Page 8 - gillibrand1991eis
P. 8

CONTENTS




          SUMMARY         . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  S- J

           J .0   PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  J-J
                  1. J   Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . .  J-J
                  J .2   Scoping Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  J-2
                  J .3   Summary of Public Scoping Issues and Concerns  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  J -2
                  J .4   Issues and Concerns Discussed in this Environmental
                         Impact Statement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  J-4

          2.0     ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING PROPOSED ACTION AND COMPARISON
                  OF IMPAC'TS  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2-1
                  2.1    Alternative I  - Proposed Action  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2-J
                  2.2    Alternatives Considered in Detail  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2-12
                         2.2.J   Alternative 2 - Conveyor Transport - Claim Group II to
                                Plant Location  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2-13
                         2.2.2   Alternative 3 - Road Section D (Original Road Section B) to
                                Claim Group II  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2-J 3
                         2.2.3   Alternative 4 - No Action Alternative  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2-13
                  2.3    Alternatives Considered but Eliminated From Detailed Study  ............ 2-16
                         2.3.1   Alternative 5 - Move Mill Site to the Mineral Source ............. 2-16
                         2.3.2   Alternative 6 - Reduce the Scope of the Project  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2-J 7
                         2.3.3   Alternative 7 - Conveyor Transport Only  ..................... 2-)8
                         2.3.4   Alternative 8 - Helicopter Transport  ......................... 2-18
                         2.3.5   Alternative 9 - Underground Mining ......................... 2-19
                  2.4    Comparison of Impacts  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2-20

          3.0     AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ...... 3-1
                  3.1    Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3-1
                         3.1.J  Conformity with the Forest Plan  ............................... 3-2
                  3.2    Air Quality (Issue Category # 1)  ................................... 3-2
                         3.2.1   Affected Environment  .................................... 3-3
                         3.2.2  Criteria for Significance of Impact Determination  ................ 3-8
                         3.2.3   Environmental Consequences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3-10
                  3.3    Soils (Issue Category #2) ........................................ 3-16
                         3.3.1   Affected Environment  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3-16
                         3.3.2   Criteria for Significance of Impact Determination  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3-17
                         3.3.3   Environmental Consequences ............................... 3-18
                  3.4    Water Resources (Issue Category #3) ............................... 3-22
                         3.4.1   Affected Environment  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3-22
                         3.4.2   Criteria for Significance of Impact Determination  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3-27
                         3.4.3   Environmental Consequences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3-28
                  3.5    Biological Resources (Issue Category #4) ............................ 3-33
                         3.5.1   Affected Environment  ................................... 3-34
                         3.5.2  Criteria for Significance of Impact Determination  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3-50
                         3.5.3   Environmental Consequences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3-50
                  3.6    Cultural and Paleontological Resources (Issue Category #5) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3-63
                         3.6.1   Affected Environment  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3-63
                         3.6.2  Criteria for Significance of Impact Determination  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3-65
                         3.6.3   Environmental Consequences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3-66



                                                         V
   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13