by 20 percent if the LBA tracts are leased. The Black Thunder Mine wells would be in use for up to 10.1 years if the Little Thunder LBA Tract is leased, depending on which alternative is selected. Their annual water production may increase, though not directly in proportion to annual coal production, which could increase by 11 percent if the LBA tract is leased. The North Rochelle Mine wells would be in use for roughly five to 8.8 more years if the West Roundup LBA Tract is leased, depending on which alternative is selected. Their annual water production should not increase, as annual coal production would not increase if the LBA tract is leased. The Antelope Mine well would not be in use for an extended period of time if the West Antelope LBA Tract is leased, regardless of which alternative is selected because mine life would not be extended. The annual water production may increase, though not directly in proportion to annual coal production, which could increase by 66 percent if the LBA tract is leased. According to the Wyoming SEO, the only permitted, non-mine water supply wells drilled below 1,000 ft in a 100 square-mile area surrounding Wright are four wells permitted by the City of Wright. As discussed above, most of the water-level declines in the subcoal Fort Union wells occur within one mile of pumped wells. The Black 4-138 Thunder Mine, which is located about six miles east of Wright, is the closest of the four applicant mines to Wright. None of the mines adjacent to the five LBA tracts propose to drill new subcoal wells if they acquire additional coal. No impacts to the water supply for the town of Wright are anticipated due to the distance between the mines and the town. Water requirements and sources for the proposed Two Elk and Two Elk Two power plants near the Black Thunder Mine are not currently known. The Wyoming SEO is discouraging further development of the lower Fort Union Formation aquifers, so the most likely groundwater source for Two Elk power plants is the Lance-Fox Hills. This would reduce the chances that the power plants would add to cumulative hydrologic impacts of mining. The fourth issue of concern with groundwater is the effect of mining on water quality. Specifically, what effect does mining have on the water quality in the surrounding area, and what are the potential water quality problems in the backfill aquifer following mining? In a regional study of the cumulative impacts of coal mining, the median concentrations of dissolved solids and sulfates were found to be larger in water from backfill aquifers than in water from either the Wasatch overburden or the coal aquifer (Martin et al. 1988). This is expected because blasting and movement of the overburden materials exposes more South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences surface area to water, increasing dissolution of soluble materials, particularly from the overburden materials that were situated above the saturated zone in the premining environment. One pore volume of water is the volume of water which would be required to saturate the backfill following reclamation. The time required for one pore volume of water to pass through the backfill aquifer is greater than the time required for the postmining groundwater system to reestablish equilibrium. According to the CHIA, estimates of the time required to reestablish equilibrium range from tens to hundreds of years (Martin et al. 1988). Chemical analyses of 336 samples collected between 1981 and 1986 from 45 wells completed in backfill aquifers at 10 mines indicated that the quality of water in the backfill will, in general, meet state standards for livestock use when recharge occurs (Martin et al. 1988). The major current use of water from the aquifers being replaced by the backfill (the Wasatch and Wyodak Coal aquifers) is for livestock because these aquifers are typically too high in dissolved solids for domestic use and well yields are typically too low for irrigation (Martin et al. 1988). According to monitoring data published by GAGMO (Hydro Engineering 1991a, 1991b, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996b, 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000), TDS values in backfill wells have ranged from 400 to 25,000 mg/L. Of the 48 backfill wells South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS sampled in 1999 and reported in the 2000 annual GAGMO report (HydroEngineering 2000), TDS in 75 percent were less than 5,000 mg/L, TDS in 23 percent were between 5,000 and 10,000 mg/L, and TDS in one well was above 10,000 mg/L. These data support the conclusion that water from the backfill will generally be acceptable for its current use, which is livestock watering, even before equilibrium is established. The incremental effect on groundwater quality due to leasing and mining of one or more of the five LBA tracts included in this EIS would be to increase the total volume of backfill and, thus, the time for equilibrium to reestablish. The fifth area of concern is the potential for cumulative impacts to groundwater resources in the coal due to the proximity of coal mining and CBM development. The Wyodak coal is being developed by mining and CBM production in the same general area. Dewatering activities associated with reasonably foreseeable CBM development would be expected to overlap with and expand the area of groundwater drawdown in the coal aquifer in the PRB over what would occur due to either coal mining or CBM development alone. Numerical groundwater flow modeling was used to predict the drawdown impacts in the Wyodak CBM Project FEIS (BLM 1999c). The modeling considered coal mining and CBM development in order to assess cumulative impacts. Modeling was done to simulate mining with and without CBM development in order to 4-139

4.0 Environmental Consequences differentiate the impacts of the two types of activities. Numerical groundwater flow modeling was also used to predict the impacts of the cumulative stresses imposed by mining and CBM development on the Fort Union Formation coal aquifer in the PRB Oil and Gas Project FEIS (BLM 2003a). Modeling was necessary because of the large areal extent, variability, and cumulative stresses imposed by mining and CBM development on the Fort Union coal aquifers. Information from earlier studies was incorporated into the modeling effort for this analysis. As expected, modeling indicated that the groundwater impacts from CBM development and surface coal mining would be additive in nature and that the addition of CBM development would extend the area experiencing a loss in hydraulic head to the west of the mining area. The 20-year GAGMO report stated that drawdowns in all areas have greatly increased in the last few years due to the water production from the Wyodak coal aquifer by methane producers (Hydro-Engineering 2001). Figure 4-15 shows the cumulative worst-case coal aquifer drawdown map for the life of the five southern mines (same as Figure 4-14) with the maximum modeled drawdown contours from the PRB Oil and Gas Project FEIS superimposed. Modeled composite maximum coal drawdown contours from mining and CBM development would occur during the period 2006 to 2009 and are for the Proposed Action of operating 39,367 4-140 new CBM wells and 12,077 CBM wells already drilled and permitted for a total of 51,444 CBM wells operating by the end of 2011 (BLM 2003a). Figure 4-15 indicates that to the north, south and west of the southern mine group, the projected drawdown in the coal aquifer due to CBM production would exceed drawdown due to mining. Drawdowns from CBM development are projected to exceed drawdowns from coal mining as close as one mile from each of the mines. Drawdowns in the coal caused by CBM development would be expected to reduce the need for dewatering in advance of mining, which would be beneficial for mining. Wells completed in the coal may also experience increased methane emissions in areas of significant aquifer depressurization. There would be a potential for conflicts to occur over who (coal mining or CBM operators) is responsible for replacing or repairing private wells that are adversely affected by the drawdowns; however, the number of potentially affected wells completed in the coal is not large. As discussed previously, coal companies are required by state and federal law to mitigate any water rights that are interrupted, discontinued, or diminished by coal mining. In response to concerns about the potential impacts of CBM development on water rights, a group of CBM operators and local landowners developed a standard water well monitoring and mitigation South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences

0' 45

0' 30
50

350'

0' 15

300'

50' ' 100

250'

0' 20

400'

25'

400 '

WRIGHT

RENO JUNCTION

40 0'

350'

387

300'

Campbell County Converse County
100'

150'

50'

25'

SCALE: 1"= 6 MILES

LEGEND

Figure 4-15. Cumulative Worst-Case Coal Aquifer Drawdown for the Five Southern Mines with Maximum Modeled Drawdown Contours From PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS Superimposed.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

25'

200'

50'

250 '

4-141

4.0 Environmental Consequences agreement that can be used on a case-by-case basis as development proceeds. All CBM operators on federal oil and gas leases are required to offer this water well agreement to the surface landowners (BLM 2003a). The Wyodak CBM Project FEIS (BLM 1999c) established requirements for federal CBM lessees to install monitoring wells at specific locations throughout the Wyodak EIS study area. According to the PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS (BLM 2003a), the CBM companies propose to continue this program. The BLM is currently requiring monitoring wells for exploratory CBM development projects outside of the Wyodak EIS study area. After CBM development and coal mining projects are completed, it will take longer for groundwater levels to recover due to the overlapping drawdown impacts caused by the dewatering and depressuring of the coal aquifer by both operations. 4.5.6 Alluvial Valley Floors No cumulative impacts to AVFs are expected to occur as a result of leasing and subsequently mining each of the five LBA tracts. Impacts to designated AVFs are generally not permitted if the AVF is determined to be significant to agriculture. AVFs that are not significant to agriculture can be disturbed during mining but they must be restored as part of the reclamation process. Impacts during mining, prior to AVF restoration, would be expected to be incremental, not additive. 4-142 4.5.7 Wetlands Wetlands are discrete features that are delineated on the basis of specific soil, vegetation, and hydrologic characteristics. Wetlands within areas of coal mining disturbance are impacted; wetlands outside the area of disturbance are not directly affected. Therefore, the impacts to wetlands as a result of surface coal mining are incremental, not additive. Increasing the area to be mined would increase the number of wetlands that would be impacted. The North Antelope/Rochelle Complex has been authorized to impact 272.60 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, Black Thunder Mine 58.29 acres, North Rochelle Mine 20.24 acres, and Antelope Mine 76.67 acres. These numbers would increase if the LBA tracts are leased to these applicants (see Sections 3.8 and 4.1.7 of this document). COE requires replacement of all impacted jurisdictional wetlands in accordance with Section 404 of the CWA. As part of the mining and reclamation plans for each mine, COE approves the plan to restore wetlands and the number of acres to be restored. WDEQ/LQD allows and sometimes requires mitigation of non-jurisdictional wetlands affected by mining, depending on the values associated with the wetland features. Replacement of non-jurisdictional wetlands would occur in accordance with the requirements of the surface land owners. Surface land ownership in the PRB in general and on the LBA tracts considered in this EIS is primarily private, however, in the South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences NARO North, Little Thunder, and West Roundup LBA Tracts, there are public lands administered by USDAFS as part of the TBNG. During mining and before replacement of wetlands, all wetland functions would be lost. The replaced wetlands may not function in the same way as the premine wetlands did; however, all wetlands would be replaced in accordance with COE requirements. 4.5.8 Vegetation Most of the land that is being or would be disturbed is grassland, sagebrush shrubland, or breaks grassland and is used for grazing and wildlife habitat. Rangeland is by far the predominant land use in the PRB, accounting for 92 percent of the land use in Converse and Campbell Counties. A small amount of previously cultivated lands would be disrupted by mining. At the completion of mining, it is anticipated that all disturbed land would be reclaimed for grazing and wildlife habitat, mostly in the form of mixed native grass prairie, sagebrush shrubland, and, where appropriate, bottomland grassland. Some of the minor community types, such as those occurring on breaks, would not be restored to premining conditions but may be replaced to a higher level due to use of better quality soils. Based on annual reports prepared by mining companies and submitted to WDEQ, in any given year approximately 10,000 to 15,000 acres of land disturbed by mining activities at the five existing southern surface coal mines would not be reclaimed to South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS the point of planting with permanent seed mixtures. Over the life of the five southern mines, a total of approximately 66,582 acres would be disturbed. This disturbed area includes all existing leases including federal, state, and private coal. The currently proposed NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts would add another 18,485 acres. Almost all of this acreage is native rangeland and would be returned to a native rangeland state through planting of WDEQ/LQDapproved revegetation seed mixtures as required. Several impacts to vegetation would occur as a result of operations at these five mines. Most of the surface disturbance would occur in two vegetation types: Grassland, and Big Sagebrush. Grassland makes up approximately 33.4 percent of the General Analysis Area and the Big Sagebrush vegetation type makes up approximately 32 percent of the General Analysis Area. All five mines plan to restore these two vegetation types as required by law. It is estimated that it would take from 20 to 100 years for Big Sagebrush density to reach premining levels. The Big Sagebrush component provides important wildlife habitat (particularly for mule deer, pronghorn, and sage grouse). The reduction in acreage of Big Sagebrush vegetation type would, therefore, reduce the carrying capacity of the reclaimed lands for pronghorn and sage grouse populations until premining sagebrush density levels are restored. Mule deer should not be 4-143

4.0 Environmental Consequences affected since they are abundant in this area. not as Additional, more widespread but less intensive, vegetation disturbance would be associated with the proposed CBM development west of the mines, and with construction of the proposed power plants and railroad line. The importation and spread of noxious weeds is of concern throughout the state of Wyoming, including the PRB. Noxious weed introduction may be facilitated by energy development as well as by recreational and agricultural activities. Infestation by species of noxious weeds has the potential to alter distribution of vegetation types and, accordingly, alter wildlife habitat distribution and affect wildlife populations in the PRB. The distribution and spread of many plant species of concern are currently being monitored by the Wyoming Cooperative Agricultural Pest Survey in association with county weed and pest districts and the Wyoming Department of Agriculture. As discussed in Section 4.1.8, the approved mining and reclamation plans for the existing mines include plans to control invasion by weedy (invasive nonnative) plant species. The amended mining and reclamation plans for each LBA tract would also include steps to control invasion from such species. Oil and gas operators are being required to submit an Integrated Pest Management Plan as part of their applications to drill on federal oil and gas leases (BLM 2003d).

Although some of the less extensive native vegetation types (e.g., Graminoid/Forb Ephemeral Drainages) would be restored during reclamation, the treated grazing lands would not. Following reclamation and release of the reclamation bond, however, privately owned surface lands would be returned to agricultural management and the areas with reestablished native vegetation could again be subject to sagebrush management practices. Community and species diversities would initially be lower on reclaimed lands. The shrub components would take the longest to be restored to premining conditions. Shrub cover and forage values would gradually increase in the years following reclamation. Over longer periods of time, species re-invasion and shrub establishment on reclaimed lands should largely restore the species and community diversity on these lands to premining levels. Over the long term, the net effect of the cumulative mine reclamation plans may be the restoration, at least in part, of all vegetation types originally found in the area. However, the shrub component may be substantially reduced in areal extent. Shrubs are relatively unproductive for livestock but very important for wildlife. All of the vegetation types found in the General Analysis Area, as on the LBA tracts, are fairly typical for this region of eastern Wyoming. 4-144

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences 4.5.9 Wildlife The direct impacts of surface coal mining on wildlife occur during mining and are therefore short-term. They include road kills by minerelated traffic, restrictions of wildlife movement created by fences, spoil piles, and pits, and displacement of wildlife from active mining areas. The indirect impacts are longer term and include loss of carrying capacity and microhabitats on reclaimed land due to flatter topography, less diverse vegetative cover, and reduction in sagebrush density. After mining and reclamation, alterations in the topography and vegetative cover, particularly the reduction in sagebrush density, would cause a decrease in carrying capacity and diversity on the LBA tracts. Sagebrush would gradually become reestablished on the reclaimed land, but the topographic changes would be permanent. Cumulative impacts to most wildlife would increase as additional habitat is disturbed but would moderate as more land is reclaimed. Raptor and grouse breeding areas have been diminishing statewide for at least the last 30 years due, in part, to surface disturbing activities. Coal mining and oil and gas exploration and development have been identified as potential contributors to the decline in their breeding habitat. Therefore, surface occupancy and disturbance restrictions, as well as seasonal restriction stipulations, have been applied to operations occurring on or near these crucial areas on public South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS lands. These restrictions have helped protect important raptor and grouse habitat on public lands, but the success of yearlong restrictions on activities near areas critical to grouse has been limited because most of the surface in the PRB is privately owned. Erection of nesting structures and planting of trees on reclaimed land would gradually replace raptor nesting and perching sites. Smalland medium-sized animals would move back into the areas once reclamation is completed. Numerous grazing management projects (fencing, reservoir developments, spring development, well construction, and vegetative treatments) have also impacted wildlife habitat in the area. The consequences of these developments have proven beneficial to some species and detrimental to others. Fencing has aided in segregation and distribution of livestock grazing, but sheep-tight woven wire fence has restricted pronghorn movement. Water developments are used by wildlife; however, without proper livestock management, many of these areas can become overgrazed. The developed reservoirs provide waterfowl, fish, and amphibian habitat. Vegetation manipulations have included the removal or reduction of native grass-shrublands and replacement with cultivated crops (mainly alfalfa/grass hay), as well as a general reduction of shrubs (mainly sagebrush) in favor of grass. These changes have increased spring and summer habitat for grazing animals, but have also reduced the important shrub component that is 4-145

4.0 Environmental Consequences critical for winter range, thus reducing overwinter survival for big game and sage grouse. The reduction in sagebrush has been directly blamed for the downward trend in the sage grouse populations. The regional EIS’s (BLM 1974, 1979, 1981, and 1984) predicted significant cumulative impacts to pronghorn from existing concentrated mining and related disturbance as a result of habitat disturbance and creation of barriers to seasonal and daily movements. Significant cumulative indirect impacts were also predicted because of increased human population and access resulting in more poaching, increased vehicle/pronghorn collisions, and increased disturbance in general. However, the WGFD recently reviewed monitoring data collected on mine sites for big game species and the monitoring requirements for big game species on those mine sites. Their findings concluded that the monitoring had demonstrated the lack of impacts to big game on existing mine sites. No severe minecaused mortalities have occurred and no long-lasting impacts on big game have been noted on existing mine sites. The WGFD therefore recommended that big game monitoring be discontinued on all existing mine sites. New mines will be required to conduct big game monitoring if located in crucial winter range or in significant migration corridors. Leasing of the five LBA tracts under the Proposed Actions would increase the area of habitat disturbance in the 4-146 southern group of mines by 27.8 percent and would enlarge the area where daily wildlife movement is restricted. The entire NARO North and South, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts, and approximately 81 percent of the Little Thunder LBA Tract as proposed are within the Cheyenne River Pronghorn Herd Unit, which includes 4.78 million acres. The mining operations within the Cheyenne River Herd Unit are the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mines. These mines will cumulatively disturb 48,573 acres within the herd unit based on existing leases. If the five LBA tracts are leased, the estimated mining disturbance within the Cheyenne River Herd Unit would increase by about 16,344 acres to 64,917 acres. This would represent approximately 1.4 percent of the Cheyenne River Herd Unit area. Approximately 19 percent of the Little Thunder LBA Tract is within the Hilight Pronghorn Herd Unit, which includes approximately 546,000 acres. The mining operations within the Hilight Herd Unit are the Caballo, Belle Ayr, Cordero-Rojo, Coal Creek, Jacobs Ranch, and Black Thunder Mines. These mines will cumulatively disturb 57,512 acres within the herd unit based on existing leases. If the Black Thunder LBA Tract is leased, the estimated mining disturbance within the Hilight Herd Unit would increase by about 1,031 acres to 58,543 acres. This would represent South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences approximately 10.7 percent of the Hilight Herd Unit area. The five LBA tracts included in this EIS are located within the Thunder Basin Mule Deer Herd Unit. The herd unit contains approximately 2.33 million acres and includes nine permitted coal mines along Highway 59, from Caballo Mine to the north, to Antelope Mine to the south. Currently, permitted disturbance within this nine-mine group includes approximately 106,085 acres. Addition of the five proposed LBA tracts would increase the disturbance area by about 17,375 acres, an increase of 22.4 percent. The 123,460 acres of existing and proposed mine disturbance represents approximately 5.3 percent of the 2.33 million acre Thunder Basin Mule Deer Herd Unit. The WGFD big game herd unit maps show the NARO North and South, Little Thunder, and West Roundup LBA Tracts are out of the normal white-tailed deer range. However, white-tailed deer are infrequently recorded in the vicinity of the West Antelope LBA Tract. Incidental observations are generally confined to the Antelope Creek riparian corridor. The WGFD does not consider the five LBA tracts to include elk use areas, but elk have been recorded within the vicinity of the LBA tracts over the past several years and observed wintering on adjacent grasslands in recent years as well. None of the proposed lease areas or areas within two miles has been classified as crucial or critical elk habitat. The nearest crucial elk habitat is just over South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS four miles east of the Little Thunder LBA Tract on the Jacobs Ranch Mine reclaimed mine land. The WGFD (Oedekoven 1994) designated an area of approximately five square miles on Jacobs Ranch Mine reclaimed or adjacent lands as crucial winter habitat for the Rochelle Hills elk herd. There is potential for expansion of elk habitat on the lease areas through quality reclamation. The area of active mining in the southern group of five mines contains significant numbers of raptor nests. The largest concentration of nesting activity in the area is associated with the rough breaks country and areas where trees have become established. CBM development in areas adjacent to existing surface coal mines increases impacts related to disturbance of nesting and foraging habitat. As discussed in Section 4.1.10, raptor mitigation plans have been developed and approved as part of the approved mining and reclamation plans for each mine. The plans would have to be amended to include any newly leased lands. The raptor mitigation plan for each mine is subject to USFWS review and approval before the mining and reclamation plan is approved. There may be cumulative impacts to raptors as a result of CBM development on and adjacent to the LBA tracts and existing coal mining operations. Under the Proposed Actions, the LBA tracts would be leased as maintenance tracts to existing mines. As a result, construction of power lines and increases in vehicular traffic related 4-147

