Lisbon Valley Copper Project EIS

DRIFT .
. ENVlRONMENTAL OOACTSTATEMENT
. ··.LISB·ON:VALLEYCOPPER:PROJEC·t··: . ,..
.' .. n1P'r~Mrl~-,(I':;:··"" ", :.'... , .
•' ..... ,~_ ••~.- ~. . <,',. •
... r'. ·-~'~:!:,-IJQ'r:'f,

. . ~, ~... ' .:' .' ;
,r-: ,MAY 2, 0 19~6 " , "" .

• r', <
. P.repared~by:· . ' •. "'<:'.' :. :~: , . . .

. ' ... Bureau 6f~d Map.agement:·.: ... :.'. .
.' Moab Field· Office
.. '82 EastDogwood·
Moab~Utah 84532
MayJ996 ...
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
LISBON VALLEY COPPER PROJECT
u.s. DEPARTMENT OF THe INTERIOR

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGBMENT
MOAB DISTRICT OFFICE
UTAH
May 1996
~
UTAH STATE 0iRE0R
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
United States Department of the Interior AIWlI::~
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
IN REPLYREF£R TO:
Moab District Office
82 East Dogwood Avenue
Moab, Utah 84532
1790
UTU-72499
MAY 1 6 1996 (U-060)
Dear Reader:
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has prepared this Draft Environmental Impact
Statement (DEIS) for your review and comment. The DEIS has been prepared to analyze
impacts from a proposed copper mining and recovery operation in Lisbon Valley, Utah. The
project proponent is Summo USA Corporation. The DEIS has been prepared under third party
contract by Woodward-Clyde Consultants. Under this arrangement the project proponent pays
all costs associated with the EIS effort, and Woodward-Clyde Consultants prepares the EIS
under the supervision of and to standards identified by BLM.
The DEIS analyzes impacts, and identifies alternatives and mitigative measures. You are
invited to review this DEIS and provide comments. The comment period will be 45 days and
all comments must be postmarked by July 8, 1996 in order to be considered. Comments
received will be analyzed and appropriate changes identified in a Final EIS. Written
Gomments will be printed in the FEIS, along with BLM's response.
A public meeting will be held in Moab, Utah on June 12, 1996, at 7:00 PM, in the Moab
District Office conference room.at the above listed address. Please address written
comments to:
Kate Kitchell, Moab District Manager

82 East Dogwood Avenue
Moab, Utah 84532
Additional copies of this document may be obtained by calling (801) 259-6111. If you have
any questions about the draft, please feel free to contact Lynn Jackson, BLM Project
Coordinator, at the same phone number.
We appreciate your interest in public land management and look forward to hearing from you.
Moab District Manager

COVER SHEET
Lisbon Valley Copper Project

Environmental Impact Statement
(X) Draft () Final
Lead Agency Based on issues and concerns identified

during the scoping process, the EIS
u.s. Department of the Interior, focuses on impacts to Water Resources,
Bureau of Land Management Geochemisty, Soils and Reclamation,
Wildlife, and Socioeconomics.
Jurisdictions in Utah that could be
Affected EIS Contact
Grand County Comments on this EIS should be directed

San Juan County to:
Abstract Kate Kitchell, Moab District Manager

Bureau of Land Management
This EIS assesses the environmental 82 East Dogwood Avenue
consequences of Federal approval of the Moab, Utah 84532
Plan of Operations for an open pit copper
mine and heap leach operation in Lower Date by which Comments on the EIS
Lisbon Valley, in southeastern Utah. This must be Received
EIS addresses the site-specific and
cumulative impacts of the Proposed Action July 8, 1996
and four alternatives, including the No
Action alternative. Date EIS made Available to EPA and
the Public
Cumulative impacts are those impacts that
would occur as a result of the Proposed May 24, 1996
Action, plus other interrelated projects
planned for development in the project area
during the analysis period.
239961R3.CS SllS1!16(1:41 PM)lRPT/4

INSTRUCTIONS TO THE READER
ENV.m.ONMENTAL ANALYSIS PROCESS
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires that an environmental analysis be conducted for
projects of this type. In this case, it bas been determined that the approval of the Lisbon Valley project does
constitute a major federal action that could significantly affect the quality of the human environment. Because
of this, an Environmental Impact Statement (ElS), rather than an Environmental Assessment, bas been
prepared to document baseline and impact conditions.
The figure below illustrates in summary fashion the environmental analysis process that the Bureau of Land
Management (ELM) will follow for this project. The figure also shows the sections of the ElS where various
phases of the NEPA process are addressed. As the diagram shows, the affected environment is documented,
impacts are assessed, and the Draft ElS (nElS) and Final ElS (FElS) are prepared. Alternatives development
(described in Section 2.0) has also proceeded with much coordination among Summo, the BLM, and the tbird-
party ElS contractor.
This document is the DElS and will be followed by a FEIS which addresses comments on the DEIS. A Record
of Decision (ROD) will follow no sooner than 30 days after release of the FEIS.
o SECtION OF "!HIS as DOCUMENT WHERE "!HIS IIEW IS ADORESSal.