4.0 Environmental Consequences to coal removal would be limited. However, CBM development on and adjacent to the LBA tracts has and will continue to result in construction of new power lines in the area of the existing mines and the LBA tracts. Where power poles border roads, perched raptors may be illegally shot. The SMCRA regulations require that surface coal mine operators use the best technology currently available to ensure that electric power lines are designed and constructed to minimize electrocution hazards to raptors. Many of the power lines for CBM development are being constructed underground. CBM development has also resulted in increases in vehicular traffic in and around the LBA tracts and existing mining operations. Increases in vehicular traffic may result in increased road kill and associated increases in collisions with bald eagles or other raptors feeding on carrion. Any influx of people into previously undisturbed land may also result in increased disturbance of nesting and fledgling raptors. Cumulative impacts to waterfowl from already approved mining, as well as the five proposed LBA tracts would be minor because most of these birds are transient and most of the ponds in this area are ephemeral. In addition, the more permanent impoundments and reservoirs that are impacted by mining would be restored. Sedimentation ponds and wetland mitigation sites would provide areas for waterfowl prior to reclamation. Few vital sage grouse wintering areas or leks have been, or are planned to be, disturbed as a result of already approved mining in the southern group of five mines and no additional wintering areas or leks would be disturbed if the LBA tracts included in this EIS are leased and mined. A total of five sage grouse leks have been identified and monitored in the General Analysis Area. Four of these lek sites are located within North Antelope/Rochelle Complex’s permit area and one is located within Black Thunder Mine’s permit area. Two of these five historical leks are still active and they are located 6,000 ft and 9,000 ft, respectively, from active mining operations at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex. One of the active leks is located within two miles of the NARO North LBA Tract. The other four LBA tracts are located more than two miles from any of the active leks. To date, mining has not physically disturbed any of the leks in the General Analysis Area. The addition of the five LBA tracts to the area to be disturbed by the currently approved mining operations in the southern PRB would potentially reduce sage grouse nesting habitat during mining, particularly in the NARO North LBA Tract area. Noise related to the mining activity could indirectly impact sage grouse reproductive success. Sage grouse leks close to active mining could be abandoned if mining-related noise elevates the existing ambient noise levels. Surface coal mining activity is known to contribute to a drop in male sage grouse attendance at leks close to active mining, and over time this can alter the distribution of breeding South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4-148

4.0 Environmental Consequences grouse (Remington and Braun 1991). The direct and indirect impacts of mining encroachment on the grouse population are not clear at this time. An independent research project is underway to investigate how sage grouse use the landscape in the vicinity of active coal mines and how lands can be reclaimed to benefit those populations. Grouse in the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex area are the focus of this study, which is being conducted by TWC and is funded by PRCC, TBCC, TCC, AML Research, and WGFD. The cumulative effects to sage grouse and other upland game birds that would be expected as a result of existing and proposed surface coal mining and other current, proposed, and future activities, such as oil and gas development, agriculture, and urban development, may include an increase in sage grouse mortality; displacement and harassment, and physical disturbance of sage grouse leks and nesting and brooding areas. Some of the disturbance areas would be in the process of being reclaimed as new disturbances are initiated. Sage grouse population levels in reclaimed areas may not reach predisturbance levels. The addition of the five proposed LBA tracts to the area to be disturbed by currently approved mining operations in the southern PRB would cumulatively contribute to habitat loss for other mammal and bird species. Habitat adjacent to existing and proposed mine areas includes sagebrush shrublands, upland grasslands, bottomland grasslands, South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS improved pastures, haylands, wetlands, riparian areas, greasewood shrublands, and ponderosa pine woodlands. CBM development is disturbing additional habitat in areas west of the surface coal mines. Disturbance related to these activities is more widespread but less intensive than disturbance related to surface coal mining. Many of these other mammal and bird species are highly mobile, have access to adjacent habitats, and possess a high reproductive potential. As a result, these species should respond quickly and invade suitable reclaimed lands as reclamation proceeds. A research project on habitat reclamation on mined lands within the PRB for small mammals and birds concluded that the diversity of song birds on reclaimed areas was slightly less than on adjacent undisturbed areas, although their overall numbers were greater (Shelley 1992). Within the General Analysis Area, the drainages generally have intermittent or ephemeral flows under natural conditions. Flows in some of these drainages have increased and would be expected to continue to increase as a result of the influx of CBMproduced waters. Drainage from the five mines within the General Analysis Area combines where Black Thunder Creek enters the Cheyenne River. Disturbance from existing and proposed operations at these mines, including the five SPRB LBA Tracts, would affect approximately six percent of the Cheyenne River drainage area. Other current, proposed, and future activities in the General Analysis Area include oil and 4-149

4.0 Environmental Consequences gas development and agriculture. Cumulative impacts to aquatic species that would be expected as a result of these activities’ effects on the area’s waterways, such as fluctuations in natural streamflow and changes in water quality, including increases in sedimentation, salt concentrations, and other contaminants, may include changes in species’ habitats and diversity. Some of the permanent pools along drainages that support minnows and other nongame fish, and the larger impoundments and streams in the area that have fish populations would be restored following mining. Additional discussions of cumulative impacts to wildlife from coal development and industrialization of the eastern PRB are discussed in BLM regional EISs for the area (BLM 1974, 1979, 1981, and 1984), and these documents are incorporated by reference into this EIS. The cumulative impacts of mining the five LBA tracts included in this EIS would be assessed during the WDEQ/LQD permit approval process, if they are leased. During the permit approval process, the mine permit applications would be reviewed by WGFD and WDEQ/LQD. 4.5.10 Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Species, USDA-FS Region 2 Sensitive Species, and BLM Sensitive Species Refer to Appendices G through K. 4.5.11 Land Use and Recreation Surface coal mining reduces livestock grazing and wildlife habitat, limits access to public lands that are included in the mining areas, and disrupts oil and gas development. In addition, when oil and gas development facilities are present on coal leases, all associated facilities and equipment must be removed prior to mining. Mining the coal prior to recovery of all of the CBM resources releases CBM into the atmosphere. The potential impacts of conflicts between CBM and coal development are discussed in Section 4.1.2. Cumulative impacts resulting from energy extraction in the PRB include a reduction of livestock grazing and subsequent revenues, a reduction in habitat for some species of wildlife (particularly pronghorn, sage grouse, and mule deer), and loss of recreational access to public lands (particularly for hunters). There are no recreational facilities, wilderness areas, etc., in the immediate vicinity of the existing southern group of five mines, and the majority of the land is seldom used by the public except for dispersed recreation (e.g., hunting), off-road vehicles, and sightseeing. Hunting and other public access is generally limited inside of the mine permit areas for safety reasons. However, approximately 77 percent of this land surface is private and access is controlled by the landowner. Most of the area is being developed for CBM and more landowners are expressing South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4-150

4.0 Environmental Consequences safety concerns due to the development and are severely limiting or eliminating rifle hunting on their lands. Such actions will continue to impact hunter access for this area. Leasing the NARO North, Little Thunder, and West Roundup LBA Tracts would affect access to public lands because public lands administered by USDA-FS are included on these tracts. Leasing the NARO South and West Antelope LBA Tracts would not affect access to public lands because no public lands are included on these tracts. The increased human presence associated with the cumulative energy development in the eastern PRB has likely increased levels of legal and illegal hunting. Conversely, the mines in the area have become refuges for big game animals during hunting seasons since they are often closed to hunting. Reclaimed areas are attractive forage areas for big game. As an example, reclaimed lands at the Jacobs Ranch Mine have been declared crucial elk winter habitat by WGFD (Oedekoven 1994). Energy development-related indirect impacts to wildlife have resulted from and will continue to result from human population growth. Energy development has been the primary cause of human influx into the eastern PRB. Mining the LBA tracts under the Proposed Actions and/or Action Alternatives would allow a continuation of employment and production at the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mines by up to 10 years. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS The demand for outdoor recreational activities, including hunting and fishing, has increased proportionately as population has increased. However, at the same time these demands are increasing, wildlife habitat and populations are being reduced. This conflict between decreased habitat availability and increased recreational demand has had (or may have) several impacts: demand for hunting licenses may increase to the point that a lower success in drawing particular licenses will occur; hunting and fishing, in general, may become less enjoyable due to more limited success and overcrowding; poaching may increase; the increase in people and traffic may continue to result in shooting of nongame species and road kills; and increased off-road activities may continue to result in disturbance of wildlife during sensitive wintering or reproductive periods. Campbell County’s public recreation facilities are some of the most extensively developed in the Rocky Mountain Region, and use by young, recreation-oriented residents is high. The relatively strong financial position of the county recreation program appears to assure future recreation opportunities for residents regardless of the development of the LBA tracts or any other specific mine. Converse County’s recreational facilities are not as advanced and development of the LBA tracts and the ensuing employment increase may increase demand for recreational opportunities in Converse County.

4-151

4.0 Environmental Consequences 4.5.12 Cultural Resources In most cases, treatment of eligible sites is confined to those that would be directly impacted, while those that may be indirectly impacted receive little or no consideration unless a direct mine-associated effect can be established. The higher population levels associated with mineral development coupled with increased access to remote areas can result in increased vandalism. Surface coal mining operations and other mineral development may contribute to the permanent unintentional destruction of segments of the archeological record. Surface coal mining is generally limited to lands where the overburden thickness is relatively thin (200 ft or less). A majority of the known cultural resource sites in the eastern PRB are known because of studies at existing and proposed coal mines. Based on the cultural inventories conducted for the five southern mines, there is an estimated average density of 5.7 sites per square mile (640 acres) in this area and approximately 10 percent of these sites are eligible for the NRHP. The cultural inventories conducted on the five LBA tracts found that the density of sites and occurrence of eligible sites is slightly lower than the average density on the NARO North and South, Little Thunder, and West Roundup LBA Tracts, and slightly higher than the average density on the West Antelope LBA Tract. Approximately 580 cultural resource sites will be impacted by already approved mines, with an estimated 86 of these sites being eligible for 4-152 nomination to the NRHP. These numbers would increase if the LBA tracts are leased. Adverse impacts to cultural sites include ground disturbance and changes in setting or context. Ground disturbance, the major impact, can affect the integrity of or destroy a site. Changes in setting or context greatly impact historical properties. Mitigation measures such as stabilization, restoration, or moving of buildings may cause adverse impacts to context, in-place values, and overall integrity. Additionally, the loss of a site through mitigation can constitute an adverse impact by eliminating the site from the regional database and/or affecting its future research potential. Beneficial results or impacts have also occurred from coal development. Valuable data have been collected during cultural resource surveys. Data that would otherwise not be collected until some time in the future, or lost in the interim, have been made available for study. Mitigation has also resulted in the collection and preservation of data that would otherwise be lost. The data that has been and will be collected provides opportunities for regional and local archeological research projects. 4.5.13 Native American Concerns No cumulative impacts to Native American traditional values or religious sites have been identified as a result of leasing and subsequent mining of the NARO North and South, South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts. 4.5.14 Paleontological Resources Impacts to paleontological resources as a result of the already approved cumulative energy development occurring in the eastern PRB consist of losses of plant, invertebrate, and vertebrate fossil material for scientific research, public education (interpretive programs), and other values. Losses have and will result from the destruction, disturbance, or removal of fossil materials as a result of surface-disturbing activities, as well as unauthorized collection and vandalism. A beneficial impact of surface mining can be the exposure of fossil materials for scientific examination and collection, which might never occur except as a result of overburden removal, exposure of rock strata, and mineral excavation. 4.5.15 Visual Resources A principal visual impact within the area of the five southern mines is the visibility of mine pits and facility areas. People most likely to see these facilities would either be passing through the area or visiting it on mine-related business. Except for the loading facilities and the draglines, the pits and facilities are not visible from more than a few miles away. While sufficient capacity exists, future changes in facilities may be constructed to mine the LBA tracts and to improve operating efficiency and air quality protection at the mines. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS After mining, the reclaimed slopes might appear somewhat smoother than premining slopes and there would be fewer gullies than at present. Even so, the landscape of the reclaimed mines would look very much like the undisturbed landscape within the General Analysis Area. 4.5.16 Noise Existing land uses within the eastern PRB (e.g., mining, livestock grazing, oil and gas production, wildlife habitat, and recreation) contribute to noise levels, but wind is generally the primary noise source. Mining on the LBA tracts would not increase the number of noise-producing facilities within the eastern PRB, but it would lengthen the time this particular noise source would exist, expand the area this noise source would affect, and may augment the level of impacts to other resources (e.g., increased exposure of wildlife to noise impact and increased noise impact to recreational users). Mining-related noise is generally masked by the wind at short distances, so cumulative overlap of noise impacts between mines is not likely. Recreational users and grazing lessees utilizing lands surrounding active mining areas do hear miningrelated noise, but this has not been reported to cause a significant impact. As stated above, wildlife in the immediate vicinity of mining may be adversely affected by noise; however, observations at surface coal mines in the area indicate that wildlife generally adapt to noise 4-153

4.0 Environmental Consequences conditions associated with active coal mining. Cumulative increases in noise from trains serving the eastern PRB mines have caused substantial increases (more than five dBA) in noise levels along segments of the rail lines over which the coal is transported to markets. However, no significant adverse impacts have been reported as a result. 4.5.17 Transportation Facilities New or enhanced transportation facilities (road, railroads, and pipelines) are expected to occur as a result of energy development in the PRB. However, no new cumulative impacts to transportation facilities are expected to occur as a direct result of leasing and subsequent mining of the LBA tracts. The transportation facilities for the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, and Antelope Mines are already in place. Construction of new rail facilities for transporting the coal out of the region, such as the proposed DM&E railroad, would add another route of coal transportation out of the basin, but would not be expected to increase the number of coal trains without an increase in market demand for the coal. Traffic levels from the mines would be maintained for a longer time period under the Action Alternatives. Oil and gas pipelines on the tracts would have to be relocated or removed prior to mining. 4.5.18 Socioeconomics Because of all of the energy-related development that has been occurring in and around Campbell and Converse Counties in the past 30 years, socioeconomic impacts are a major concern. Wyoming’s economy has been structured around the basic industries of extractive minerals, agriculture, tourism, timber, and manufacturing. Each of these basic industries is important. Many Wyoming communities depend on the minerals industry for much of their economic well being. The minerals industry is by far the largest single contributor to the economy of Wyoming. The 2002 valuation on minerals industry production and property in 2001 was $6,738,726,062, or 60 percent of the state’s total valuation (Wyoming Department of Revenue 2002). Since most minerals are taxed as a percentage of their assessed valuation, this makes the minerals industry a significant revenue base for both local and state government in Wyoming. Wyoming mineral production in 2001 placed the state first in coal production, sixth in natural gas production, eighth in oil production (Wyoming Business Council 2003), and fifteenth in nonfuel mineral production in the U.S. (USGS 2001). Between 1990 and 2002, coal production in Campbell and Converse Counties increased by an average of 7.1 percent per year (WSGS 1991 and 2003b). WSGS is currently projecting that coal production in Campbell and Converse Counties will increase by South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4-154

4.0 Environmental Consequences 1.4 percent in 2003, and increase by about one percent per year during 2004 through 2008 (WSGS 2003b). In 2002, Wyoming coal supplied 37 percent of the nation’s steam coal needs (U.S. Department of Energy 2003). In 2002, PRB coal was used to generate electricity for public consumption in 35 states and Canada (U.S. Department of Energy 2003). Electricity consumers in those states benefit from low prices for PRB coal, from cleaner air due to the low sulfur content of the coal, and from the royalties, taxes, and bonus payments that the federal government receives from the coal. Locally, continued sale of PRB coal helps stabilize municipal, county, and state economies. By 2005, annual coal production is projected to generate about $2.6 billion of total economic activity, including $351 million of personal income, and support the equivalent of 15,885 fulltime positions (BLM 1996a). In addition to the five proposed LBA tracts studied in this EIS, a number of mineral and related developments have occurred, are in progress, or are anticipated in Campbell County and the surrounding area. The 90 Mw Wygen I coal-fired power plant was recently constructed near the Wyodak Mine east of Gillette. The Black Hills Corporation is currently permitting a second coal-fired plant, the 500-Mw Wygen II, nearby. NAPG has proposed the construction of three coal-fired power plants in Campbell County: the 300-Mw Two Elk and the 500-Mw Two Elk Two plants near the Black Thunder Mine, and the 500-Mw South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS Middle Bear plant near the CorderoRojo Mining Complex (Billings Gazette 2001a). In addition, NAPG has proposed the construction of a power line that would link its two 500-Mw power plants with interstate transmission lines in the Front Range of Colorado (Billings Gazette 2001b). According to Pedersen Planning Consultants (2001), power plant development between 2001 and 2010 could bring over 6,000 temporary and 450 permanent jobs to Campbell County alone. The DM&E Railroad Corporation has proposed the construction of a rail line connecting its existing facilities in South Dakota and Minnesota with PRB coal mines. The lead regulatory agency for the expansion project, the Surface Transportation Board, granted final approval in January 2002. DM&E must still obtain permits or approvals from other agencies including the BLM, USDAFS, and COE, and several lawsuits have been filed against the proposal following the approval of the project by the Surface Transportation Board (WSGS 2002b). For Wyoming, the estimated direct-construction workforce is 700 persons for the estimated $1.5 billion project. DM&E hopes to begin service into the PRB by 2006 (WSGS 2003a). Recently, Gillette has experienced a population increase as a result of CBM development in the area. In the past several years, Gillette’s population has increased, unemployment has decreased, housing has become increasingly tight, and traffic and criminal activity 4-155