MAJOR PHASES OF THE EIS PROCESS
239961R3.1 5/15196(1:50 PM)/RPT/3

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
DEAR READER LETTER

INSTRUCTIONS TO THE READER
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................ xiv
EXECUTIVE SlJl\.1J.v.1:AR.Y " ........................................................................................... ES-1
1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1-1
1.1 PlJRPOSE.AND NEED .............................................................................. 1-4

1.2 AUTIIORIZING ACTIONS ....................................................................... 1-4
1.3 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT .AND SCOPING ISSUES ................................ 1-9
1.3.1 Alternatives Analyzed in Detail ........................................................ 1-9

1.3.2 Alternatives Considered and Eliminated ......................................... 1-10
1.3.3 Issues and Concerns Analyzed ....................................................... 1-12
1.3.4 Issues Considered but Not Analyzed .............................................. 1-15
2.0 ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION ............................... 2-1
2.1 OVERVIEW ............................................................................................... 2-1

2.2 PROPOSED ACTION ................................................................................ 2-1
2.2.1 General ............................................................ ,................................ 2-1

2.2.2 J\1ining Activities .............................................................................. 2-2
2.2.3 Crushing Activities ........................................................................... 2-7
2.2.4 Processing Activities ....................................................................... 2-10
2.2.5 Support Facilities ........................................................................... 2-24
2.2.6 Water Supply ................................................................................. 2-28
2.2.7 WorkForce ........................ ~ .......................................................... 2-29
2.2.8 Electrical Power............................................................................. 2-29
2.2.9 Waste Management...................................... :................................. 2-34
2.2.10 Transportation ............................................................................... 2-35
2.2.11 Air Emission Controls .................................................................... 2-36
2.2.12 Reclamation/Closure ...................................................................... 2-37
2.3 ALTERN"ATIVES ..................................................................................... 2-41
2.3.1 No Action Alternative .................................................................... 2-41

239961R3.TC 5116196(1:55 PM)lR.PTI3 -i-
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
2.3.2 Open Pit Backfilling Alternative ..................................................... 2-41

2.3 .3 Facility Layout Alternative (BLM Preferred Alternative) ................ 2-42 .
2.3.4 Waste Rock Selective Handling Alternative...: ................................ 2-43
2.4 FEATURES COMMON TO ALL ALTERNATIVES ............................... 2-44

2.5 SUMMARY OF ENVIRON1v.1ENTAL IMPACTS FROM
EACH ALTERNATIVE ANALyZED ...................................................... 2-45
2.6 AGENCY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE ............................................... 2-45
3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONIv.I:ENT .............................................................................. 3-1
3.1 GEOLOGY AND GEOTECHNICAL ISSUES .......................................... 3-1
3.1.1 Study Area. ...................................................................................... 3-1

3.1.2 Geologic Setting .............................................................................. 3-1
3.1.3 Geologic Resources ........................................................................ .3-2
3.1.4 Geotechnical Considerations ........................................................... .3-7
3.1.5 Potential for Additional Copper Development ................................ 3-12
3.2 ,HYDROLOGY ......................................................................................... 3-14
3.2.1 Study Area. .................................................................................... 3-14

3.2.2 Surface Water Resources ............................................... :............... 3-14
3.2.3 Groundwater Resources ................................................................. 3-18
3.3 GEOCIIEl.\.1IS'fR.Y ................................................................................... 3-31
3.3.1 Study Area..................................................................................... 3-31

3.3.2 Static Test Analyses ....................................................................... 3-32
3.3.3 EPAMethod 1312 - Synthetic Precipitation Leach Test.. ............... 3-33
3.4 SOILS AND RECLAMATION................................................................. 3-34
3.4.1 Study Area..................................................................................... 3-34

3.4.2 Soils Resources.............................................................................. 3-34
3.5 VEGETATION ......................................................................................... 3-40
3.5.1 Study Area. .................................................................................... 3-43

~'IC SIl6l96(1:S1 PM)lRPTI3 -ii-
I~
Section
3.5.2 Special Status Species .................................................................... 3-45
3.6 WILDLIFE ............................................................................................... 3-45
3.6.1 Study Area..................................................................................... 3-46