4.0 Environmental Consequences have increased. Under the Proposed Action for the Wyoming Oil and Gas Project FEIS (BLM 2003a), it is assumed that CBM development would require 2,047 employees (1,974 CBM and 67 non-CBM) for a 20-year project life. If all of the new projects are undertaken, it is likely that the population in northeastern Wyoming would continue to grow, and there would be increasing demands on housing, schools, roads, law enforcement, and other aspects of the communities in this area. The population increase would be expected to be somewhat dispersed among all of the communities in the area, which include Douglas, Wright, and Newcastle as well as Gillette. The extent of the impacts to the local communities would depend on the amount of overlap between the construction periods on the proposed projects. According to a 2001 study of future housing needs in Campbell County (Pederson Planning Consultants 2001), it was estimated that increases in CBM development and surface coal mine employment, coupled with the construction of currently proposed power plants, could increase Campbell County housing demand by over 5,000 housing units, with the peak occurring in about 2005. Delays in power plant and railroad permitting and construction could alter the timing and magnitude of the peak in population and housing demand. At this time, based on the status of their planning and permitting efforts, the Black Hills Corporation, Inc. Wygen II coal-fired power plant, the NAPG Two 4-156 Elk coal-fired power plant, and the proposed DM&E rail line are considered reasonably foreseeable developments. The NAPG Two Elk Unit Two coal-fired power plant and the NAPG Middle Bear coal-fired power plant are proposals which are not reasonably foreseeable at this time. Construction of the proposed coal-fired plants would be dependent on completion of permitting requirements and availability of financing. Construction of the proposed DM&E railroad is also dependent on completion of permitting requirements and availability of financing as well as resolution of legal issues. Increases in mining employment would potentially occur gradually as new coal leases are permitted for mining. Up to 160 additional jobs are anticipated if all five LBA tracts studied in this EIS are leased. The construction of coal-fired power plants and the DM&E Railroad expansion and continued CBM development would result in direct fiscal benefits to city, county, and state governments. Equipment and facilities would be subject to excise (sales and use) and ad valorem (property) taxes. Counties that have a major construction project of $50 million or larger also receive extra revenues in the form of impact assistance. According to an article in the Gillette News-Record (2001c), if the three NAPG power plants are constructed, Campbell, Converse, Weston, and Crook Counties could receive as much as $11 million in impact assistance. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences 4.6 The Relationship Between Local Short-term Uses of Man’s Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-term Productivity BLM’s Preferred Alternative (Table 23). From 2003 on, the Antelope Mine would be able to produce coal at an average production level of 13.4 mmtpy for another 24 years under Alternative 1 (No Action Alternative), compared with an average of 23 mmtpy for 24 years under the Proposed Action, an average of 24 mmtpy for 24 years under Alternative 2, or an average of 20.5 mmtpy for another 24 years under Alternative 3 (BLM’s Preferred Alternative) (Table 24). As the coal is mined, almost all components of the present ecological system, which have developed over a long period of time, would be modified. In partial consequence, the reclaimed land would be topographically lower, and although it would resemble original contours, it would lack some of the original diversity of geometric form. The forage and associated grazing and wildlife habitat that the LBA tracts provide would be temporarily lost during mining and reclamation. During mining of the LBA tracts there would be a combined loss of native vegetation on 18,485 acres (Proposed Action for all five LBA tracts) up to a maximum of 21,183 acres (Alternative 2 for all tracts) with an accompanying disturbance of wildlife habitat and grazing land. This disturbance would occur incrementally over a period of years. The mine sites would be returned to equivalent or better forage production capacity for domestic livestock before the performance bonds are released. Long-term productivity would depend largely on 4-157

From 2003 on, the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex would be able to produce coal at an average production level of 75 mmtpy for 11 years under Alternative 1 (No Action Alternative), compared with an average of 90 mmtpy for 16 years under the Proposed Action, an average of 90 mmtpy for 17 years under Alternative 2, an average of 90 mmtpy for 16.5 years under Alternative 3, or an average of 90 mmtpy for 15 years under the BLM’s Preferred Alternative (Table 2-1). From 2003 on, the Black Thunder Mine would be able to produce coal at an average production level of 37.1 mmtpy for 23 years under Alternative 1 (No Action Alternative), compared with an average of 42.5 mmtpy for 30.5 years under the Proposed Action, or an average of 42.5 mmtpy for 33.1 years under Alternative 2 (BLM’s Preferred Alternative), or an average of 42.5 mmtpy for 30.5 years under Alternative 3 (Table 2-2). From 2003 on, the North Rochelle Mine would be able to produce coal at an average production level of 35 mmtpy for 6.7 years under Alternative 1 (No Action Alternative), compared with an average of 35 mmtpy for 11.7 years under the Proposed Action, or an average of 35 mmtpy for 13.3 years under Alternative 2, or an average of 35 mmtpy for 15.5 years under Alternative 3, or an average of 35 mmtpy for 14.9 years under the South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences postmining range-management practices, which to a large extent would be controlled by private landowners. Mining would disturb pronghorn habitat, but the LBA tracts would be suitable for pronghorn following successful reclamation. Despite loss and displacement of wildlife during mining, it is anticipated that reclaimed habitat would support a diversity of wildlife species similar to premining conditions. The diversity of species found in undisturbed rangeland would not be completely restored on the leased lands for an estimated 50 years after the initiation of disturbance. Re-establishment of mature sagebrush habitat--which is crucial for pronghorn and sage grouse--could take even longer. CBM is currently being recovered from within and/or near each of the LBA tracts and BLM’s analysis suggests that a large portion of the CBM resources on each of the tracts can be recovered prior to mining. CBM that is not recovered prior to mining would be vented to the atmosphere during the mining process. Methane is a greenhouse gas which contributes to global warming. According to the EIA/DOE, U.S. anthropogenic methane emissions totaled 28.0 million metric tons in 2001 (U.S. Department of Energy 2002). U.S. 2001 methane emissions from coal mining were estimated at 2.78 million metric tons (10 percent of the U.S. total anthropogenic methane emissions in 2001). According to Table 14 of that report, surface coal mining was 4-158 estimated to be responsible for about 0.53 million metric tons of methane emissions in 2001. This represents about 1.89 percent of the estimated U.S. anthropogenic methane emissions in 2001, and about 19.06 percent of the estimated methane emissions attributed to coal mining of all types. Based on the 2001 coal production figures, it is estimated that Wyoming and Montana PRB surface coal mines were responsible for approximately 0.98 percent of the estimated U.S. anthropogenic methane emissions in 2001. Currently, the North Antelope/ Rochelle Complex, Black Thunder Mine, and Antelope Mine anticipate increasing coal production rates if they acquire leases for the NARO North and South LBA Tracts, the Little Thunder LBA Tract, and the West Antelope LBA Tract, respectively. The North Rochelle Mine does not propose to increase coal production rates if they acquire a lease for the West Roundup LBA Tract. Total U.S. methane emissions attributable to coal mining would not be likely to decrease if one or more of these five LBA tracts are not leased at this time because a decision to lease or not to lease these tracts would not directly affect total U.S. coal production. However, the methane on an LBA tract could be more completely recovered if leasing is delayed. Coal is a major source of electricity generation in the U.S. Emissions from coal-fired power plants are sources of pollution and may South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

4.0 Environmental Consequences contribute to global warming. The applicant mines plan to produce the coal included in the LBA tracts at currently permitted levels using existing production and transportation facilities. As a result, leasing the NARO North, NARO South, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and West Antelope LBA Tracts to existing mines under the Proposed Actions or Preferred Alternatives would not be expected to result in increased or new emissions from coal-fired power plants. If these LBA tracts are leased and mined, there would be a deterioration of the groundwater quality in the lease areas; however, the water quality would still be adequate for livestock and wildlife. This deterioration would probably occur over a long period of time. As a result of mining alone, depth to groundwater would increase within roughly 25 miles away from the five southern mine pits in the coal aquifer. The water levels in the coal aquifer should return to premining levels at some time after mining has ceased because recharge areas would not be disturbed in order to recover the coal in the LBA tracts. Mining operations and associated activities would degrade the air quality and visual resources of the area on a short-term basis. Following coal removal, removal of surface facilities, and completion of reclamation, there would be no longterm impact on air quality. The longterm impact on visual resources would be negligible. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS Short-term impacts to recreation values may occur from reduction in big game populations due to habitat disturbance and reduction in access to some public lands. These changes would primarily impact hunting in the lease areas. However, because reclamation would result in a wildlife habitat similar to that which presently exists and access to public lands would be restored, there should be no long-term adverse impacts on recreation. The long-term economy of the region would be enhanced as a result of the Proposed Actions and Action Alternatives. The Proposed Action, Alternative 2, the BLM’s Preferred Alternative, and Alternative 3 would extend the life of the North Antelope/Rochelle Complex by from four to six years (Table 2-1). The Proposed Action, Alternative 2 (BLM’s Preferred Alternative), and Alternative 3 would extend the life of the Black Thunder Mine by from 7.5 to 10.1 years (Table 2-2). The Proposed Action, Alternative 2, Alternative 3, and BLM’s Preferred Alternative would extend the life of the North Rochelle Mine by from five to 8.8 years (Table 2-3). The Proposed Action, Alternative 2, and Alternative 3 (BLM’s Preferred Alternative) are not predicted to extend the life of the Antelope Mine (Table 2-4). 4.7 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources

The major commitment of resources would be the mining and consumption of 1,529.8 million tons (Proposed Action for all five LBA 4-159

4.0 Environmental Consequences tracts) up to a maximum of 1,984.1 million tons (Alternative 2 for all tracts) of coal to be used for electrical power generation. CBM that is not recovered prior to mining would also be irreversibly and irretrievably lost (see additional discussion of the impacts of venting CBM to the atmosphere in Section 4.6). It is estimated that one to two percent of the energy produced would be required to mine the coal, and this energy would also be irretrievably lost. The quality of topsoil on approximately 18,485 acres (Proposed Action for all five LBA tracts) up to a maximum of approximately 21,183 acres (Alternative 2 for all tracts) would be irreversibly changed. Soil formation processes, although continuing, would be irreversibly altered during mining-related activities. Newly formed soil material would be unlike that in the natural landscape. Direct and indirect wildlife deaths caused by mining operations or associated activity would be an irreversible loss. Loss of life may conceivably occur due to the mining operations and vehicular and train traffic. On the basis of surface coal mine accident rates in Wyoming as determined by the Mine Safety and Health Administration (1997) for the 10-year period 1987-1996, fatal accidents (excluding contractors) occur at the rate of 0.003 per 200,000 man-hours worked. Disabling (lost-time) injuries occur at the rate of 1.46 per 200,000 4-160 South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS man-hours worked. Any injury or loss of life would be an irretrievable commitment of human resources. Disturbance of all known historic and prehistoric sites on the mine areas would be mitigated to the maximum extent possible. However, accidental destruction of presently unknown archeological or paleontological values would be irreversible and irretrievable.

5.0 Consultation and Coordination 5.0 CONSULTATION COORDINATION AND Wyoming on April 15, 2000 that ALC filed a lease application with BLM for the Little Thunder LBA Tract. The BLM Wyoming State Director notified the Governor of Wyoming on August 24, 2000 that TCC filed a lease application with BLM for the West Roundup LBA Tract. The BLM Wyoming State Director notified the Governor of Wyoming on October 3, 2000 that ACC filed a lease application with BLM for the West Antelope LBA Tract. Public Notice A notice announcing the receipt of the PRCC, ALC, and TCC coal lease applications was published in the Federal Register on September 12, 2000. This notice also announced the date, time, and place of the PRRCT meeting to be held on October 25, 2000 to discuss these applications. BLM published a Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and Notice of Scoping in the Federal Register on October 3, 2001 and in the Gillette News-Record on September 25, 2001 and October 2, 2001. The publications served as public notice that the ACC coal lease application had been received, announced the time and location of a public scoping meeting, and requested public comment on all four lease applications. Parties on the distribution list were sent letters announcing the time and location of a public scoping meeting in September 2001. The public scoping meeting was held on October 10, 2001 in Gillette, Wyoming. At the public meeting, PRCC, TBCC, TCC, and ACC 5-1

In addition to this EIS1, other factors and consultations are considered and play a major role in determining the decision on these proposed lease applications. These include the following. Regional Coal Team Consultation The four coal lease applications included in this EIS were all reviewed and discussed at the October 25, 2000 PRRCT public meeting in Cheyenne, Wyoming. Each of the applicants presented information about their existing mine and pending lease application to the PRRCT at that meeting. Voting and nonvoting members of the PRRCT include the governors of Wyoming and Montana, the Northern Cheyenne Tribe, the Crow Tribal Council, the USDA-FS, OSM, USFWS, NPS, and USGS. The PRRCT determined that the lands in the four applications met the qualifications for processing as production maintenance tracts. The PRRCT recommended that the BLM continue to process all four lease applications. Governor's Consultation The BLM Wyoming State Director notified the Governor of Wyoming on April 5, 2000 that PRCC had filed a lease application with BLM for the NARO North and NARO South LBA Tracts. The BLM Wyoming State Director notified the Governor of
1

Refer to page xii for a list of abbreviations and acronyms used in this document.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

5.0 Consultation and Coordination personnel orally presented information about their mines and their needs for the coal. The presentations were followed by a question and answer period, during which one oral comment was made. The scoping period extended from October 1 through October 31, 2001, during which time BLM received 12 written comments. A notice announcing the availability of the SPRB Coal Draft EIS was published in the Federal Register on February 7, 2003 by the EPA. The BLM published a Notice of Availability and Notice of Public Hearing in the Federal Register on February 20, 2003, and in the Gillette News-Record and Douglas Budget on February 5 and February 12, 2003. A comment period on the Draft EIS commenced on February 7, 2003, with publication of the EPA Notice of Availability and ended on April 11, 2003. A public hearing was held at 7:00 pm on March 4, 2002, at the Best Western Tower West Lodge in Gillette, Wyoming. The purpose of the public hearing was to solicit public comments on the Draft EIS and on the fair market value, the maximum economic recovery, and the proposed competitive sale of coal from the five LBA tracts. Comments from four speakers were recorded at the public hearing. BLM received 12 written comment letters on the Draft EIS, which are included with agency responses as Appendix M in this Final EIS. Parties on the distribution list are being sent copies of this Final EIS. Availability of the SPRB Coal Final 5-2 EIS will be published in the Federal Register by the BLM and the EPA. After a 30-day availability period, BLM will make a separate decision to hold or not to hold a competitive lease sale for the federal coal in each of these five tracts. A public ROD for each of the tracts will be mailed to parties on the mailing list and others who commented on this EIS during the NEPA process. The public and/or the applicants can appeal the BLM decision to hold or not to hold a competitive sale and issue a lease for any of the five tracts. There will be a 30-day appeal period on each ROD before it can be implemented. Department of Justice Consultation After each competitive coal lease sale, but prior to issuance of a lease, BLM will solicit the opinion of the Department of Justice on whether the planned lease issuance creates a situation inconsistent with federal anti-trust laws. The Department of Justice is allowed 30 days to make this determination. If the Department of Justice has not responded in writing within the 30 days, BLM can proceed with issuance of the lease. Other Consultations Other federal, state, and local governmental agencies that were directly consulted in preparation of this EIS are listed in Table 5-1. List of Preparers This EIS was prepared by WWC Engineering, a third-party contractor, South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

5.0 Consultation and Coordination under the direction of the BLM. Representatives from cooperating agencies contributed to and participated in the NEPA process. Tables 5-2 and 5-3 provide listings of the BLM, USDA-FS, and OSM interdisciplinary team and the thirdparty consultant personnel who prepared and reviewed this EIS. Distribution List This EIS was distributed to numerous Congressional offices, federal agencies, state governments, local governments, industry representatives, interest groups, and individuals for their review and comment (Tables 5-4a and 5-4b).

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

5-3

5.0 Consultation and Coordination Table 5-1. Federal, State, and Local Governmental Agencies Consulted in EIS Preparation.
Individual 5 Voting Members and 21 Nonvoting Members Lynn Jahnke Wildlife & Fish Supervisor Position

Agency or Organization Powder River Regional Coal Team Wyoming Game and Fish Department Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality/ Air Quality Division

Bernard Daily Judy Shamley Darla Potter Cara Casten

Program Manager for New Source Review Program Sr. Analyst Air Quality Engineer Air Quality Engineer District III Supervisor Engineer Division of Economic Analysis, Senior Economist Ad Valorem Tax Division, Administrator Mineral Tax Division, Administrator Analyst Soil Scientist Mine Engineer

Land Quality Division Wyoming Department of Administration and Information Wyoming Department of Revenue

Donald McKenzie Doug Emme Wayne Liu Allen Black Randy Bolles

Wyoming Employment Center USDA/Natural Resources Conservation Service USDI/OSM, Casper, Wyoming

Betsy Hockert Randy White Mark Humphrey

Tribal Governments Consulted Cheyenne River Sioux Crow Crow Creek Sioux Eastern Shoshone Flandreau Santee Sioux Lower Brule Sioux Northern Arapaho Northern Cheyenne Oglala Lakota Rosebud Sioux Santee Sioux Southern Cheyenne/Southern Arapahoe Standing Rock Sioux

5-4

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

5.0 Consultation and Coordination Table 5-2.
Name Mike Karbs Chris Arthur Willie Fitzgerald

List of Contributors and Reviewers.
Project Responsibility BLM Casper Field Office Project Supervisor Cultural Wildlife BLM Wyoming State Office

Bob Janssen Janet Kurman Mavis Love Julie Weaver Susan Caplan

Coal Program Coordination NEPA Coordination Land Adjudication Land Adjudication Air Quality and Climate BLM Buffalo Field Office

B.J. Earle Tom Bills Larry Gerard

Cultural Resources Wildlife Resources Wildlife Resources BLM National Science and Technology Center

Scott Archer

Air Quality and Climate Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Western Regional Coordinating Center

Floyd McMullen

EIS Project Coordinator U.S. Department of Agriculture - Forest Service Douglas Ranger District

JoAnne Homuth Joe Reddick Tim Byer Ian Ritchie

EIS Project Coordinator and Paleontological Resources Project Coordination Wildlife Resources Cultural Resources U.S. Department of Agriculture - Forest Service Nebraska National Forest

Barbara A. Beasley

Paleontological Resources

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

5-5

5.0 Consultation and Coordination Table 5-3.
Name Nancy Doelger

List of Preparers.
Education/Experience BLM Casper Field Office M.S., B.S. Geology, 26 years professional experience BLM Wyoming State Office Reservoir Management Group B.S. Graduate Study, Geology, 25 years professional experience B.S. Petroleum Engineering, 7 years professional experience WWC Engineering Third-Party Contractor B.S. Geology, 25 years professional experience (Licensed Wyoming Geologist) M.S., B.S. Civil Engineering, 32 years professional experience (Licensed Professional Engineer) B.S. Chemical Engineering, 5 years professional experience M.S., B.S. Rangeland Ecology and Watershed Management, 13 years professional experience 11 years professional experience 3 years professional experience 12 years professional experience Intermountain Resources Subcontractor M.S., B.S. Wildlife Management, 24 years professional experience B.S. Wildlife Management, 11 years professional experience GCM Services, Inc. Subcontractor M.A. Anthropology, 15 years professional experience B.A. Anthropology, 11 years professional experience McVehil-Monnett Associates, Inc. Subcontractor M.S. Landscape Architecture, B.S. Landscape Architecture/Natural Resource Management, 26 years professional experience B.S. Geology, 19 years professional experience (Licensed Wyoming Geologist) Responsibility EIS Project Leader/Editor