3.6.2 Special Status Species·................................................................... .3-46
3.7 GRAZIN"G ......................................................................................·.......... 3-48
3.7.1 Study Area..................................................................................... 3-48
3.8 SOCIOECONOMICS ............................................................................... 3~52
3.8.1 Study Area..................................................................................... 3-52

3.8.2 Economic Conditions ..................................................................... 3-53
3.8.3 Population ..................................................................................... 3-56
3.8.4 Housing ......................................................................................... 3-57
3.8.5 Facilities and Services .................................................................... 3-58
3.8.6 Social Conditions and Quality ofLife ............................................. 3-60
3.9 'TR.ANSPORTATION ............................................................................... 3-61
3.9.1 Study Area..................................................................................... 3-61

3.9.2 Highways and Local Roads in the Study Area ................................ 3-61
3.10 HAZARDOUS MATERIAl..S ................................................................... 3-65
3.10.1 Records Review and Agencies Contacted ..................... :................ .3-65

3.10.2 Historic Mining Operations and Oil and Gas
Development in Lisbon Valley........................................................ 3-66
3.11 CULTURAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES ....................... 3-66
3.11.1 Study Area..................................................................................... 3-66

3.11.2 Cultural Resources ......................................................................... 3-69
3.11.3 Paleontological Resources.............................................................. 3-73
239961R3.TC S116196{1:S1 PM)lRPTI3 -lI1-

Section Page
3.12 VISUALRESOURCES ............................................................................ 3-73
3.12.1 Study Area.......................... :.......................................................... 3-73
3.13 LAND USE............................................................................................... 3-77
3.13.1 Study Area .................................................................................... 3-77

3.13.2 Land Use Resources ...................................................................... 3-77
3.14 CLIMATE AND AIR QUALITy .............................................................. 3-79
3.14.1 Study Area .................................................................................... 3-79

3.14.2 Climate .......................................................................................... 3-79
3.14.3 Air Quality ..................................................................................... 3-81
3.15 NOISE ...................................................................................................... 3-84
3.15.1 Study Area .................................................................................... 3-84
3.16 RECREATIONAL RESOURCES ............................................................. 3-84
3.16.1 Study Area..................................................................................... 3-84

3.16.2 Recreational Resources .................................................................. 3-84
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES .............................................................. 4-1
4.1 GEOLOGY AND GEOTECHNICAL ISSUES ......................................... .4-1
4.1.1 Methodology ................................................................................... 4-1

4.1.2 Proposed Action .................'............................................................. 4-1
4.1.3 No Action Alternative ..................................................................... .4-3
4.1.4 Open Pit Backfilling Alternative ....................................................... 4-4
4.1.5 Facility Layout Alternative ............................................................... 4-4
4.1.6 Waste Rock Selective Handling Alternative...................................... 4-4
4.2 IIYDROLOGY .......................................................................................... 4-5
4.2.1 Methodology ............. :..................................................................... 4-5

4.2.2 Proposed Action .............................................................................. 4-6
-lV-
/~
Section Page

4.2.4 Open Pit Backfilling Alternative .................................................... .4-24
4.2.5 Facility Layout Alternative ............................................................. 4-25
4.2.6 Waste Rock Selective Handling Alternative ................................... .4-25
4.3 GEOCIffil\fiSTR.Y ................................................................................... 4-26
4.3.1 Methodology ................................................................................. 4-26

4.3.2 Proposed Action ............................................................................ 4-26
4.3.5 Fa~ty Layout Alternative .............................................................. 4-28
4.4 SOILS AND RECLAMATION ................................................................. 4-29
4.4.1 Methodology ...............: ................................................................. 4-29

4.4.2 Proposed Action ............................................................................ 4-30
4.4.4 Open Pit Backfilling Alternative ..................................................... 4-3 5
4.4.6 Waste Rock Selective Handling Alternative.................................... 4-35
4.5 "VEGETATION ......................................................................................... 4-36
4.5.1 Methodology ................................................................................. 4-36

4.5.2 Proposed Action ............................................................................ 4-36
4.6 'WII.,DLIFE ............................................................................................... 4-41
4.6.1 Methodology ................................................................................. 4-41

4.6.2 Proposed Action ................................................ , ........................... 4-41
4.6.4 Open Pit Backfilling Alternative ......... :........................................... 4-45
239961R3.TC SlI6l95(1:51 PM)IRPT/3 -v-

Section

4.7 GRAZIN"G ................................................................................................ 4-46
4.7.1 Methodology ................................................................................. 4-46

4.7.2 Proposed Action ............................................................................ 4-46
4.7.3 No Action Alternative ..................................................................... 4-49
4.8 SOCIOECONOMICS ............................................................................... 4-51
4.8.1 Methodology ................................................................................. 4-51