Dwain McGarry Lee Almasy

CBM Geology CBM Reservoir Engineering

Ken Collier

Project Management Report Preparation Report Preparation

Doyl Fritz

Jack Fritz Steve Holzerland

Report Preparation Report Preparation

Heidi Robinson Mal McGill Rodney Ventling

Document Production CADD CADD

Jim Orpet Russell Tait

Physical Resources Physical Resources

David Ferguson Garren Meyer

Cultural Resources Cultural Resources

Phil Dinsmoor

Air Quality

Robin Carlson

Air Quality

5-6

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

5.0 Consultation and Coordination Table 5-3.
Name

List of Preparers (Continued).
Education/Experience BKS Environmental Associates, Inc. Subcontractor B.S. Range Management, M.S. Soil Science, 24 years professional experience B.A. Biology, M.S. Plant and Soil Science, 9 years professional experience B.S. Horticulture, M.S. Agronomy, 4 years professional experience Responsibility

Brenda Schladweiler

Vegetation Baseline

Paige Wolken

Vegetation Baseline

Heidi Smith

Vegetation Baseline

Kort Clayton Kimberly Brown Gwyn McKee Bonnie Postovit Howard Postovit William Winland

Thunderbird Wildlife Consulting, Inc. Subcontractor M.S. Biology, Wildlife Baseline 9 years professional experience M.S. Biology, Wildlife Baseline 11 years professional experience M.S. Wildlife Ecology, Wildlife Baseline 16 years professional experience M.S. Zoology, Wildlife Baseline 26 years professional experience M.S. Wildlife Ecology, Wildlife Baseline 26 years professional experience B.S. Biology, Wildlife Baseline 15 years professional experience Argonne National Laboratories PhD. Environmental Health Engineering, 31 years professional experience Ph.D. Chemical Engineering, 21 years professional experience Air Quality Impact Assessment Air Quality Impact Modeling

Kyong C. Chun Young-soo Chang

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

5-7

5.0 Consultation and Coordination Table 5-4a. BLM Distribution List for Coal Leasing.
Federal & State Officials Governor of Wyoming Jim Geringer Governor of Montana Judy Martz U.S. Representative Barbara Cubin U.S. Senator Craig Thomas U.S. Senator Mike Enzi Wyoming Senator Dick Erb Wyoming Senator John Hines Wyoming Senator Jim Anderson Wyoming Representative Deborah Alden Wyoming Representative George McMurtry Wyoming Representative Jeff Wasserburger Wyoming Representative Dave Edwards Wyoming Representative Jene Jansen Wyoming Representative Frank Latta Federal Agencies BLM, Washington D.C. BLM, Buffalo WY BLM, Casper WY BLM, Billings MT BLM, Miles City MT BLM, Cheyenne WY Bureau of Indian Affairs, Washington D.C. Bureau of Indian Affairs, Billings MT Bureau of Reclamation Department of Energy Department of Interior EPA Region VIII Federal Highway Administration HQ-USAF/CEVP Mineral Management Service National Park Service, Washington D.C. National Park Service, Denver CO. Devils Tower National Monument Office of Surface Mining, Washington D.C. OSM WRCC,.Denver CO OSM, Casper WY USDI Rocky Mountain Regional Solicitor U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Cheyenne WY U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Washington D.C. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Cheyenne WY U.S. Geological Survey, Reston VA U.S. Geological Survey, Denver CO U.S. Geological Survey, Cheyenne WY USDA-Forest Service, Washington D.C. USDA-Forest Service, Denver CO USDA-Forest Service, Laramie WY USDA-Forest Service, Douglas WY State Agencies Montana Office of the Governor Wyoming Clearinghouse Coordinator WY Employment Research & Planning Dept. Wyoming Dept. of Environmental Quality/ Land Quality & Air Quality Divisions Wyoming Division of Economic Analysis Wyoming State Planning Coordinator’s Office Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Comm. Wyoming Parks & Cultural Resources Dept. Wyoming State Engineer's Office Wyoming Department of Transportation Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office Wyoming Game & Fish Department Wyoming Business Council Wyoming Department of Agriculture Wyoming Industrial Siting Division Wyoming Public Service Commission Wyoming State Geological Survey Wyoming State Inspector of Mines Wyoming Water Development Commission Local Agencies and Government Big Horn County, Montana Planning Board Campbell County, Wyoming Commission Campbell Co., WY School Superintendent City of Douglas, Wyoming City of Gillette, Wyoming Converse County, Wyoming Commissioners Converse County, Wyoming School District Converse Cty., Wyoming Joint Powers Board Converse County, Wyoming Planning Office Gillette Dept. of Community Development Powder River County, Montana Rosebud County, Montana Commission Town of Wright, Wyoming Weston County, Montana Commission Tribal Organizations and Individuals Arapahoe Business Council C'Hair, William Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe Crow Tribal Council Crow Creek Sioux Tribe E. Shoshone Cultural Coordinator E. Shoshone Tribal Attorney Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe Long Sioux, Clifford Lower Brule Sioux Tribe N. Arapaho Historian-Robert Goggles N. Cheyenne Cultural Committee N. Cheyenne Tribal Council N. Cheyenne Tribe-Steven Brady Oglala Sioux Tribal Council Rosebud Sioux Tribe S. Cheyenne/S. Arapaho Tribes Santee Sioux Tribal Council Shoshone Business Council Sicangu Lakota Treaty Council Standing Rock Sioux Agency Standing Rock Sioux Tribe

5-8

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

5.0 Consultation and Coordination Table 5-4a. BLM Distribution List for Coal Leasing (Continued).
Organizations Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Biodiversity Conservation Alliance Campbell County Economic Dev. Corp. Cheyenne Audubon Society Foundation for N. American Wild Sheep Izaak Walton League of America Medicine Wheel Coalition Murie Audubon Society National Mining Association National Wildlife Federation Natural Resources Defense Council Petroleum Association of Wyoming Powder River Basin Resource Council Sierra Club The Fund for Animals The Nature Conservancy Wildlife Management Institute Wyoming Assoc of Professional Archeologists Wyoming Bankers Association Wyoming Business Alliance Wyoming Geological Association Wyoming Mining Association Wyoming Outdoor Council Wyoming Stock Growers Association Wyoming Wildlife Federation Wyoming Wool Growers Association Companies/Businesses American Colloid Company Antelope Coal Company Ark Land Company Arnjac Belle Ayr Mine Bjork, Lindley, Danielson & Baker, P.C. Bridgeview Coal Company Buckskin Mine Burlington Northern Railroad Company Burns & McDonnell C.H. Snyder Company CE&MT, Incorporated CH2M Hill Consol, Inc., Exploration & Land Dept. Cordero-Rojo Mine Complex Decker Coal Company Dry Fork Coal Company Ducker, Montgomery, Lewis, & Aronstein Eagle Butte Mine ECC ENCOAL Environmental Solutions, Incorporated Evergreen Enterprises Foster-Wheeler Environmental Glenrock Coal Company Greystone Hardin & Associates Independent Production Company Intermountain Resources Jacobs Ranch Coal Corporation Kennecott Energy Company Kenneth R. Paulsen Consultants Kfx Wyoming Incorporated Kiewit Mining Company KN Energy L.E. Peabody & Associates M&K Oil Company, Incorporated Marston & Marston McGraw-Hill McVehil-Monnett Associates, Inc. Meineadair Consultants Mine Engineers, Incorporated Mining Associates of Wyoming NERCO Coal Company North Rochelle Mine Norwest Mine Services P&M Coal Company Pacificorp/Interwest Mining PIC Technologies Poudre Environmental Consulting Powder River Coal Company Powder River Energy Corporation RAG Coal West, Incorporated Redstone Resources Riverside Technology, Incorporated Royal Gold Incorporated San Juan Coal Company Shea & Gardner The Rim Companies Thunder Basin Coal Company Thunder Basin Coalition Thunderbird Wildlife Consulting Torch Energy TRC Environmental Triton Coal Company URS Greiner Woodward Clyde U.S. West Communications Western Energy Company Western Fuels Association Western Gas Resources Williams Production RMT Company WWC Engineering Wyodak Resources Dev. Corporation Yates Petroleum Company Press Associated Press Casper Journal Casper Star Tribune Cheyenne-Wyoming Eagle Douglas Budget Gillette News-Record Rocky Mountain Oil Journal Western Coal Newsletter

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

5-9

5.0 Consultation and Coordination Table 5-4a. BLM Distribution List for Coal Leasing (Continued).
Educational Institutions Northwestern Univ. Policy Research Inst. UW Libraries, Coe Reference Department CSU, The Libraries Individuals Antelope, Sr., Howard Barbero, Ralph Benson, Scott Bierman, Sheldon Cundy, Cecil Daub, Jerry Jacob, Gerald Natta, F.L. Robertson, C.J. Saulcy, Bill Williams, John Winland, Mark

5-10

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

5.0 Consultation and Coordination Table 5-4b. Distribution List for SPRB Coal Final EIS.
Individuals Amber , Richard Baalman, Lynne & Mark Balog, Peter Bartlett, Randy Bishop, Hugh & Valeri Boland, Edward Bovey, Glenn S. Bradshaw, Donald B. Breecher, V.M. Brenk, Charles A. Broadhead, Dean Brown, Maurice Budd, May Cagle, Bill Champion, W.H. Cheesema, Rilla Cogil, Jolene A. Collins, GF Trust Columbus, Joseph A. Cook, D.L. Cook, Rita C. Crandall, Terry R. Crary, Calvert D. Culver Trust, A.M. Dale, Robert L. Dean, Hudson Deemar, Irving R. Deputy, Robert W. Devlin, James A. Diefenderfer, Michael R. Dilts, John C. & Betty Dilts, Jerry and Barbara Dilts, Fred W. Dix, David R. Dorman, Jenise E. Dorough , Thomas A. Dymond, Michael S. Ellbogen, John P. Engle, Fred L. Faith, J. Gregory Farley, Thomas H. Gamberg, Russell J. Gates, John W. Gibbons, J.P. Haefele, James & Estelle Hammond, William C. Hando, Ronald E. Hanson, Joyce A. Harden, James L. Harrell, J.S. Harvey, M.J. Head, Debra Johnson Hobson, DeMar Johnson Holt, David T. Isenberger, Matthew & Peggy Jacobs, Donald F. Jacobs, Donald & Rosemae Johnstone, Wilma Kane, Ollie M. Kane, Frank & Patsy Kaufman, Marcella Keisling, James D. Kelly, Gale O. & Patsy R. Kennedy, M. John Kentta, Harold Killion, B.K. Klabzuba, Robert Klaenhammer, H.M. Klungness, Milton L. Klurfeld, Gregor Krokosz, Emily Kuta, Delores Kutter, Julie E. Ladd, Jerry D. Larmon, Jim S. & Connie L. Lauchnor, Emily H. Lawson, Don & Marjorie Leutwyler, Scott Litton, Patricia L. Lunning, Leonard Mackey, Robert & Dorothy Mackey, William Macy, Rose T. Madrid, Louis A. Mares, Ben E. McBride, Dorothy L. McCurley, Karan Lea Kane Medema, James & Millie Miller, Mary Lou Mills, Clark & Doris Mills, Dale & Edith Mitchell, Victor, Cynthia Nelson, Richard R. Nimmo, Jolynn & Terry Noonan, Thomas J. O'Connell, R.K. Ogle, Morris E. Ostling, Michael E. Ostling, Susan M. Peel, Daniel Provine, Charles & Evelyn Putnam, Forest & Jan Putnam, Harry Putnam, Forest Randolph, Rex L. Rasmussen, Donald B. Redle, William D. Reno, Floyd C. & Eda Reynolds, Kathleen Ann Rickard, O.L. Roderick, Jonathan & Carol Roemer, Lamar B. Rogers, Keating M.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

5-11

5.0 Consultation and Coordination Table 5-4b. Distribution List for SPRB Coal Final EIS (Continued).
Rogers, Geri Rogers, Richard J. Rousch, Linda Sauble, Dennis Mackey Schlenker, Kenneth Schulte, Frank L. Shainholtz, James & Barbara Sharp, Jim L. Sheets, R.P. Shockley, Melba J. Shogrin, F.L. Smolik, Leroy M. Smolik, Robert G. SnowBillie, Ruth Spencer, Russell A. Sprinkle, Joseph A. Stadelman, Diana & Joseph Stalls, I.L. Stone, Elizabeth Storms, Michael C. Storms, Robert F. Strang, John P. Stuart, Paul R. TeSelle, Roger Thomas, Vern Guy Treichel, William Tsukishima, Mary S. Tucker, Toni A. Tucker, R. Lee Vaught, George G. Voiles, Joy Lynn Kane VonDrehle, William F. Wagner, Richard L. Wanger, Deena L. Weese, Jennie M.Weinmann, John G. Weinstein, Ethel B. Wilkinson, Jerry Wilkinson, John Allen Wold, John S. Worthington, Tina Marie Young, Dennis Businesses/Organizations A.G. Andrikopoulos Res., Incorporated Altex Oil Corporation American Oil & Gas Corporation Andover Oil Company B&J Resources LLC B.S. & B. Oil Company Bankers Trust Company Bankfirst Basin Exploration, Incorporated Beacon Exploration Company Beard Oil Company Belle Fourche Pipeline Company Berenergy Corporation Big West Oil & Gas, Incorporated Black Hills Exploration & Production Co. Black Magic #1, LLC Blake Construction Company Bowers Oil & Gas, Incorporated Box Creek Mineral Ltd Partnership Bridle Bit Ranch Company Buck Stanley Trust Burlington Northern Railroad BWAB LLC Caroline Hunt Trust Estate Cenex Harvest States Coop Chisholm Trail Ventures, L.P. Citation 1998 Investment, L.P. CNG Producing Company Coastal Oil & Gas Corporation Cometra-Bank-Texas Conoco, Incorporated Coral Petroleum, Ltd. Cramer Oil Company Crest Resources, Incorporated D&D Resources Daven Corporation Davis Oil Company Dee Bentley, Incorporated Dever Minerals Devon Energy Corporation DNR Oil & Gas Incorporated Double Eagle Dymond Resources Ltd. Partnership Eland Energy Eloise McKee Trust Energen Resources MAQ, Incorporated Enterprise 1987 Ltd. Eureka Oil Company Fairway Resources, Incorporated Fayette Oil & Gas Corporation FDIC FDM Property Trust Fidelity Oil Holdings, Incorporated Fina Oil & Chemical First Interstate Bank of Commerce Forcenergy Gas Exploration Four G Oil Company Four-Ten Exploration FSU Foundation Future Realty, Incorporated G.H. Corporation Gene F. Lang & Company Geotech Production Company GPM Incorporated Gunsmoke Production Company Hanson & Strahn, Incorporated Headington Oil Company, L.P. Hewitt Family Partnership High Plains Associates, Incorporated

5-12

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

5.0 Consultation and Coordination Table 5-4b. Distribution List for SPRB Coal Final EIS (Continued).
Howell Petroleum Corporation Hunt Oil Company Hurley Oil Properties Independent Production Company Internationale Nederlanden (U.S.) Interstate Investment Company Intoil, Incorporated J.A. Humphrey Trust Jenne, Lucile Trusts I & II Jetta Production Company Inc./JPC LLC Jim's Water Service JN Exploration & Production L.P. JRJ Ranches KAB Acquisition L.P.-III Kaiser-Francis Oil Company Kenneth F. Cummings & Company Kenneth Revland Trust Kerr McGee Corporation Key Production Company Kirby Minerals KN Production Company L.B. Industries Lance Oil & Gas Company LFL Joint Venture Investments Lloyd Company Lucille F. Emery Trust LY Ltd. Liability Company Lyeth-Burk Partnership Mach Petroleum, Incorporated Machris, Maurice A. Trust Malibu Presbyterian Church Manufacturers Hanover Trust Marathon Oil Company Martin Exploration Management Company o Maxim Drilling & Exploration McCullis Resources Company, Incorporated McNeil Street Drilling Venture Meany Land & Exploration, Incorporated Merit Petroleum Company MIGC, Incorporated Mullinex Associates 69/Mullinex Murjo Oil & Royalty Company N. American Explorer, Incorporated Naomi Hopkins Trust Nationsbanc Leasing Corp. of N. America New England Mutual Life Insurance Co. Nortex Corporation North Baptist Church Northern Production Company, Incorporated Norwest Bank of Colorado Norwest Bank of Denver, Trustee Ocean Energy, Incorporated Olive Oil, L.C. Oxy USA, Incorporated PAMCO Investments Corporation Pathfinder Energy, Incorporated Paul Revere Life Insurance Company Peak Resource Management, Incorporated Pennzoil Corporation Perry & Butler Perry R. Bass, Incorporated Petro Atlas Corporation Petroleum, Incorporated Phillips Petroleum Company Phoenix Mutual Life Insurance Company Platte Valley Management Company Powder River Coal Company Powder River Oil & Gas Vent., LLC Preston, Reynolds, & Company, Inc Prima Oil & Gas Company Princess Properties, LLC Providence Mutual Life Ins. Company Questar Exploration & Production R.W. Scott Investments, LLC Ralph W. Zimmer Trust RBC Exploration Company Redle, Yonkee, & Toner Redstone Resources Richard Altman & Company Rockrimmon Royalty Company, LLC ROEC, Incorporated Ryder Stilwell Oil Samson Hydrocarbon Company Scorpio Resources Seco Energy Corporation Shell Western E&P Company Skelly Oil Company Smithco Properties South Coast Oil Corporation Spear Lazy S Land Company Sports Resources, Incorporated Spring Creek Ranch, LLC Stanwich Energy Company States, Incorporated Stockman's Bank & Trust Stroock & Rogers Sunshine Valley Petroleum Corporation Swift Energy Company Talala Corporation Tarus Exploration USA, Incorporated TBI Exploration, Incorporated Texaco Exploration & Production, Inc. Textron Collective Investment Trust The Chase Manhattan Bank The Daube Company The Esperanza Corporation The Oswald Family Trust The Thermo Company Tindall Operating Company Tom Brown, Incorporated Two Rivers Ranch TXP Operating Company

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

5-13

5.0 Consultation and Coordination Table 5-4b. Distribution List for SPRB Coal Final EIS (Continued).
U.S. National Bank Association United Pipe & Supply, Incorporated United States National Bank of Ogden University of Montana U.S. West Communications, Incorporated Vale Company Vastar Resource, Incorporated Walker Trust Wells Resources, Incorporated Wellstar Corporation Western Production Company Western Ranches International Westport Oil & Gas Company, Incorporated Whiting Petroleum Corporation WP Properties Corporation Young Trust ZAB, Inc./Zalman Resources