4.8.2 Proposed Action ............................................................................ 4-51
4.9 lRANSPORTATION ............................................................................... 4-59
4.9.1 Methodology ................................................................................. 4-59

4.9.2 Proposed Action ............................................................................ 4-60
4.10 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ................................................................... 4-64
4.10.1 Methodology ...........~ ..................................................................... 4-64

4.10.2 Proposed Action ............................................................................ 4-67
4.10.5 Facility Layout Alternative ............................................................ .4-71
4.10.6 Waste Rock Selective' Handling Alternative.................................... 4-71
~.lC Sll6f96(1:S1 PM)lRPTI3 -Vl-
1'/
Section Page
4.11 CULTURAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES ...................... .4-71
4.11.1 Methodology ................................................................................. 4-71

4.11.2 Proposed Action ............................................................................ 4-72
4. I I 3 No Action Alternative .................................................................... 4-75
4. I 1.4 Open Pit Backfilling Alternative ..................................................... 4-75
4.12 VISUALRESOURCES ............................................................................ 4-76
4.12.1 Methodology ................................................................................. 4-76

4.12.2 Proposed Action ............................................................................ 4-76
4.123 No Action Alternative .................................................................... 4-77
4.12.4 Open Pit Backfilling Alternative .................................................... .4-77.
4.13 LAND USE............................................................................................... 4-78
4.13.1 Methodology ........................................... :..................................... 4-78

4.13.2 Proposed Action ............................................................................ 4-78
4.13.4- Open Pit Backfilling Alternative .................. , ................................. .4-79
4.13.6 Waste Rock Selective Handling Alternative .................................... 4-79
4.14 AIR. QUALITy ......................................................................................... 4-79
4.14.1 Methodology ................................................................................. 4-79

4.12.2 Proposed Action ............................................................................ 4-79
4.14. 6 Waste Rock Selective Handling Alternative ................................... .4-83
239961R3.TC SlI6I96(I:51 PM)lRPTI3 -Vll-
/
)'J
Section
4.15 NOISE ........... ~ .......................................................................................... 4-83
4.15.1 Methodology ................................................................................. 4-83

4.15.2 Proposed Action ............................................................................ 4-83
4.16 RECREATIONAL RESOURCES ............................................................. 4-84
4.16.1 Methodology ................................................................................. 4-84

4.16.2 Proposed Action ............................................................................ 4-85
4.16.3 No Action Alternative .............................. :..................................... 4-86
4.17 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ..................................................................... .4-86

4.18 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS ................................................. 4-90
4.19 SHORT-TERM USES VS. LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY .................. 4-91
4.20 IRREVERSmLE OR IRRETRIEVABLE RESOURCE
COJ\.1Iv.1I1'MENTS ..................................................................................... 4-93
5.0 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION.......................................................... 5-1
5.1 AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED ............................... 5-1
5.1.1 Federal Agencies .............................................................................. 5-1

5.1.2 State Agencies ................................................................................. 5-1
5.1.3 Local Agencies ................................................................................ 5-1
5.2 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ........................................................................ 5-1

5.3 PUBLIC COl\1l\.1ENTORS .......................................................................... 5-1
6.0 LIST OF PREPARERS ........................................................................................... 6-1
7.0 GLOSSARy .................................... :....................... :.............................................. 7-1
23996Ilt3:rc SIl6M(I:S1 PM)'RPT13 -viii-

Section
8.0 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................... 8-1
9.0 rnDEX ................................................................................................................... 9-1
239901R3.TC 5116195(1:51 PM)lRPTI3 -ix-
{l
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A UNPATEN1ED MINING CLAIMS

APPENDIXB STATIC TEST RESULTS
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1-1 LISBON VALLEY COPPER PROJECT PERMITS/

NOUFICATIONS/APPROVALS ........................................................ 1-6
TABLE 2-1 PROPOSED DISTURBANCE BY FACILITY AND
SURFACE LAND OWNERSHlP ........................................................ 2-4
TABLE 2-2 W AS1E ROCK D1Jl\1PS ..................................................................... 2-8
TABLE 2-3 MAJOR}v:IINE EQUIP:rv.rE.NT ............................................................. 2-9
TABLE 2-4 POND DESIGN CRITERIA .............................................................. 2-19
TABLE 2-5 CHEMICAL STORAGE AND USE ESTIMA1ES ............................ 2-26
TABLE 2-6 ESTIMA1ED PROJECT WA1ER USE BY YEAR........................... 2-31
TABLE 2-7 ESTIMATED TOTAL OPERATIONS WORK
FORCE (EMPLOYEES) .................................................................... 2-32
TABLE 2-8 ESTIMATED WORK FORCE BY SHIFT (pOSITIONS) ................. 2-32
TABLE 2-9 ESTIMA1ED DAILY VEHICLE TRIPS .......................................... 2-36
TABLE 2-10 PRELIMINARY SEED MIXTURE ................................................... 2-38
TABLE 2-11 IJ.\.1PACT St.JJ\11vfARY ....................................................................... 2-46
TABLE 3.2-1 SUMMARY OF SURFACE WATER ANALYTICAL RESULTS ..... 3-19
TABLE 3.2-2 SUMMARY OF WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS FOR
MONITORIN'G WELLS .................................................................... 3-21
TABLE 3.2-3 SUMMARY OF GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTS ....... 3~26
TABLE 3.4-1 PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS
FOR SOILS ....................................................................................... 3-36
TABLE 3.4-2 SOIL MATERIAL SUITABILITY CRITERIA FOR
SALVAGE AND REDISTRIBUTION AS COVERSOIL .................. 3-41
TABLE 3.7-1 LOWER LISBON GRAZING ALLOTMENTS ................................. 3-48
TABLE 3.7-2 LISBON GRAZING ALLOTMENTS ................................................ 3-48
TABLE 3.7-3 LOWER LISBON GRAZING ALLOTMENT ROTATION............... 3-51
TABLE 3.7-4 PROPOSED DISTURBANCE AND SURFACE LAND
OWNERSHIP, LOWER LISBON ALLOTMENT-
PASTURE NO. 1 AREA ................................................................... 3-51
TABLE 3.7-5 PROPOSED DISTURBANCE AND SURFACE LAND
OWNERSHIP, LISBON ALLOTMENT ............................................ 3-52
23996/RJ.TC Sfl6196(l:SJ PM)'RPJ'13 -x-
If
TABLE 3.9-1 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC .......................................................... 3-62

TABLE 3.9-2 ACCIDENT IDSTORY - IDGHWAYS ............................................. 3-63
TABLE 3.10-1 GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND DATA SOURCES
CONSULTED REGARDING POTENTIAL HAzARDOUS
WASTE SITES .................................................................................. 3-67
TABLE 3.11-1 POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT CULTURAL
RESOURCES IN THE STUDY AREA ............................................. 3-71
TABLE 3.13-1 LAND AUTHORIZATION AND DESIGNATIONS
WITInN LANDS ENCOMPASSED BY THE PROPOSED
PROJECT BOUNDARY ................................................................... 3-78
TABLE 3.14-1 MONTHLY TEMPERATURE MEANS ............................................ 3-80
TABLE 3.14-2 MONTHLY PRECIPITATION AND SNOWFALL .......................... 3-82
TABLE 4.5-1 DIRECT IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION BY
FACILITY AND VEGETATIVE COMMUNITY TypE................... 4-38
TABLE 4.5-2 DIRECT IMPACT OF THE FACILITY LAYOUT
ALTERNATIVE BY FACILITY AND VEGETATIVE
COMMUNITY TYPE ....................................................................... 4-42
TABLE 4.7-1 ACREAGE REQUIREMENTS FOR ONE ADM BY
ECOLOGICAL SITE......................................................................... 4-47
TABLE 4-7.2 TEMPORARY GRAZING LOSS .. :................................................... 4-48
TABLE 4-7.3 PERMANENT GRAZING LOSS ..................................................... .4-50
TABLE 4.14-1 MAXIMlJM PM10 IMPACTS ...................................................... ;..... 4-82
TABLE 4.14-2 PROPOSED AIR POLLUTANT CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY AND ASSUMED EFFICIENCY ........................... .4-82
2399G1R3.TC 5116196(1:51 PM)lRPTI3 -xi-

LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1-1 LOCATION MAP, LISBON VALLEY AREA .................................... 1-2