5-14

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

6.0 References Cited 6.0 REFERENCES CITED Mine, Permit No. MD-616, prepared for ACC by McVehilMonnet, August 2000. , 2001, Antelope Mine State Decision Document, Permit No. 525-T6-A1, Change No. 18, December 4, 2001. On file with WDEQ/LQD, Cheyenne, Wyoming. Applied Hydrology & Associates, Inc., 1999, Technical Report on Groundwater Modeling of CBM Development, Powder River Basin, Wyoming. Prepared for BLM, Buffalo, Wyoming. Argonne, 2002, Technical Support Document Air Quality Impact Assessment for the Montana Statewide Oil and Gas Final Environmental Impact Statement and Amendment of the Powder River and Billings Resource Management Plans and the Wyoming Final Environmental Impact Statement and Proposed Plan Amendment for the Powder River Basin Oil and Gas Project. Prepared for the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Montana and Wyoming State Offices, by the Environmental Assessment Division, Argonne National Laboratory. Argonne, Illinois. Billings Gazette, 2000, “Western Area Power Administration Delays Review of Plan for Power Plant”, February 5. Acquired from website on the Internet: 6-1

Air Resource Specialists, Inc. (ARS), 2002, Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality “Thunder Basin National Grasslands Monitoring Site Quarterly Reports, Spring 2001 – Winter 2002”, August 2002. , 2003, Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality “Thunder Basin National Grasslands Monitoring Site Quarterly Reports, First Quarter 2003”, July 2003. Antelope Coal Company (ACC), 1982-2001, Antelope Coal Mine Annual Reports. On file with WDEQ/LQD, Cheyenne, Wyoming. , 1998, Antelope Mine Permit, WDEQ Surface Mine Permit 525-T6, approved October 29, 1998. On file with WDEQ/LQD, Cheyenne, Wyoming. , 1999, Permit No. 525 Horse Creek Amendment/Revision Application, December 15, 1999. On file with WDEQ/LQD, Cheyenne, Wyoming. , 2000a, Lease By Application for the West Antelope Tract Proposed Lease Area, presented to BLM Wyoming State Office, September 7, 2000. , 2000b, Air Quality Permit Application for the Antelope South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

6.0 References Cited . , 2001a, “Group finds partner to build Wright power plant”, October 18. Acquired from website on the Internet: . , 2001b, “New coal plant planned”, April 14. Acquired from website on the Internet: . of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. , 1979, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Proposed Development of Coal Resources in the Eastern Powder River Wyoming. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Washington, D.C. , 1981, Final Powder River Regional Coal Environmental Impact Statement. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Cheyenne, Wyoming. , 1983, Final Environmental Impact Statement on the Riley Ridge Natural Gas Project, Sublette, Lincoln, and Sweetwater Counties, Wyoming. BLM-YA-EA-84002-1327. Prepared by Environmental Research and Technology, Inc., for the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Cheyenne, Wyoming. , 1984, Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Round II Coal Lease Sale in the Powder River Region. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Cheyenne, Wyoming. , 1985a, Buffalo Resource Area Resource Management Plan Environmental Impact Statement. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Buffalo Re-

Black Hills Corporation, 2001, Press release February 26. Acquired from website on Internet: . Borden, G.W., R.R. Fletcher, and D.T. Taylor, 1994, “Economic Impact of Coal on Wyoming’s Economy”, Cooperative Extension Service Department of Agricultural Economics, College of Agriculture, University of Wyoming, B-987. Braun, C.E., 1998, Sage Grouse declines in western North America: What are the problems? Proceedings of the Western Associated of Fish and Wildlife Agencies 78:139156. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 1974, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Eastern Powder River Basin of Wyoming. U.S. Department

6-2

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

6.0 References Cited source Wyoming. Area, Casper, , 1992c, Final Environmental Assessment for the North Antelope and Rochelle Coal Lease Application for Powder River Coal Company. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Casper District Office, Casper, Wyoming. , 1995, Final Environmental Assessment for the Antelope Coal Lease Application. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Casper District Office, Casper, Wyoming. , 1996a, Draft Economic Summary for the Buffalo Resource Area. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Casper District Office, Buffalo, Wyoming. , 1996b, Draft Natural Systems Paper for the Buffalo Resource Area’s Land Use Plan. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Casper District Office, Buffalo, Wyoming. , 1996c, Draft Environmental Consequences of Existing Management for the Buffalo Resource Area. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Casper District Office, Buffalo, Wyoming. , 1996d, Draft Existing Management of the Buffalo Resource Area. U.S. Department of the Interior, 6-3

, 1985b, Platte River Resource Area Resource Management Plan Environmental Impact Statement. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Casper, Wyoming. , 1988, NEPA Handbook H1790-1. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Washington, D.C. , 1989, Manual 3420, Competitive Coal Leasing. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Washington, D.C. , 1991, Powder River Regional Coal Team Operational Guidelines for Coal Lease-ByApplications. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Cheyenne, Wyoming. , 1992a, Final Environmental Assessment for the West Black Thunder Coal Lease Application. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Casper District Office, Casper, Wyoming. , 1992b, Final West Rocky Butte Coal Lease Application Environmental Impact Statement. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Casper District Office, Casper, Wyoming. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

6.0 References Cited Bureau of Land Management, Casper District Office, Buffalo, Wyoming. , 1996e, Southern Powder River Basin Coal Leasing Study. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, State Office, Cheyenne, Wyoming. , 1996f, Coal Development Status Check Powder River Federal Coal Region Montana & Wyoming Data Tables. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Casper District Office, Casper, Wyoming. , 1996g, Draft Energy Resources Booklet for the Buffalo Resource Area. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Casper District Office, Buffalo, Wyoming. , 1997a, Draft and Final Gillette South CBM Project Environmental Impact Statement, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Buffalo Resource Area, Buffalo, Wyoming. , 1997b, Final Environmental Impact Statement for the North Rochelle Coal Lease Application (WYW127221). U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Casper Field Office, Casper, Wyoming. , 1998, Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Powder River Coal Lease Application (WYW136142) and Thundercloud Coal Lease Application (WYW1361458). U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Casper Field Office, Casper, Wyoming. , 1999a, Wyodak Coal Bed Methane Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Buffalo Field Office, Buffalo, Wyoming. , 1999b, Final Environmental Assessment WY-070-EA-9191 for the Proposed Enron (Belco)-BLM Coal Lease Exchange WYW322794. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Casper Field Office, Casper, Wyoming, October 1999. , 1999c, Wyodak Coal Bed Methane Project Final Environmental Impact Statement. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Buffalo Field Office, Buffalo Wyoming, October 1999. , 2000a, Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Horse Creek Lease Application (WYW141435). U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Casper Field Office, Casper, Wyoming.

6-4

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

6.0 References Cited , 2000b, Instruction Memorandum No. 2000-081, Policy on Conflicts between CBM and Coal Development. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Washington Office, Washington, D.C., February 2000. , 2000c, Wyodak Drainage Coal Bed Methane Environmental Assessment, EA #WY-070-01-034. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Buffalo Field Office, Buffalo, Wyoming. , 2001a, Approved Resource Management Plan for Public Lands Administered by the Bureau of Land Management Buffalo Field Office. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Buffalo Field Office, Buffalo, Wyoming. Available from website on the Internet: . , 2001b, Final Environmental Impact Statement for the North Jacobs Ranch Coal Lease Application (WYW146744). U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Casper Field Office, Casper, Wyoming. , 2003a, Final Environmental Impact Statement and Proposed Plan Amendment for the Powder River Basin Oil and Gas Project. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS Buffalo Field Office, Buffalo, Wyoming, January 2003. , 2003b, Final Statewide Oil and Gas Environmental Impact Statement and Proposed Amendment of the Powder River and Billings Resource Management Plans. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Montana State Office, Billings, Montana. , 2003c, Powder River Basin coal lease information, available on the Internet as of November 2003: . , 2003d, Record of Decision and Resource Management Plan Amendments for the Powder River Basin Oil and Gas Project. Buresh, Tammy, 2000, Wright Water and Sewer District, personal communication October 17. Campbell County Economic Development Corporation, 2003, housing information available from website on Internet as of August 2003: . Campbell County School District #1 (CCSD), 2003, personal communication with CCSD#1 Human Resource Department, September 8. Casper Star Tribune, 2001, “Coalfired Power Plant Sought near Gillette”, April 9. Acquired 6-5

6.0 References Cited from website on the Internet: . , 2002a, “$64M Two Elk Tax Free Bonds OK’d”, by Dustin Bleizeffer, September 5. , 2002b, “Mines seek better blasts”, by Dustin Bleizeffer, February 3. , 2003, “Eagle Butte wins on EQC ruling”, by Brodie Farquhar, January 18. Cerovski, A.M., G.T. Byer, K. Duffy, and D. Felley, 2000, Wyoming Bird Conservation Plan, Version 1.0, Wyoming Partners in Flight, Lander, Wyoming. Chancellor, Rick, 2003, WDEQ, June 16, 2003 personal communication. City of Gillette, 1978, City of Gillette/Campbell County Comprehensive Planning Program. Gillette, Wyoming. , 2001, Department of Community Development, Planning Division, “2001-2002 Land Use Inventory, Housing and Demographic Estimates”, December 31, 2001. , 2002, Department of Community Development, Planning Division, Gillette population estimates - 1977 through 1989. Clark, D.W., 1995, Geotechnical processes in ground water 6-6 South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS resulting from surface mining of coal at the Big Sky and West Decker Mine area, southeastern Montana: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 95-4097, 80 p. Commonwealth Associates Inc., 1980, Environmental Baseline Study, Antelope Coal Field. Connelly, J.W., and C.E. Braun, 1997, Long-term changes in sage grouse populations in western North America. Wildlife Biology 3:229-234. Converse County, 1978, Converse County Land Use Plan, Douglas, Wyoming. Crist, M.A., 1991, Evaluation of groundwater-level changes near Gillette, northeastern Wyoming. U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Investigations Report 884196. Dailey, Bernard J., 2001, WDEQ/AQD, e-mail communication November 28, 2001 listing power plant applications on file with AQD. Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad Corporation (DM&E), 1998, information acquired from DM&E website on the Internet: . (Site includes links to news, STB application, maps and other company information.)

6.0 References Cited De Bruin, R.H., 1996, Oil and gas map of Wyoming: Wyoming State Geological Survey Map Series MS-48, scale 1:500,000. , 1999, Oil and Gas Fields Map of the Powder River Basin, Wyoming: Wyoming State Geological Survey Map Series MS-51, scale 1:350,000. De Bruin, R.H., and R.W., Jones, 1989, Coalbed methane in Wyoming: Guidebook on gas resources of Wyoming, pp. 97104. Emme, Doug, 2003, WDEQ, personal communication, May 7. Ferguson, David, 2001a, Class I and Class III Cultural Resource Inventories of the Powder River Coal Company’s Tract L, Campbell and Converse Counties, Wyoming. Prepared for Powder River Coal Company by GCM Services, Inc., Butte, Montana. , 2001b, Class I and Class III Cultural Resource Inventories of Lands Within Antelope Coal Company’s “West Antelope LBA”, Converse and Campbell Counties, Wyoming. Prepared for Antelope Coal Company by GCM Services, Inc., Butte, Montana. Ferguson, David, and G. Meyer, 2000, A Class I and Class III Cultural Resource Inventory and Historical Overview of South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS Triton Coal Company’s Proposed Permit Amendment Area, Campbell County, Wyoming. Prepared for Triton Coal Company, Gillette, Wyoming by GCM Services, Butte, Montana. , 2001, A Class III Cultural Resource Inventory of the “Little Thunder Creek LBA” for Thunder Basin Coal Company’s Black Thunder Mine, Campbell County, Wyoming. Prepared for Thunder Basin Coal Company, Wright, Wyoming by GCM Services, Inc., Butte, Montana. Finley, A., and J. Goolsby, 2000, Estimates of Coal Volumes and Coalbed Methane in Place, Powder River Basin, Wyoming. Wyoming State Geological Survey, Wyoming Geo-Notes No. 68, p. 16-18. Fitzgerald, J.P., C.A. Meaney, and D.M. Armstrong, 1994, Mammals of Colorado. Denver Museum of Natural History, Denver, Colorado. Flores, R.M., A.M. Ochs, L.R. Bader, R.C. Johnson, and D. Vogler, 1999, Framework geology of the Fort Union Coal in the Powder River Basin, Wyoming and Montana. Chapter PF, pages 1-40 in Fort Union Coal Assessment Team. 1999 Resource Assessment of Selected Tertiary Coal Beds and Zones in the Northern Rocky Mountains and Great

6-7

6.0 References Cited Plains Region. U.S.G.S. Professional Paper 1625-A. Fox, Douglas G; Ann M. Bartuska, James G. Byrne; and others, 1989, A Screening Procedure to Evaluate Air Pollution Effects on Class I Wilderness Areas. General Technical Report RM-168. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Fort Collins, Colorado. Gillette News-Record, 2001a, “New line would feed electricity to Denver area”, by Stephanie Cooper, January 31. , 2001b, “What’s going up?”, by Stephanie Cooper, May 6. , 2001c, “Company Considers 3 Power Plants”, August 5. Acquired from website the on Internet: . , 2002a, “Two Elk Plant gets partner”, by Adam Rankin, May 7. , 2002b, “Gillette’s Housing Still Tight”, January 26. Acquired from website on the Internet: . , 2002c, “Power plant permit stalls”, by Adam Rankin, June 30. Greiser, Sally, J.S. Stevens, A.L. Stanfill, H. Plochman, T. Weber Greiser, and S. Vetter, 6-8 1982, Eastern Powder River Basin Prehistory: Archaeological Investigations at the Antelope Mine. Prepared for Northern Energy Resource Company (NERCO), Inc., Portland, Oregon by Historical Research Associates [HRA], Missoula, Montana. Hall, D., C. Coe, J. Grady, M. Grant, and T.J. Lennon, 1981, A Cultural Resource Inventory of the Proposed Antelope Coal Mine in Converse County, Wyoming (Revised). Prepared for NERCO by Western Cultural Resource Management, Inc., Boulder, Colorado. Hartman, Bob, BLM, November 29, 2001, personal communication. Hockert, Betsy, 2000, Wyoming Employment Center, Gillette, Wyoming, personal communication, October 17. Hodson, W.G., R.H. Pearl, and S.A. Druse, 1973, Water Resources of the Powder River Basin and Adjacent Areas, Northeastern Wyoming. U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA-465. Hollaway, Deirdre, Horizon Realty, Douglas, Wyoming, March 19, 2002, personal communication. Homath, JoAnne, 2003, USDA-FS Douglas Ranger District, Douglas, Wyoming, October 20, 2003, personal communication. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

6.0 References Cited Humphrey, Mark, 2002, OSM, Casper, Wyoming, personal communication, April 15. Hydro-Engineering, 1991a, GAGMO 1991 Annual Report. Prepared for the Gillette Area Groundwater Monitoring Organization. , 1991b, GAGMO 10-year Report. Prepared for Gillette Area Groundwater Monitoring Organization. , 1992, GAGMO 1992 Annual Report. Prepared for the Gillette Area Groundwater Monitoring Organization. , 1993, GAGMO 1993 Annual Report. Prepared for the Gillette Area Groundwater Monitoring Organization. , 1994, GAGMO 1994 Annual Report. Prepared for the Gillette Area Groundwater Monitoring Organization. , 1995, GAGMO 1995 Annual Report. Prepared for the Gillette Area Groundwater Monitoring Organization. , 1996a, GAGMO 15-Year Report. Prepared for Gillette Area Groundwater Monitoring Organization. , 1996b, GAGMO 1996 Annual Report. Prepared for Gillette Area Groundwater Monitoring Organization. , 1997, GAGMO 1997 Annual Report. Prepared for the South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS 6-9 Gillette Area Groundwater Monitoring Organization. , 1998, GAGMO 1998 Annual Report. Prepared for the Gillette Area Groundwater Monitoring Organization. , 1999, GAGMO 1999 Annual Report. Prepared for the Gillette Area Groundwater Monitoring Organization. , 2000, GAGMO 2000 Annual Report. Prepared for the Gillette Area Groundwater Monitoring Organization. , 2001, GAGMO 20-Year Report. Prepared for Gillette Area Groundwater Monitoring Organization. IMPROVE, 2002, Visibility report from 1989-2001 acquired from the Colorado State University website on the Internet: . Jacobs Ranch Coal Company (JRCC), 1999, Jacobs Ranch Mine Permit Application 271T4. On file with WDEQ/LQD, Cheyenne, Wyoming. , 2000, Jacobs Ranch Mine State Decision Document, Permit No. 271-T4-R2, Change No. 4, July 5, 2000. On file with WDEQ/LQD, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

6.0 References Cited , 2002, Addendum D11-F, AVF Investigations within the North Jacobs Amendment Area, prepared for Jacobs Ranch Mine by WWC Engineering, Sheridan, Wyoming, January 2002. , 2003, Personal communication regarding PM10 monitoring data for the Jacobs Ranch Mine, October 16. Keck, John T., 1997, June 6, 1997 Letter of Decision on Antelope Coal Company’s Tract Revision Project. Wyoming State Historic Preservation Officer, Letter No. 69KLK012. Law, B.E., 1976, Large-scale compaction structures in the coal/bearing Fort Union and Wasatch Formations, northeast Powder River Basin, Wyoming: in Wyoming Geological Association: Guidebook on geology and energy resources of the Powder River Basin, pp. 221229. amphibians in Wyoming Game Department, Wyoming. Wyoming. and Fish Lander,

Mariah Associates, 1991, Test Excavations and Data recovery Plan, Antelope Coal Mine, Converse County, Wyoming. Prepared for Antelope Coal Company. Martin, L.J., D.L. Naftz, H.W. Lowham, and J.G. Rankl, 1988, Cumulative potential hydrologic impacts of surface coal mining in the eastern Powder River Structural Basin, northeastern Wyoming (CHIA). U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Investigations Report 884046. Prepared in cooperation with Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality and U.S. Office of Surface Mining, Cheyenne, Wyoming. Martner, B.E., 1986, Wyoming Climate Atlas. Prepared in cooperation with the Wyoming Water Research Center, University of Wyoming. Mathes, George Jr., 2002, Director of Human Resources, Campbell County School District No. 1, personal communication, March 20, 2002. McKenzie, Donald R., WDEQ/LQD, March 29, 2002, personal communication.

Lewis, B.D., and W.R. Hotchkiss, 1981, Thickness, percent sand, and configuration of shallow hydrogeological units in the Powder River Basin, Montana and Wyoming. U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigation Series Map I-1317. Luce, B., B.O. Oakleaf, A. Cerovski, L. Hunter, and J. Friday, 1999, Atlas of birds, mammals, reptiles, and 6-10

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

6.0 References Cited McVehil-Monnett Associates, Inc., 1997, NO2 Concentrations in Northeastern Wyoming: Historical Data and Projections. Report prepared and submitted to WDEQ/AQD July 1997. Meyer, Garren, 2001, A Class III Cultural Resource Inventory of Triton Coal Company’s Proposed West Roundup LBA and Adjacent Areas, Campbell County, Wyoming. Prepared for Triton Coal Company, Gillette, Wyoming by GCM Services, Inc., Butte, Montana. Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), 1997, 645 Database, Wyoming Summary Employment and Injury Information. Northeast Wyoming Economic Development Coalition (NEWEDC), 2002, Converse County housing information available from website on the Internet, as of March 2002: . Oedekoven, O.O., 1994, Distribution, habitat use, and population dynamics of the Rochelle Hills elk herd, Final Report, Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Gillette, Wyoming. Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM), 1980, Noise impact assessment for the Caballo Rojo Mine. Unpublished Report prepared by James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers, Inc. Aurora, Colorado. , 1984, Correlation and effect of mine facility wells on the Tullock Aquifer in the Gillette, Wyoming, vicinity. Prepared by G.E. McIntosh, C.A. Harrison and J.V. Wilcox. , 1985, Reconnaissance maps to assist in identifying alluvial valley floors, Powder River Basin, Montana and Wyoming, U.S. Department of the Interior. Draft prepared by Earth Resource Associates, Helena, Montana. , 2000, Annual Evaluation Summary Report for the Coal Regulatory Program Administered by the Land 6-11

Munson, Gene, 1996, Class III Cultural Resource Inventory of Black Thunder Mine Proposed Expansion of Mine Permit Boundary, Campbell County, Wyoming. Prepared for Black Thunder Mine Gillette, Wyoming by GCM Services, Butte, Montana. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 1969, Climatography of the United States: Asheville, North Carolina, National Climatic Center, Climatological Summaries, No. 20-48. Niering, W.A., 1985, Wetlands. Chanticlear Press, Inc., New York, New York. 638 pages.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

6.0 References Cited Quality Division of the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality for Evaluation Year 2000, December 7, 2000. , 2002a, Annual Evaluation Summary Report for the Coal Regulatory Program Administered by the Land Quality Division of the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality for Evaluation Year 2001, February 8, 2002. , 2002b, Annual Evaluation Summary Report for the Coal Regulatory Program Administered by the Land Quality Division of the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality for Evaluation Year 2002, December 4, 2002. , 2003, Annual Evaluation Summary Report for the Coal Regulatory Program Administered by the Land Quality Division of the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality for Evaluation Year 2003, September 30, 2003. Olive, W.W., 1957, The Spotted Horse Coalfield, Sheridan and Campbell Counties, Wyoming: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1050. Management, Denver, Colorado, regarding Campbell County PM10 monitoring data, September 9. Pedersen Planning Consultants, 2001, Campbell County Housing Needs Assessment, May 15, 2001. Pitchford, M.L., and W.C. Malm, 1994, Development and Applications of a Standard Visual Index. Atmospheric Environment 28(5):1,049-54. Powder River Coal Company (PRCC), 1994, North Antelope Mine Permit to Mine, Application 532-T4. On file with WDEQ/LQD, Cheyenne, Wyoming. , 1994-2000, North Antelope Mine and Rochelle Mine Annual Reports. Submitted to WDEQ/LQD by Powder River Coal Company. On file with WDEQ/LQD, Cheyenne, Wyoming. , 1996, Alluvial Valley Floor Investigations Within and Adjacent to the North Antelope Mine: Addendum D11-1 to Permit to Mine Application 532-T4. On file with WDEQ/LQD, Cheyenne, Wyoming. , 1997, North Antelope Mine State Decision Document, March 17,1997. On file with WDEQ/LQD, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Payton, R., 2002, Personal communication with Scott Archer, Senior Air Resource Specialist, U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land 6-12

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

6.0 References Cited , 1998, Appendix D6, Addendum D6-G1 of Mine Permit 569-T5 Groundwater Modeling of the North Antelope and Rochelle Mines and Adjacent Areas, Revised 1998. On file with WDEQ/LQD, Cheyenne, Wyoming. , 1999a, Appendix D11 of Mine Permit 569-T5, North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Alluvial Valley Floors, Revised June 1999. On file with WDEQ/LQD, Cheyenne, Wyoming. , 1999b, Appendix D6, Addendum D6-6 of Mine Permit 569-T5, North Antelope/Rochelle Complex, Groundwater Model. On file with WDEQ/LQD, Cheyenne, Wyoming. , 2001a, North Antelope/ Rochelle Complex Annual Report, Appendix D, Hydrology; Coal Drawdown Map. On file with WDEQ/LQD, Cheyenne, Wyoming. , 2001b, North Antelope /Rochelle Complex Air Quality Permit Application MD-657, approved August 14, 2001. Prepared by McVehilMonnett Associates, Inc. On file with WDEQ/AQD, Cheyenne, Wyoming. Powder River Eagle Studies, 19871999, Belle Ayr Mine and Eagle Butte Mine Annual Reports. Submitted to South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS WDEQ/LQD West, Inc. by RAG Coal

, 1994, Baseline Report for Powder River Coal Company Extension. Submitted to WDEQ/LQD by Powder River Coal Company. , 1999, Baseline Report for Antelope Coal Mine’s Horse Creek Extension. Submitted to WDEQ/LQD by Antelope Coal Company. , 2000, Annual Wildlife Report for Antelope Coal Mine. Submitted to WDEQ/LQD by Antelope Coal Company. Rehm, B.W., G.H. Groenewold, and K.A. Morin, 1980, Hydraulic properties of coal and related materials, Northern Great Plains: Groundwater, v. 18, no. 6, pp. 551-561. Remington, T.E., and C.E. Braun, 1991, How surface coal mining affects sage grouse, North Park, Colorado. Pages 128-132 in R.D. Comer, P.R. Davis, S.Q. Foster, C.V. Grant, S. Rush, O. Thorne, II, and J. Todd (eds.), Proceedings V: Issues and technology in the management of impacted wildlife. Thorne Ecological Institute, Boulder, Colorado. Rotenberry, J.T., M.A. Patten, and K.L. Preston, 1999, Brewer’s sparrow, in the Birds of North America, No. 390. The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, PA, and The

6-13

6.0 References Cited American Ornithologists Union, Washington, D.C. Shamley, Judy, WDEQ/AQD, March 28, 2002, personal communication. Shelley, Kevin, 1992, Habitat Reclamation for Birds and Small Mammals on Surface Mined Lands in the Powder River Basin, Wyoming. M.S. Thesis Department of Zoology and Physiology, University of Wyoming. Sheridan Press, 2002, “Arch Coal’s blasting study goes to DEQ”, Associated Press, July 26. Stephenson, Gary, 1992, February 24, Letter of Decision concerning Antelope Mine 1992 Plan Revisions: Test Excavations and Data Recovery Plan, Antelope Coal Mine, Converse County, Wyoming. Prepared by Mariah Associates. SHPO Letter No. 0292RLB012. Sundstrum, C., W.G. Hepworth, and K.L. Diem, 1973, Abundance, Distribution, and Food Habits of Pronghorn, Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, Bulletin No. 12, 51 p. Surface Transportation Board, 2000, Draft EIS for the DM&E Powder River Basin Expansion Project. Prepared in cooperation with the BLM. September 2000. Thunder Basin Coal Company (TBCC), 1980-1996, Black 6-14 Thunder Mine Annual Reports. On file with WDEQ/LQD, Cheyenne, Wyoming. , 2000a, Black Thunder Mine Permit, WDEQ Surface Mine Permit No. 233-T6, approved December 2000. On file at WDEQ/LQD office in Sheridan, Wyoming. , 2000b, Black Thunder Mine State Decision Document, Permit No. 233-T6-A1, Change No. 4, December 15, 2000. On file with WDEQ/LQD, Cheyenne, Wyoming. , 2002, Black Thunder Mine Report for Development of Safe Setback Distances for Blasting Activities at the Black Thunder Mine, dated July 2002. Thunderbird Wildlife Consulting, Inc. (TWC), 2000, NARO LBA Tracts Wildlife Baseline Survey. Prepared for PRCC. , 2003, Personal communication with Kort Clayton September 9. Triton Coal Company, LLC (TCC), 2000a, North Rochelle Mine Permit, WDEQ Surface Mine Permit No. 550-T5 revised October 2000. On file at WDEQ/LQD office in Sheridan, Wyoming. , 2000b, North Rochelle Mine State Decision Document, Permit No. 550-T5, August 25, 2000. On file with South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

6.0 References Cited WDEQ/LQD, Wyoming. Cheyenne, FS Publication RC-ECOL-872, USDA-FS Rocky Mountain Region, Lakewood, Colorado. 429 pages. , 1987b, Forest Service Handbook, FSH 2509-19 - Air Resource Management Handbook. , 2000, Screening Methodology for Calculating ANC Change to High Elevation Lakes. Published by the USDA-FS Rocky Mountain Region, Lakewood, Colorado. , 2001a, Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Northern Great Plains Management Plans Revision for Thunder Basin National Grassland. , 2001b, Land and Resource Management Plan for the Thunder Basin National Grassland. , 2002a, Final Environmental Impact Statement and Land and Resource Management Plan Revision Record of Decision for the Thunder Basin National Grassland, July 31, 2002. , 2002b, Letter from Norman Wagoner, USDA-FS District Ranger, Douglas Ranger District, to Mike Karbs, Assistant Field Manager Solid Minerals, BLM Casper Field Office, September 12, 2002. U.S. Department of (USDOC), 1990, Commerce Economics 6-15

, 2003, North Rochelle Mine Air Quality Permit Application MD-790A, approved March 5, 2003. On file with WDEQ/AQD, Sheridan, Wyoming. University of Wyoming (UW), 1994, Economic Impact of Coal on Wyoming's Economy. Cooperative Extension Service, Department of Agricultural Economics, College of Agriculture. B-987. , 2001, Data Search for Species Listed with the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database. Letter and computer printouts from A.J. Fedder to G. McKee (Thunderbird Wildlife Consulting, Inc.), dated April 16, 2001. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE), 1987, Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, by the Environmental Laboratory, Department of the Army, Waterways Experiment Station. Department of AgricultureForest Service (USDA-FS), 1985, Medicine Bow National Forest and Thunder Basin National Grassland, Land and Resource Management Plan, October 1985. , 1987a, Plant Associations of Region Two, Edition 4. USDASouth Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

U.S.

6.0 References Cited and Statistics Administration, Bureau of the Census, 1990 Census of Population and Housing. , 2000, Economics and Statistics Administration, Bureau of the Census, 2000 Census of Population and Housing. , 2003a, Economics and Statistics Administration, Bureau of Census, July 2002 population and housing estimates, available from website on the Internet as of August 2003: . , 2003b, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Gross Domestic Product data for the U.S., available from website on the Internet as of September 2003: . U.S. Department of Energy (USDOE), 2002, Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States 2001, Report 0573(2001), December 2002. Report acquired from website on the Internet: . , 2003, Energy Information Administration, Wyoming coal production, consumption, and export information, available from website on the Internet as of November 2003: . U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 1997a, National Air Toxics Information Clearinghouse (NATICH) Database. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. , 1997b, Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Database. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. , 1998, Interagency Workgroup on Air Quality Modeling (IWAQM) Phase 2 Summary Report: Recommendations for Modeling Long Range Transport Impacts Research Triangle Park, North Caroline (EPA-454/R-98-09). , 2001, letter to Nancy Doelger, BLM, Comment letter on North Jacobs Ranch Coal Lease Application DEIS, dated March 1, WMA Report “PRB Short-Term Exposure NO2 Study”, April 2000. , 2002a, AirData: Access to Air Pollution Data. Acquired from website on the Internet August 14, 2002: . , 2002b, Memorandum in response to Dr. Edward Faeder’s December 11, 2001 report dated March 28, 2002, “Short-Term Exposures to Nitrogen Dioxide”, from Suzanne Wuerthele and Robert Benson, EPA Regional South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

6-16

6.0 References Cited Toxicologists, to Richard Long, EPA Director Air and Radiation Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 8, Denver, Colorado. , 2003, Letter to Nancy Doelger, BLM, Region 8 comment letter on South Powder River Basin Coal DEIS, Air Quality, Nitrogen Dioxide, dated April 16. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 2002, Coal Mine List of Migratory Bird Species of Management Concern in Wyoming based on Wyoming Bird Conservation Plan, 1 May 2000, report available from Wyoming Field Office, Cheyenne, Wyoming. , 2003, Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; withdrawal of the proposed rule to list the mountain plover as threatened. Federal Register 68(174) 5308353101. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 1988, Martin, L.G., D.L. Naftz, H.W. Lowham, and J.G. Rankl, Cumulative potential hydrologic impacts of surface coal mining in the eastern Powder River Structural Basin, northeastern Wyoming (CHIA). U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Investigations Report 884046. Prepared in cooperation with Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality and U.S. Office of Surface Mining, Wyoming. Cheyenne,

, 1995, 1995 National Assessment of United States Oil and Gas Resources Circular 1118. , 2001, “The Minerals Industry of Wyoming” in “Minerals Yearbook 2001”, available from website on the Internet as of November 2003: . Van Voast, W.A., and J.C. Reiten, 1988, Hydrogeologic response–twenty years of surface coal mining in southeastern Montana: Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology Memoir 62. Wesche, T.A., B.L. Weand, G.W. Rosenlieb, L.S. Johnson, 1978, Aquatic Biota and Abiota of Selected Streams on Thunder Basin National Grassland, University of Wyoming Water Resources Research Institute, Laramie, Wyoming. Wisdom, M.J., B.C. Wales, M.M. Rowland, M.G. Faphael, R.S. Holthausen, T.D. Rich, and V.A. Saab, 2002, Performance of Greater Sage-Grouse Models for Conservation Assessment in Interior Columbia Basin, USA Conservation Biology, 16: 1232-1242. Wyoming Business Council, 2003, 2002 Wyoming Mineral and

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

6-17

6.0 References Cited Energy 2003. Yearbook, February , 2002, Office of the State Inspector of Mines, Annual Report for Year Ending December 31, 2002. , 2003, Research and Planning Division, Wyoming labor market information acquired from website on the Internet November 2003: . Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality/Air Quality Division (WDEQ/AQD), 2000, Wyoming Air Quality Standards and Regulations. , 2001, Information provided by Bernie Dailey regarding PRB Mines Air Quality and Production Data for 19972000. , 2002, Monitoring data supplied by Bob Schick, Monitoring Program Manager, August 2002. , 2003a, Monitoring data supplied by Bob Schick, Monitoring Program Manager, June 2003. , 2003b, Ambient air monitoring from WDEQ/AQD website on the Internet, as of November 2003: . Wyoming Department of Revenue, 2002, 2002 Annual Report. , 2003, Excise Tax Division, Sales and Use Tax Distribution Reports for fiscal South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

Wyoming Department of Administration and Information, 2003a, Economic Analysis Division, Wyoming economic and demographic data, available from website on the Internet as of November 2003: . , 2003b, Economic Analysis Division, “Ten Year Outlook Wyoming Economic Forecast: 2003 to 2012”, July 2003. Wyoming Department of Commerce, 1996, Economic and Community Development Division, Energy Section, “Wyoming 1996 Mineral and Energy Yearbook”, January 1996. Wyoming Department of Employment, 1998, Office of the State Inspector of Mines, Annual Report for the Year Ending December 31, 1998. , 1999, Office of the State Inspector of Mines, Annual Report for the Year Ending December 31, 1999. , 2000, Office of the State Inspector of Mines, Annual Report for the Year Ending December 31, 2000. , 2001, Office of the State Inspector of Mines, Annual Report for Year Ending December 31, 2001.

6-18

6.0 References Cited year 2003, available from website on the Internet as of September 2003: . Wyoming Game and Fish Department (WGFD), 1996, Wildlife Observation System, Wyoming Game and Fish Department Publications, Cheyenne, Wyoming. , 2000, Casper and Sheridan Region Annual Big Game Herd Unit Reports. , 2002, Casper and Sheridan Region Annual Big Game Herd Unit Reports. Wyoming Housing Database Partnership, 2003, A Profile of Wyoming Demographics, Economics, and Housing, Semiannual Report, ending June 30, 2003. Wyoming Mining Association (WMA), 1997, “PRB Mines-Air Quality and Production Data”, 19801996 prepared for WDEQ/AQD. , 2000, Air Quality Subcommittee, Powder River Basin Short-Term Exposure NO2 Study, April 2000. Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (WOGCC), 2001, information acquired from WOGCC website, December 2001: . , 2003, Personal communication between Rick South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS Marvel and Dave Hutton, WOGCC, and Nancy Doelger, BLM Casper Field Office, regarding oil and gas wells in the Powder River Basin, October 22. Wyoming SHPO, 2001, File Searches 3105 and 3173 conducted on May 2 and 9. Wyoming State Engineer’s Office (SEO), 2003, Retrieval of Groundwater and Surface Water Rights, July 2003, Cheyenne, Wyoming. Wyoming State Geological Survey (WSGS), 1991, Wyoming GeoNotes, No. 32, 48 pp. , 1994, Wyoming Geo-Notes, No. 43, 49 pp. , 1996, Wyoming Geo-Notes, No. 52, 59 pp. , 1997, Wyoming Geo-Notes, No. 54, 66 pp. , 1998, Wyoming Geo-Notes, No. 58, 73 pp. , 1999, Wyoming Geo-Notes, No. 61, 79 pp. , 2000, Wyoming Geo-Notes, No. 67, 64 pp. , 2001a, Wyoming Geo-Notes, No. 69, 44 pp. , 2001b, Wyoming Geo-Notes, No. 70, 44 pp. , 2001c, Wyoming Geo-Notes, No. 72, 40 pp. 6-19

6.0 References Cited , 2002a, Wyoming Geo-Notes, No. 73, 44 pp. , 2002b, Wyoming Geo-Notes, No. 74, 36 pp. , 2003a, Wyoming Geo-Notes, No. 76, 36 pp. , 2003b, Wyoming Geo-Notes, No. 77, 39 pp. Wyoming State Inspector of Mines, 1990-2002, Annual Report of the State Inspector of Mines of Wyoming, Office of the State Inspector of Mines, Rock Springs, Wyoming. Wyoming Water Resources Center, 1997, A study of techniques to assess surface and groundwater impacts associated with CBM and surface coal mining. In conjunction with WDEQ/LQD, SEO, WSGS, BLM and OSM.