FIGURE 1-2 PROJECT BOUNDARIES AND SURFACE OWNERSHIP ............... 1-3
FIGURE 2-1 LOCATION OF MINE FACILITIES AND AREA OF
SURFACE CON'TROL ..................................................... :.................. 2-3
FIGURE 2-2 PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM AREA 02 AND 03 CRUSIDNG
AND SCREENIN'G ........................................................................... 2-11
FIGURE 2-3 PL.ANT SI1E PLAN.......................................................................... 2-13
FIGURE 2-4 LEACH PAD DETAILS .................................................................... 2-14
FIGURE 2-5 LINERDET~S .............................................................................. 2-15
FIGURE 2-6 PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM AREA 03 HEAP LEACHING ........... 2-16
FIGURE 2-7 PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM AREA 04 SOLVENT
EX1'RACTION.................................................................................. 2-21
FIGURE 2-8 PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM AREA 05 ELECTROWINNING ....... 2-23
FIGURE 2-9 PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM AREA 05 CATHODE
HANDLING ...................................................................................... 2-25
FIGURE 2-10 SIMPLIFIED WATER BALANCE.................................................... 2-30
FIGURE 2-11 ELECTRICAL POWERLINE CORRIDOR MAP .............................. 2-33
FIGURE 3.1-1 GEOLOGICAL MAP FOR THE LISBON VALLEY ......................... .3-3
FIGURE 3.1-2 STRATIGRAPIDC SECTION............................................................. 3-5
FIGURE 3.1-3 CROSS SECTION A-A', CENTENNIAL PIT AREA ........................ .3-6
FIGURE 3.1-4 CROSS SECTION B-B', CENTENNIAL PIT AREA ......................... .3-8
FIGURE :3.1-5 CROSS SECTION C-C', SENTINEL #2 PIT AREA .......................... .3-9
FIGURE 3.1-6 CROSS SECTIOND-D', SENTINEL #1 PIT AREA ......................... 3-10
FIGURE 3.1-7 CROSS SECTION E-E', GTO PIT AREA ........................................ .3-11
FIGURE 3.2-1 MONITORING WELL, BORING, AND SURFACE
WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS ................................................. .3-15
FIGURE 3.2-2 SURFACE WATER FEATURES ...................................................... 3-16
FIGURE 3.2-3 GROUNDWATER STIFF DIAGRAMS ............................................ 3-27
FIGURE 3.4-1 SOILS MAP ...................................................................................... 3-35
FIGURE 3.5-1 VEGETATION MAP ........................................................................ 3-42
FIGURE 3.5-2 EXfSTING CONDmONS IN LISBON CANYON (PHOTO) .......... 3-44
FIGURE 3.7-1 LOWER LISBON VALLEY GRAZING ALLOTMENTS ................. 3-49
FIGURE 3.8-1 UNEMPLOYMENT RATE (%) ........................................................ 3-54
FIGURE 3.8-2 INDUSTRY TRENDS IN GRAND COUNTY: 1978-1994 .............. 3-55
FIGURE 3.8-3 .INDUSTRY TRENDS IN SAN JUAN COUNTY: 1990-1994.......... 3-55
FIGURE 3.8-4 AVERAGE ANNUAL WAGES ($) .................................................. .3-56
23m1l3.TC StI06(l:S1 PM)lR.PTI3 -xii-

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Concluded)
FIGURE 3.8-5 POPULATION TRENDS IN SAN WAN AND GRAND

COUNTIES: 1980-1994 ................................................................... 3-56
FIGURE 3.11-1 CULTURAL RESOURCES STIJDY AREA ................... :................. 3-68
FIGURE 3.12-1 WOODS RANCH HEAP LEACH AREA (PHOTO) ......................... 3-74
FIGURE 3.12-2 TYPICAL LISBON VALLEY SCENE (PHOTO) ............................. 3-74
FIGURE 3.12-3 HISTORIC REMAINS OF THE GTO PIT (PHOTO) ........................ 3-75
FIGURE 3.12-4 LISBON SPRING AREA (PHOTO) ................................................. 3-75
FIGURE 3.14-1 WIND FREQUENCY DISTRJBUTION ............................................ 3-83
FIGURE 4.2-1 PREDIC1ED GROUNDWA1ER DRAWDOWN, YEAR II ............... .4-7
FIGURE 4.2-2 PREDIC1ED POST-MINING STEADY-STATE
GROUNDWATERDRAWDOWN ..................................................... .4-8
FIGURE 4.2-3 PANORAMIC VIEW OF MOUTH OF LISBON CANYON
(PHOTO) ...............................................................................,: ........... 4-11
FIGURE 4.2-4 HEAD AND SURFACE ELEVATIONS AT EACH PIT
OVER TThffi .....................................................................................4-15
FIGURE 4.2-5 EXISTING EROSION IN LISBON VALLEY (PHOTO) .................. 4-17
FIGURE 4.2-6 GTO PIT AREA (PHOTO) ................................................................ 4-19
FIGURE 4.8-1 PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT ......................................................... 4-53
FIGURE 4.14-1 24-HOUR MAXIMUM PMlO IMPACTS ........................................... 4-81
FIGURE 4.17-1 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS STUDY AREA ...................................... 4-87
23996JR3.TC 5116196(1:51 PM)IRPl'I3 -Xlll-