6-20

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

7.0 Glossary 7.0 GLOSSARY

aboriginal - Related to early or primitive cultures in a region. ad valorem tax - A tax paid as a percentage of the assessed value of property. adverse impact - An apparent direct or indirect detrimental effect. aliquot - An exact portion. alkalinity - The degree to which the pH of a substance is greater than 7. alluvial deposit - Deposits of clay, silt, sand, gravel, and/or other materials carried by moving surface water, such as streams, and deposited at points of weak water flow; alluvium. alluvial valley floor (AVF) - An area of unconsolidated stream-laid deposits holding streams with water availability sufficient for subirrigation or flood irrigation agricultural activities (see 30 CFR 701.5). alluvium - Sorted or semi-sorted sediment consisting of clay, silt, sand, gravel, or other unconsolidated rock material deposited in comparatively recent geologic time by a stream or other body of running water in the bed of that stream or on its flood plain or delta. alternative - In terms of the National Environmental Policy Act, one of several substitute or alternate proposals that a federal agency is considering in an environmental analysis. ambient - Surrounding conditions (or environment) in a given place and time. annual precipitation - The quantity of water that falls yearly in the form of rain, hail, sleet, and snow. approximate original contour - Post-mining surface configuration achieved by backfilling and grading of mined-out areas so that the reclaimed land surface resembles the general surface configuration of the land prior to mining (see 30 CFR 701.5). aquatic - Living or growing in or on the water. aquifer - A layer of permeable rock, sand, or gravel that stores and transmits water in sufficient quantities for a specific use. aquitard - A confining bed that retards but does not totally prevent the flow of water to or from an adjacent aquifer; a leaky confining bed.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

7-1

7.0 Glossary area source – A plant site that does not emit any single HAP at a rate of 10 tons or greater per year, or any combination of HAPs at a rate of 25 tons or greater per year. arithmetic mean - The sum of the values of n numbers divided by n. It is usually referred to as simply the “mean” or “average”. ash - The residual non-combustible matter in coal that comes from included silt, clay, silica, or other substances. The lower the ash content, the better the quality of the coal. avian - Of, relating to, or derived from birds. backfill - The operation of refilling an excavation. Also, the material placed in an excavation when it is refilled. baseline - Conditions, including trends, existing in the human environment before a proposed action is begun; a benchmark state from which the environmental consequences of an action are forecast; the no-action alternative. beneficial impact - An apparent direct or indirect advantageous effect. bentonite - A clay formed by the decomposition of volcanic ash which has the ability to absorb large amounts of water and to expand to several times its normal volume; used in adhesives, cements and ceramic fillers. bonus - That value in excess of the rentals and royalties that is paid to the United States as part of the consideration for receiving a lease for publicly owned minerals [see 43 CFR 3400.0-5(c)]. braided stream - A stream flowing in several dividing and reuniting channels resembling the strands of a braid. buffer zone - An area between two different land uses that is intended to resist, absorb, or otherwise preclude development or intrusion between the two use areas. bypass coal - An isolated part of a coal deposit that is not leased and that can only be economically mined in an environmentally sound manner as a part of continued mining by an existing adjacent operation [see 43 CFR 3400.0.5(d)]. clinker (scoria) - Baked and fused rock resulting from in-place burning of coal deposits. coal bed methane (CBM) - Methane gas that is generated during the coalforming process. 7-2 South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

7.0 Glossary colluvium - Rock fragments, sand, or soil material that accumulates at the base of slopes; slope wash. confluence - The point at which two or more streams meet. conglomerate - A rock that contains rounded rock fragments or pebbles cemented together by another mineral substance. contiguous - Lands or legal subdivisions having a common boundary, lands having only a common corner are not contiguous. cooperating agency - An agency which has jurisdiction by law in an action being analyzed in an environmental document and who is requested to participate in the NEPA process by the agency that is responsible for preparing the environmental document [see 40 CFR 1501.6 and 1508.5]. crucial wildlife habitat - Parts of the habitat necessary to sustain a wildlife population during periods of their life cycle. It may be a limiting factor on the population, such as nesting habitat or winter habitat. cultural resources - The remains of human activity, occupation, or endeavor reflected in districts, sites, structures, buildings, objects, artifacts, ruins, works of art, architecture, and natural features that reveal the nature of historic and prehistoric human events. These resources consist of (1) physical remains, (2) areas where significant human events occurred, and (3) the environment immediately surrounding the resource. cumulative impact - The impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (federal or nonfederal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time (40 CFR 1508.7). decibel - A unit of sound measurement. In general, a sound doubles in loudness for every increase of 10 decibels. deciview (dv) - A general measure of view impairment (13 deciview equals a view of approximately 60 miles) caused by pollution. dip - The angle at which a rock layer is inclined from the horizontal. direct (or primary) impact - An impact caused by an action that occurs at the same time and place as the action (see 40 CFR 1508.8). discharge - Any of the ways that ground water comes out of the surface, including through springs, creeks, or being pumped from a well. South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS 7-3

7.0 Glossary dissected upland - An upland or high area in which a large part of the original surface has been deeply cut into by streams. dragline - A type of excavating crane that casts a rope- or cable-hung bucket a considerable distance, collects the dug material by pulling the bucket toward itself on the ground with a second rope or cable, elevates the bucket, and dumps the material on a backfill bank or pile. eolian deposit - Sediment carried, formed, or deposited by the wind, as sand dunes. ephemeral stream - A stream that flows occasionally because of surface runoff, and is not influenced by permanent ground water. erosion - The wearing away of the land surface by running water, wind, ice or other geologic agents. evapotranspiration - The sum total of water lost from the land by evaporation and plant transpiration. excavation (archeological) - The scientifically controlled recovery of subsurface materials and information from a cultural site. Recovery techniques are relevant to research problems and are designed to produce maximum knowledge about the site's use, its relation to other sites and the natural environment, and its significance in the maintenance of the cultural system. fair market value - The amount in cash, or in terms reasonably equivalent to cash, for which in all probability a coal deposit would be sold or leased by a knowledgeable owner willing but not obligated to sell or lease to a knowledgeable purchaser who desires but is not obligated to buy or lease. fixed carbon - In coal, the solid combustible material remaining after removal of moisture, ash, and volatile matter. It is expressed as a percentage. floodplain - The relatively flat area or lowland adjoining a body of flowing water, such as a river or stream, that is covered with water when the river or stream overflows its banks. forage - Vegetation used for food by wildlife, particularly big game wildlife, and domestic livestock. formation (geologic) - A rock body distinguishable from other rock bodies and useful for mapping or description. Formations may be combined into groups or subdivided into members. fossil - The remains or traces of an organism or assemblage of organisms that have been preserved by natural processes in the earth's crust. Many minerals 7-4 South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

7.0 Glossary that may be of biologic origin are not considered to be fossils (e.g. oil, gas, asphalt, limestone). geometric mean - The nth root of the product of the values of n positive numbers. ground water - Subsurface water that fills available openings in rock or soil materials to the extent that they are considered water saturated. habitat - A place where a plant or animal naturally or normally lives and grows. habituation - The process of becoming accustomed to, or used to, something; acclimation. hazardous materials - Substance which, because of its potential for corrosivity, toxicity, ignitability, chemical reactivity, or explosiveness, may cause injury to persons or damage to property. hazardous waste - Those materials defined in Section 101 (14) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, and listed in 40 CFR § 261. heterogenous - Made up of dissimilar constituents. human environment - The natural and physical environment and the relationship of people with that environment (see 30 CFR 1508.14). hydraulic conductivity - The capacity of a medium to transmit water; permeability coefficient. Expressed as the volume of water at the prevailing temperature that will move in unit time under a unit hydraulic gradient through a unit area. Units include gallons per day per square foot, centimeters per second. hydraulic - Pertaining to fluid in motion, or to movement or action caused by water. hydric soil - A soil that is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions that favor the growth and regeneration of hydrophytic (water-loving) vegetation. Hydric soils that occur in areas having positive indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology are wetland soils. hydrocarbon - Any organic compound, gaseous, liquid, or solid, consisting solely of carbon and hydrogen. hydrogeology - The science that deals with subsurface waters and with related South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS 7-5

7.0 Glossary geologic aspects of surface waters. hydrology - The science dealing with the behavior of water as it occurs in the atmosphere, on the surface of the ground, and underground. hydrophytic vegetation - The plant life growing in water or on a substrate that is at least periodically deficient in oxygen as a result of excessive water content. When hydrophytic vegetation comprises a community where indicators of hydric soils and wetland hydrology also occur, the area has wetland vegetation. impermeable - Not capable of transmitting fluids or gasses in appreciable quantities. incised - Having a margin that is deeply and sharply notched. indirect (or secondary) impact - A reasonably foreseeable impact resulting from an action but occurring later in time than or removed in distance from that action (see 40 CFR 1508.8). in-place coal reserves - The estimated volume of all of the coal reserves in a lease without considering economic or technological factors which might restrict mining. in-situ leach mining - Removal of the valuable components of a mineral deposit through chemical leaching without physical extraction of the rock. interbedded - Layers of one type of rock, typically thin, that are laid between or that alternate with layers of another type of rock. interburden - A layer of sedimentary rock that separates two mineable coal beds. interdisciplinary - Characterized by participation or cooperation among two or more disciplines or fields of study. intermittent stream - A stream that does not flow year-round but has some association with ground water for surface or subsurface flow. laminated - Consolidated or unconsolidated sediment that is characterized by thin (less than 1 cm thick) layers. land and resource management plan (LRMP) - A land use plan that directs the use and allocation of U.S. Forest Service lands and resources. lead agency - The agency or agencies preparing or having taken primary responsibility for preparing an environmental document (see 40 CFR 1508.16). 7-6 South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

7.0 Glossary lease (mineral) - A legal document executed between a mineral owner or lessor and another party or lessee which grants the lessee the right to extract minerals from the tract of land for which the lease has been obtained [see 43 CFR 3400.0-5(r)]. lek - A traditional breeding area for grouse species where territorial males display and establish dominance. lenticular - Term describing a body of rock or earth that thins out in all directions from the center like a double convex optical lens. limb (geologic) - One side of a fold (syncline or anticline). limestone - A sedimentary rock consisting chiefly of calcium carbonate. lineament - A linear topographic feature of regional extent that is believed to reflect crustal structure. loadout facilities - The mine facilities used to load the mined coal for transport out of the mine. loam - A rich, permeable soil composed of a mixture of clay, silt, sand, and organic matter. maintenance tract - A federal coal tract that would continue or extend the life of an existing coal mine. major federal action - An action with effects that may be major and which is potentially subject to federal control and responsibility (see 40 CFR 1508.18). major sources – Those sources that emit more than 10 tons per year of any single hazardous air pollutant, or 25 tons of all hazardous air pollutants combined. The determination of major is based on all sources of hazardous air pollutants at the site, and not just the equipment affected by the MACT standard. maximum economic recovery (MER) - The requirement that, based on standard industry operating practices, all profitable portions of a leased federal coal deposit must be mined. MER determinations will consider existing proven technology; commercially available and economically feasible equipment; coal quality, quantity, and marketability; safety, exploration, operating, processing, and transportation costs; and compliance with applicable laws and regulations [see 43 CFR 3480.0-5(a)(24)]. meteorological - Related to the science dealing with the atmosphere and its phenomena, especially as relating to weather.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

7-7

7.0 Glossary methane - A colorless, odorless, and inflammable gas; the simplest hydrocarbon; chemical formula = CH4. It is the principal constituent of natural gas and is also found associated with crude oil and coal. mineable coal - Coal that can be economically mined using present day mining technology. mineral rights - The rights of one who owns the mineral estate (subsurface). mining permit - A permit to conduct surface coal mining and reclamation operations issued by the state regulatory authority pursuant to a state program or by the Secretary pursuant to a federal program (see 30 CFR 701.5). mitigation - An action to avoid, minimize, reduce, eliminate, replace, or rectify the impact of a management practice. mudstone - A hardened sedimentary rock consisting of clay. It is similar to shale but lacks distinct layers. National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) - A list of districts, sites, buildings, structures and objects significant in American history, architecture, archeology and culture maintained by the Secretary of the Interior. Expanded as authorized by Section 2(b) of the Historic Sites Act of 1935 (16 U.S.C. 462) and Section 101(a)(1) (A) of the National Historic Preservation Act. natural gas - Combustible gases (such as hydrocarbons) or mixtures of combustible gases and non-combustible gases (such as helium) which are in a gaseous phase at atmospheric conditions of temperature and pressure. NEPA process - All measures necessary for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (see 40 CFR 1508.21). no action alternative - An alternative where no activity would occur. The development of a no action alternative is required by regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR 1502.14). The no action alternative provides a baseline for estimating the effects of other alternatives. outcrop - A rock formation that appears at or near the surface; the intersection of a rock formation with the surface. overburden - Material of any nature, consolidated or unconsolidated, that overlies a coal or other useful mineral deposit, excluding topsoil. paleontological resource - A site containing evidence of plant or non-human animal life of past geological periods, usually in the form of fossil remains. peak discharge or flow - The highest discharge of water recorded over a 7-8 South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

7.0 Glossary specified period of time at a given stream location; also called maximum flow. Often thought of in terms of spring snowmelt, summer, fall or winter rainy season flows. perennial species (vegetation) - Vegetation that lives over from season to season. perennial stream - A stream or part of a stream that flows continuously during the calendar year as a result of groundwater discharge or surface runoff. permeability - The ability of rock or soil to transmit a fluid. permit application package - A proposal to conduct surface coal mining and reclamation operations on federal lands, including an application for a permit, permit revision, or permit renewal and all the information required by SMCRA, the applicable state program, any applicable cooperative agreement, and all other applicable laws and regulations including, with respect to federal leased coal, the Mineral Leasing Act and its implementing regulations. permit area - The area of land, indicated on the approved map submitted by the operator with his or her application, required to be covered by the operator’s performance bond under the regulations at 30 CFR Part 800 and which shall include the area of land upon which the operator proposes to conduct surface coal mining and reclamation operations under the permit, including all disturbed areas (see 30 CFR 701.5). physiography - Physical geography. piezometer - A well, generally of small diameter, that is used to measure the elevation of the water table. playa - The sandy, salty, or mud-caked flat floor of a basin with interior drainage, usually occupied by a shallow ephemeral lake during or after rain or snow storms. point source (pollution) - A point at which pollution is added to a system, either instantaneously or continuously. An example is a smokestack. pore volume - the amount of fluid necessary to fill the void space in an unsaturated porus medium (i.e., mine backfill). porosity - The percentage of the bulk volume of rock, sediment or soil that is not occupied by sediment or soil particles; the void space in rock or sediment. It may be isolated or connected. postmining topography - The relief and contour of the land that remains after South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS 7-9

7.0 Glossary mining has been completed. potentiometric surface - The surface that coincides with the static level of water in an aquifer. The surface is represented by the levels to which water from a given aquifer will rise under its full hydrologic head. predator - An animal that obtains food by killing and consuming other animals. prime or unique farmland - Those lands which are defined by the Secretary of Agriculture in 7 CFR part 657 (Federal Register Vol. 4 No. 21) and which have historically been used for cropland (see 30 CFR 701.5). proposed action - In terms of National Environmental Policy Act, the project, activity, or action that a federal agency proposes to implement or undertake and which is the subject of an environmental analysis. qualified surface owner - The natural person or persons (or corporation, the majority stock of which is held by a person or persons otherwise meeting the requirements of this section) who: (1) Hold legal or equitable title to the surface of split estate lands; (2) Have their principal place of residence on the land, or personally conduct farming or ranching operations upon a farm or ranch unit to be affected by surface mining operations; or received directly a significant portion of their income, if any, from such farming and ranching operations; and (3) have met the conditions of (1) and (2) above for a period of at least three years, except for persons who gave written consent less than three years after they met the requirements of both (1) and (2) above [see 43 CFR 3400.0-5(gg)]. raptor - Bird of prey, such as an eagle, falcon, hawk, owl, or vulture. recharge - The processes by which groundwater is absorbed into a zone of saturation. reclamation - Rehabilitation of a disturbed area to make it acceptable for designated uses. This normally involves regrading, replacement of topsoil, revegetation and other work necessary to restore the disturbed area for postmining use. record of decision (ROD) - A document separate from, but associated with, an environmental impact statement that publicly and officially discloses the responsible official's decision on the proposed action (see 40 CFR 1505.2). recoverable coal - The amount of coal that can actually be recovered for sale from the demonstrated coal reserve base. 7-10 South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

7.0 Glossary rental payment - Annual payment from a lessee to a lessor to maintain the lessee’s mineral lease rights. resource management plan (RMP) - A land use plan, as prescribed by FLPMA, that directs the use and allocation of public lands and resources managed by BLM. Prior to selection of the RMP, different alternative management plans are compared and evaluated in an environmental impact statement (EIS) to determine which plan will best direct the management of the public lands and resources. revegetation - The reestablishment and development of self-sustaining plant cover following land disturbance. This may occur through natural processes, or the natural processes may be enhanced by human assistance through seedbed preparation, reseeding, and mulching. right of way (ROW) - The right to pass over property owned by another. The strip of land over which facilities such as roadways, railroads, or power lines are built. riparian - The area adjacent to rivers and streams that lies between the stream channel and upland terrain and that supports specific vegetation influenced by perennial and/or intermittent water. royalty (mineral) - A share of production that is free of the expense of production. It is generally paid by a lessee to a lessor of a mineral lease as part of the terms of the lease. runoff - That portion of rainfall that is not absorbed; it may be used by vegetation, lost by evaporation, or it may find its way into streams as surface flow. salinity - Refers to the solids, such as sodium chloride (table salt) and alkali metals, that are dissolved in water. Often in non saltwater areas, total dissolved solids is used as an equivalent term. sandstone - A common sedimentary rock primarily composed of sand grains, mainly quartz, that are cemented together by other mineral material. scoping - A public informational process required by the National Environmental Policy Act to determine private and public concerns, scope of issues, and/or questions regarding a proposed action to be evaluated in an environmental impact analysis. scoria (clinker) - Baked and fused rock resulting from in-place burning of coal deposits. sedimentation pond - An impoundment used to remove solids from water in South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS 7-11

7.0 Glossary order to meet water quality standards or effluent limitations before the water leaves the permit area (see 30 CFR 701.5). semi-arid - A climate or region characterized by little yearly rainfall and by the growth of a number of short grasses and shrubs. severance tax - A tax on the removal of minerals from the ground. shale - A very fine-grained clastic rock or sediment consisting predominately of clay-sized particles that is laminated; lithified, layered mud. significant impact - A qualitative term used to describe the anticipated importance of impacts to the human environment as a result of an action. siltstone - A fine-grained clastic rock consisting predominately of silt-sized particles. socioeconomics - The social and economic situation that might be affected by a proposed action. soil survey - The systematic examination, description, classification, and mapping of soils in an area, usually a county. Soil surveys are classified according to the level of detail of field examination. Order I is the most detailed and Order V is the least detailed. spontaneous combustion - The heating and slow combustion of coal and coaly material initiated by the absorption of oxygen. stipulations - Requirements that are part of the terms of a mineral lease. Some stipulations are standard on all Federal leases. Other stipulations may be applied to specific leases at the discretion of the surface management agency to protect valuable surface resources or uses existing on those leases. storage coefficient - The volume of water that can be released from storage per unit surface area of a saturated confined aquifer, per unit decline in the component of hydraulic head normal to the surface. It is calculated by taking the product of the specific storage and the aquifer thickness. stratigraphic - Of, relating to, or determined by stratigraphy, which is the branch of geology dealing with the study of the nature, distribution, and relations of layered rocks in the earth's crust. stripping ratio - The unit amount of overburden that must be removed to gain access to a similar unit amount of coal. subirrigation - In alluvial valley floors, the supplying of water to plants from underneath, or from a semi-saturated or saturated subsurface zone where 7-12 South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