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
ACEC Area of Critical Envirorunental Concern

ac-ftIyr acre-feet per year
AGP acid generation potential
AIRFA A.rJ:lerican Indian Religious Freedom Act
ANFO ammonium nitrate and fuel oil
ANP acid neutralization potential
ARD acid rock drainage
ARPA Archaeological Resources Protection Act
ATV all terrain vehicle
AUM animal unit months
bgs below ground surface
BLM U.S. Bureau of Land Management
cfs cubic feet per second
CQAlQC construction quality assurance/quality control
DAQ Utah Division of Air Quality
DElS Draft Envirorunental Impact Statement
DRIFONSl Decision Record and Finding of No Significant Impact
ElS Environmental Impact Statement
EPA U.S. Envirorunental Protection Agency
ESA Federal Endangered Species Act
PElS Final Envirorunental Impact Statement
FLPMA Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976
gil grams per liter
gpm gallons per minute
gprnlfe gallons per minute per square foot
GR grassland/rangeland
HDPE high density polyethylene
IFs isolated finds
km kilometers
LME London Metal Exchange
mgll milligrams per liter
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
MSHA U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration
msl mean sea level
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Stan~ds
NAGPRA Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
239961R3.TC 5/16196(1:51 PM)/RPT13 -xiv-

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act
NNP net neutralization potential
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Nor Notice of Intent
NPDES National Pollution Discharg~ Elimination System
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
pCiIl picoCuries per liter
PJ pinyon-juniper
PLS pregnant leach solution
POO Plan of Operations
PSD Prevention of Significant Deterioration (air qUality)
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Act
RO. reverse osmosis
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RMP Resource Management Plan
ROD Record of Decision
ROM run-of-mine
SB sagebrush
SCS U.S. Soil Conservation Service
SPCC Spill Prevention, Control, and Countenneasures
Summo Summo USA Corporation
SXlEW Solvent ExtractionlElectrowinning
IDS total dissolved solids
TSS total suspended solids
UDOGM Utah Division of Oil, Gas & Mining
UDWR Utah Division of Wildlife Resources
UNHP Utah Natural Heritage Program
USDA U.S. Department of AgricUlture
USFWS U.S. Fish and WIldlife Service
VRM Visual Resources Managemeirt
yr year
-xv-
EXECUTIVE SUM:MARY
lNTRODUCTION This summary of the DEIS contains a

description of the Proposed Action and
This Summary of the Draft Environmental alternatives to the Proposed Action;
Impact Statement (DEIS), prepared by the identifies the BLM's preferred alternative;
U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of summarizes existing environmental
. Land Management (BLM), Moab, Utah, conditions, analyzes various issues, and
District Office, describes the evaluation of discloses the major impacts of the
a proposal by Summo USA Corporation proposed project and the various
(Summo) to develop the Lisbon Valley alternatives upon the environment.
Copper Project in San Juan County, Utah.
The EIS is prepared under requirements of PROPOSED ACTION AND
the National Environmental Policy Act ALTERNATIVES
(NEPA).
Project Description (proposed Action)
The BLM is the lead agency responsible
for preparation of the EIS, and for issuing On August 8; 1995, Summo submitted a
a final decision regarding the mine pennit proposed Plan of Operations to the BLM,
application presented by Summo in the Moab District, to develop a copper mine in
form of a proposed Plan of Operations Lower Lisbon Valley, Utah. The proposal
(POO). For purposes of impact evaluation, includes: development of four open pits to
technical expertise was provided by access copper ore; four waste rock
independent third-party consultants disposal areas, crushing facilities; a 266
selected by, and working under the acre leach pad to process the ore; a
direction of: the BLM. processing plant and ponds; construction
of a powerline; and associated support
Tlie BL~ will seek public and agency facilities. The total disturbance area would
comments on the proposed project during be 1,030 acres; the project would be
the public comment period (May 24, 1996 located on a combination ofFederaI, State,
through July 8, 1996). Additionally, a and private (fee) lands.
public meeting will be held in Moab, Utah,
on June 12, 1996, to receive comments. Reclamation plans include both concurrent
Comments and issues brought forth during and post-mining activities to mitigate
the review of the DEIS will be addressed in potential adverse effects on the
the Final EIS. The BLM will consider the environment, nnnmuze public safety
Proposed Action and alternatives presented hazards, and return the site to the existing
in the FEIS and issue a decision on the land uses that are currently emphasized:
POO for the Lisbon Valley Project. The wildlife habitat, livestock grazing, and
final decision and rationale will be mineral development.
presented in a document known as the
Record of Decision (ROD). Final reclamation activities would include
the removal of all equipment and facilities,
239961R3.ES S1l6l96(1:53 PM)lRPT/4 ES-l
and revegetation of the facility areas. The Development of Alternatives
waste rock piles and the leach pad would
be graded, contoured, coversoil applied The issues identified through agency
and the areas revegetated with an approved review and public scoping efforts were
grass, forb, and shrub mix. Post-closure used to formulate reasonable alternative
monitoring by the proponent would be actions pertaining to the proposed mine
required to ensure successful reclamation development. These alternatives were
and compliance with permit standards. evaluated based on engineering,
environmental, and economic factors. The
Issues engineering evaluation included technical
implementability and effectiveness; while
Areas of concern were identified through the environmental evaluation considered
public scoping and agency project review. potential impacts on air, water, and soil,
Public scoping meetings were held in Moab with consideration of subsequent impacts
and Monticello, Utah on November 1 and to cultural resources, vegetation, wildlife,
2, 1995, to solicit public comment. Based and the human environment. Cost was
on scoping and agency review the primary only considered as a factor in "the
issues were identified that reflect concerns elimination of an alternative where it would
or conflicts that could be partially or totally likely result in an uneconomic mine project,
resolved through the EIS process. These thus equating to the No Action Alternative.
issues are:
Summary Description of Alternatives
• Surface and groundwater quality
• Geochemistry and acid rock No Action Alternative
drainage
• Adequacy of reclamation plans This alternative evaluates the possibility
• Vegetation and wildlife, especially that the Proposed Action of mining and
thr~ened and endangered species heap leaching might involve "undue and
• Socioeconomics unnecessary environmental degradation"
• Cultural resources under BLM regulatory requirements at 43
• Air quality CPR 3809. Summo would not receive
• Visual resources approval to develop the Lisbon Valley
Project, copper mining and heap leaching
These issues are by no means the complete activities would not occur, and ore
list of environmental concerns identified reserves in the area would remain
during NEPA project review and public undeveloped. Existing environmental
scoping. However, they do represent the conditions would remain unchanged,
issues that raised the most comments or including 85 acres of historic mining
concerns, were considered in the disturbance.
development of alternatives and, as well,
provided direction for the impact analysis. Open Pit Backfilling Alternative
This alternative is the same as the