7.0 Glossary water is available for use by vegetation (see 30 CFR 701.5). subbituminous - A lower rank of coal (35-45% carbon) with a heating value between that of bituminous and lignite, usually 8,300-11,500 Btu per pound. Subbituminous coal contains a high percentage of volatile matter and moisture. surface disturbance - Any disturbance by mechanical actions which alters the soil surface. surface rights - Rights to the surface of the land, does not include rights to oil, gas, or other subsurface minerals or subsurface rights. suspended solids - The very fine soil particles which remain in suspension in water for a considerable period of time without contact with the stream or river channel bottom. tectonic fracture - Fractures caused by deformation of the earth’s crust. threatened and endangered (T&E) species - These species of plants or animals classified as threatened or endangered pursuant to section 4 of the Endangered Species Act. Any species which is in danger of extinction, or is likely to become so within the foreseeable future. Category 1 - Substantial biological information on file to support the appropriateness of proposing to list as endangered or threatened. Category 2 - Current information indicates that proposing to list as endangered or threatened is possibly appropriate, but substantial biological information is not on file to support an immediate ruling (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). topography - Physical shape of the ground surface; the configuration of land surface including its relief, elevation, and the position of its natural and manmade features. topsoil - The surface layer of a soil. total dissolved solids (TDS) - The total quantity in milligrams per liter of dissolved materials in water. transmissivity - The rate at which water is transmitted through a unit width of an aquifer under a unit hydraulic gradient. Equals the hydraulic conductivity multiplied by the aquifer thickness. Values are given in units of gallons per day per foot. transpiration - The discharge of water vapor by plants. truck & shovel - A mining method used to remove overburden and coal in a South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS 7-13

7.0 Glossary strip mining operation. Truck and shovel operations use large bucketequipped digging and loading machines (shovels) and large dump trucks to remove overburden instead of using a dragline for overburden removal. typic - Typical. unconfined aquifer - An aquifer where the water table is exposed to the atmosphere through openings in the overlying materials. unsuitability criteria - The 20 criteria described in 43 CFR 3461, the application of which results in an assessment of federal coal lands as suitable or unsuitable for surface coal mining. uranium - A very hard, heavy, metallic element that is crucial to development of atomic energy. vegetation type - A kind of existing plant community with distinguishable characteristics described in terms of the present vegetation that dominates an area. vertebrate fossils - The remains of animals that possessed a backbone; examples are fish, amphibians, reptiles, dinosaurs, birds, and mammals. vesicular - Rock containing many small cavities which were formed by the expansion of a bubble of gas or steam during the solidification of the rock. visual resources - The physical features of a landscape which can be seen (e.g., land, water, vegetation, structures, and other features). Visual Resource Management (VRM) - The systematic means to identify visual values, establish objectives which provide the standards for managing those values, and evaluate the visual impacts of proposed projects to ensure that objectives are met. volatile matter - In coal, those substances, other than moisture, that are given off as gas or vapor during combustion. waterfowl - A bird that frequents water, especially a swimming bird. wetlands - Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient, under normal circumstances, to support a prevalence of vegetative or aquatic life that requires saturated or seasonally saturated soil conditions for growth and reproduction. Wetlands include marshes, bogs, sloughs, potholes, river overflows, mud flats, wet meadows, seeps, and springs [see 33 CFR 328.3(a)(7)(b)]. wild and scenic river - Rivers or sections of rivers designated by 7-14 South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

7.0 Glossary Congressional actions under the 1968 Wild and Scenic Rivers Act as wild, scenic, or recreational by an act of the Legislature of the state or states through which they flow. Wild and scenic rivers may be classified and administered under one or more of the following categories: wild river areas - Rivers or sections of rivers that are free of impoundments and generally inaccessible except by trail, with watersheds or shorelines essentially primitive and waters unpolluted. These represent vestiges of primitive America. scenic river areas - Rivers or sections of rivers that are free of impoundments, with watersheds still largely primitive and shorelines largely undeveloped, but accessible in places by roads. recreational river areas - Rivers or sections of rivers that are readily accessible by road or railroad, that may have some development along their shorelines, and that may have undergone some impoundment or diversion in the past. wilderness - An area of undeveloped Federal land designated wilderness by Congress, retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation, protected and managed to preserve its natural conditions and that (1) generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature with the imprint of man's work substantially unnoticeable, (2) has outstanding opportunities for solitude or primitive and unconfined recreation, (3) has at least 5,000 acres or is of sufficient size to make practical its preservation and use in an unimpaired condition, and (4) also may contain features that are of ecological, geological, scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value. These characteristics were identified by Congress in the Wilderness Act of 1964.

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

7-15

8.0 Index 8.0 INDEX

agriculture ......................................... ES-25, ES-34, ES-36, 2-53, 3-40, 341, 3-42, 3-45, 3-47, 4-68, 4-69, 4-95, 4-142, 4-144, 4-149, 4-150, 4-154, G31, H-1, H-26, H-33, I-27, J-30 alluvial valley floor or AVF .................. ES-15, ES-25, ES-30, 2-53, 2-62, 3-1, 3-40, 3-41, 3-42, 4-68, 4-69, 4-70, 491, 4-93, 4-95, 4-96, 4-100, 4-142, B3, B-6, B-9, B-14, B-17 blasting.............................................. ES-17, ES-23, ES-24, ES-29, 1-25, 28, 2-13, 2-22, 2-30, 3-22, 3-28, 3-29, 3-30, 3-31, 4-22, 4-24, 4-25, 4-26, 427, 4-31, 4-32, 4-36, 4-38, 4-43, 4-44, 4-45, 4-48, 4-49, 4-85, 4-93, 4-95, 499, 4-116, 4-127, 4-138, M-17, M-21, M-22, M-23 bonus payment or bonus bid payment ....................................... ES-11, ES-12, ES-13, ES-14, ES-29, ES-30, 1-15, 2-44, 2-45, 2-47, 2-48, 2-49. 2-50, 3-89, 3-90, 4-87, 4-155, M-1 coal bed methane or CBM .................. ES-17, ES-28, ES-31, ES-32, ES-33, ES-34, 1-23, 1-25, 2-1, 2-44, 2-51, 256, 2-60, 2-62, 2-63, 2-64, 2-65, 2-66, 2-67, 3-6, 3-7, 3-8, 3-9, 3-20, 3-22, 328, 3-36, 3-38, 3-39, 3-40, 3-49, 3-56, 3-57, 3-58, 3-67, 3-68, 3-69, 3-70, 371, 3-72, 3-80, 3-81, 3-88, 3-92, 3-93, 3-94, 3-95, 4-6, 4-13, 4-14, 4-15, 416, 4-16, 4-53, 4-56, 4-57, 4-58, 4-63, 4-65, 4-67, 4-82, 4-99, 4-103, 4-106, 4-107, 4-111, 4-112, 4-113, 4-114, 4115, 4-116, 4-117, 4-118, 4-120, 4128, 4-129, 4-130, 4-131, 4-132, 4135, 4-137, 4-139, 4-140, 4-142, 4144, 4-147, 4-148, 4-149, 4-150, 4155, 4-156, 4-158, 4-160, E-4, E-8, E9, E-12, E-13, E-14, E-15, E-28, F-1, F-2, F-3, F-4, F-5, F-6, F-7, F-8, F-9, F-10, F-11, F-12, F-13, F-14, F-15, F16, F-17, F-18, F-19, F-20, F-21, F22, F-23, F-24, F-25, F-26, F-27, F28, F-29, F-30, F-31, F-32, G-18, GSouth Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS 8-1

8.0 Index coal bed methane or CBM (Continued) ....................................... 20, G-31, G-32, G-33, H-11, H-15, H17, H-26, H-27, H-29, I-13, I-15, I-17, I-27, I-28, I-29, J-16, J-18, J-30, J31, J-32, K-8, K-9, K-10, K-11, K-12, K-13, K-14, K-15, L-1, L-2, L-3, L-4, L-6, L-7, L-8, L-9, L-10, M-4, M-9, M10, M-11, M-18, M-19, M-22, M-24, M-25, M-26, M-28, M-29 fair market value ................................ ES-4, 1-4, 1-6, 1-10, 1-14, 1-15, 1-26, 2-2, 2-5, 2-12, 2-17, 2-18, 2-20, 2-25, 2-26, 2-29, 2-33, 2-35, 2-37, 2-41, 242, 2-44, 2-45, 4-82, M-6 fugitive dust ....................................... ES-17, 2-22, 2-31, 2-39, 3-22, 4-22, 4-27, 4-33, 4-39, 4-45, 4-116, E-12, E-14, E-28 grazing ............................................... ES-28, 1-8, 1-10, 1-11, 1-14, 2-56, 346, 3-57, 4-72, 4-82, 4-83, 4-96, 4-97, 4-143, 4-144, 4-145, 4-150, 4-153, 4157, G-18, G-19, H-16, I-16, J-16, J17, K-8, K-10, K-11, K-15 hunting .............................................. ES-28, 2-65, 3-52, 3-73, 3-74, 3-75, 3-76, 4-83, 4-150, 4-151, 4-159, G16, H-14, H-24, H-26, H-28, H-30, I14, J-13, K-7, K-15, M-7 mitigation........................................... ES-25, ES-27, ES-29, ES-30, 1-19, 125, 2-7, 2-12, 2-20, 2-29, 2-37, 2-38, 3-28, 3-51, 4-6, 4-52, 4-70, 4-73, 478, 4-80, 4-81, 4-84, 4-85, 4-92, 4-93, 4-94, 4-95, 4-96, 4-97, 4-98, 4-99, 4109, 4-125, 4-140, 4-142, 4-147, 4148, 4-152, D-2, E-7, E-14, E-15, E28, G-30, G-31, G-33, G-35, I-26, I28, I-29, I-30, J-23, J-24, J-29, J-31, J-32, J-33, M-2, M-3, M-8, M-10, M12, M-13, M-14, M-17, M-22, M-23, M-24, M-27, M-28 MLA mining plan................................ ES-36, 1-16, 1-18, 1-19, 2-7, 2-12, 220, 2-29, 2-38, 2-44, 3-77, 4-84, 4143, 4-149, G-30, H-25, I-25, J-28, J29, M-13, M-15

8-2

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

8.0 Index monitoring plan.................................. 4-9, 4-92, 4-93, 4-94, 4-95, 4-96, 497, 4-98, 4-99, H-10, H-11, H-19, H22, H-29, H-31, M-3, M-8 nitrogen oxide or NO2 ......................... ES-24, 1-25, 2-61, 3-16, 3-18, 3-20, 3-22, 3-28, 3-29, 3-30, 3-31, 4-19, 420, 4-21, 4-22, 4-23, 4-24, 4-25, 4-26, 4-27, 4-28, 4-31, 4-32, 4-36, 4-37, 438, 4-42, 4-43, 4-44, 4-45, 4-48, 4-49, 4-95, 4-99, 4-104, 4-105, 4-114, 4115, 4-117, 4-118, 4-119, 4-120, 4121, 4-122, 4-127, E-5, E-6, E-9, M21, M-22, M-23, M-24 PM10................................................... ES-17, ES-22, ES-23, 2-61, 3-16, 317, 3-18, 3-20, 3-22, 3-23, 3-24, 3-25, 3-27, 3-28, 4-19, 4-20, 4-21, 4-22, 423, 4-24, 4-27, 4-28, 4-32, 4-33, 4-36, 4-37, 4-39, 4-43, 4-44, 4-45, 4-49, 494, 4-95, 4-113, 4-114, 4-115, 4-116, 4-117, 4-118, 4-119, 4-120, 4-121, 4122, 4-125, E-3, E-4, E-5, E-6, E-12, E-16, E-19, E-22, E-25, E-29, M-17, M-18, M-19, M-20, M-21 power plant(s) .................................... ES-32, 1-15, 1-25, 2-45, 2-60, 2-63, 2-64, 2-65, 2-66, 2-67, 3-22, 3-94, 46, 4-105, 4-107, 4-108, 4-109, 4-111, 4-112, 4-113, 4-138, 4-144, 4-155, 4156, 4-158, 4-159, G-31, G-32, H-26, H-27, I-27, I-28, J-30, J-31, M-1, M-2 reclamation bond ............................... ES-26, 2-68, 4-6, 4-72, 4-73, 4-83, 496, 4-144, recreation........................................... ES-15, ES-28, ES-30, 1-8, 1-10, 1-11, 1-14, 1-22, 2-56, 2-65, 3-1, 3-19, 357, 4-1, 4-82, 4-83, 4-84, 4-91, 4-100, 4-144, 4-150, 4-151, 4-153, 4-159, M12 royalty................................................ ES-11, ES-12, ES-13, ES-14, ES-29, 1-4, 1-15, 2-44, 2-45, 2-47, 2-48, 249, 2-50, 3-89, 4-87, 4-97, D-3, M-1 total dissolved solids or TDS............... ES-25, 3-34, 3-35, 3-36, 3-38, 4-52, 4-53, 4-56, 4-60, 4-63, 4-67, 4-139

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

8-3

8.0 Index U.S. Forest Service or USDA-FS ......... ES-4, ES-5, ES-28, ES-30, 1-8, 1-10, 1-11, 1-15, 1-16, 1-18, 1-19, 1-20, 121, 1-22, 1-23, 1-24, 2-32, 2-34, 2-53, 2-57, 2-63, 3-28, 3-43, 3-44, 3-45, 346, 3-57, 3-75, 3-79, 3-80, 3-81, 4-5, 4-32, 4-57, 4-64, 4-70, 4-73, 4-82, 483, 4-85, 4-97, 4-100, 4-108, 4-109, 4-113, 4-121, 4-124, 4-143, 4-150, 4151, 4-155, B-1, B-2, B-3, B-4, B-5, B-6, B-7, B-8, B-9, B-10, B-11, B-12, B-13, B-14, B-15, B-16, B-17, D-5, D6, E-2, E-7, E-10, E-11, E-17, E-20, E-23, E-26, F-1, F-2, F-3, F-4, F-5, F6, F-8, F-9, F-10, F-12, F-13, F-14, F21, F-22, F-23, F-24, F-25, F-27, F28, F-29, F-30, F-31, F-33, F-34, F35, F-36, F-37, F-38, G-1, G-3, G-9, G-11, G-15, G-22, G-25, G-28, G-36, G-38, H-1, H-3, H-8, H-13, H-19, H24, H-31, H-33, I-1, I-3, I-6, I-7, I-8, I10, I-13, I-19, I-24, I-31, J-1, J-7, J-9, J-10, J-11, J-20, J-27, J-34, J-36, K1, K-2, K-3, K-5, K-6, K-7, K-8, K-9, K-10, K-12, K-13, K-14, K-15, K-16, K-16, K-17, K-18, M-1, M-6, M-7, M-8, M-10, M-12, M-16, M-18, M-28 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or EPA................................................ ES-4, ES-33, 1-26, 2-3, 3-16, 3-18, 323, 3-24, 3-28, 3-31, 4-19, 4-21, 4-23, 4-24, 4-25, 4-28, 4-33, 4-39, 4-45, 494, 4-106, 4-113, 4-114, 4-119, 4121, 4-123, 4-124, 4-125, 4-126, E-2, E-3, E-4, E-5, E-6, E-7, E-8, E-9, E10, E-11, E-12, E-13, E-15, E-28, M16, M-17, M-18, M-21, M-22, M-27, M-28 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or USFWS .............................................. ES-27, 1-21, 1-24, 2-55, 3-43, 3-47, 3-52, 3-53, 4-79, 4-80, 4-81, 4-123, 4-124, 4-147, B-2, B-3, B-5, B-6, B-8, B-9, B-12, B-13, B-16, B-17, E-2, E10, E-11, G-9, G-11, G-12, G-15, G16, G-19, G-20, G-21, G-22, G-23, G24, G-27, G-34, G-35, G-36, G-38, G39, H-8, H-10, H-11, H-13, H-14, H8-4 South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

8.0 Index U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or USFWS 16, H-17, H-18, H-19, H-20, H-22, H(Continued) ........................................ 23, H-29, H-30, H-31, H-33, H-34, I-8, I-10, I-11, I-13, I-14, I-16, I-17, I-18, I-19, I-20, I-21, I-23, I-30, I-31, I-33, I-34, J-7, J-9, J-10, J-11, J-13, J-16, J-17, J-18, J-19, J-20, J-21, J-23, J24, J-25, J-26, J-27, J-33, J-34, J-36, J-37, K-12, K-13, K-14, K-15 wetland(s) .......................................... ES-5, ES-25, ES-30, 1-25, 2-53, 2-62, 2-63, 3-1, 3-40, 3-43, 3-44, 3-45, 470, 4-71, 4-73, 4-81, 4-91, 4-93, 4-95, 4-96, 4-100, 4-142, 4-143, 4-148, 4149, G-19, G-20, G-34, H-17, H-29, I18, I-29, I-30, J-17, J-18, J-32, J-33, K-6, K-8, K-10, K-11, M-2, M-3, M-8, M-14, M-27, M-28 Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality or WDEQ................................................ ES-22, ES-23, ES-24, ES-25, ES-26, ES-33, ES-36, 1-8, 1-10, 1-11, 1-14, 1-18, 1-19, 2-3, 2-4, 2-7, 2-9, 2-12, 214, 2-20, 2-29, 2-38, 2-43, 2-53, 2-63, 3-16, 3-18, 3-20, 3-22, 3-23, 3-24, 327, 3-28, 3-29, 3-30, 3-38, 3-40, 3-41, 3-42, 3-45, 3-47, 4-5, 4-7, 4-19, 4-21, 4-22, 4-23, 4-24, 4-26, 4-27, 4-28, 432, 4-33, 4-36, 4-37, 4-38, 4-39, 4-42, 4-43, 4-44, 4-45, 4-49, 4-50, 4-51, 454, 4-58, 4-61, 4-65, 4-68, 4-69, 4-70, 4-71, 4-72, 4-73, 4-75, 4-78, 4-79, 481, 4-95, 4-99, 4-103, 4-104, 4-105, 4-109, 4-110, 4-113, 4-114, 4-115, 4124, 4-125, 4-127, 4-130, 4-131, 4133, 4-136, 4-142, 4-143, 4-150, E-2, E-4, E-8, E-10, E-11, E-28, E-29, G11, G-12, G-23, G-26, G-29, G-30, G32, G-33, G-34, H-10, H-11, H-20, H22, H-25, H-27, H-28, H-29, I-10, I11, I-14, I-20, I-22, I-25, I-26, I-28, I30, J-9, J-10, J-11, J-14, J-21, J-23, J-24, J-25, J-28, J-29, J-31, J-33, J34, K-1, M-8, M-9, M-10, M-11, M-12, M-14, M-17, M-18, M-19, M-20, M-21, M-22, M-23, M-24, M-26, M-27, M-28

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS

8-5

8.0 Index Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality or WDEQ................................................ ES-26, 3-47, 3-49, 3-50, 3-52, 3-73, 3-74, 3-75, 4-74, 4-75, 4-76, 4-77, 478, 4-80, 4-81, 4-83, 4-146, 4-147, 4149, 4-150, 4-151, G-12, G-21, G-34, H-10, H-11, H-18, H-29, I-11, I-19, I30, J-10, J-19, J-33, M-7, M-10, M-14

8-6

South Powder River Basin Coal Final EIS