Proposed Action except that the pits would
ES-2
either be partially or completely backfilled Waste Rock Selective Handling Alternative
with material from the waste rock dumps.
Under the partial backfilling scenario, the This alternative would be the same as the
pits would be backfilled to a depth Proposed Action, except that potentially
sufficient to eliminate the projected pool of acid generating waste material would be
water in the pits. This backfilling would selectively placed within the dumps.
also reduce the height and areal extent of Approximately ten percent of the waste
the dumps, and visual resources impacts. material has the potential to generate acid,
while the remainder of the waste rock is
Under the complete backfilling scenario, either non-acid generating or has the ability
the pits would be completely backfilled, to neutralize acid. Under this alternative,
which would return the pits to the potentially acid-generating material would
approximate original contour that existed be selectively placed in the central part of
before any mining activities occurred in the the waste dumps and away from the top or
area. Complete backfilling would not sides of the dump to inhibit contact with
eliminate the disturbance created by or the water and oxygen, and thus inhibit acid
need for waste rock dumps. Dumps would generation.
be needed to store waste rock during pit
development, and until backfilling activities Agency Preferred Alternative
could commence. In additioIl, dumps
would remain after backfilling due to the In accordance with NEPA, Federal
swell factor of the waste rock. Backfilling agencies are required by the Council on
activities would occur concurrently with Environmental Quality regulations (40
operations after each pit is sequentially CFR 1502.14) to identify their preferred
mined to its economic limit. Again, this alternative for a project at the Draft EIS
complete backfilling would substantially stage. The preferred alternative is not a
reduce the height and areal extent of the final agency decision; but rather an
dumps. indication of the agency's preliminary
preference. This preference may be
Facility Layout Alternative changed in the Final EIS based on
additional information provided and/or
This alternative would be the same as the obtained during the Draft EIS comment
Proposed Action except that Waste Dump period.
D, which is proposed to be located directly
adjacent to the Lower Lisbon Valley Road, The BLM preferred alternative for the
would be eliminated. The waste rock Lisbon Valley Copper Project is the
would instead be transported to an Facility Layout Alternative. Under this
enlarged Waste Dump C. In this way, alternative, the Proposed Action would be
waste disposal activities would be confined implemented with the exception of
to a single, large dump north of the Lisbon requiring Waste Dump D to be combined
Valley Road and not be divided into two with Waste Dump C, in the proposed
smaller dumps, thus reducing visual location of Waste Dump C. This
impacts to the traveling public along alternative would mitigate adverse impacts .
Lower Lisbon Valley Road. from concurrent and post-mining drainage
239961R3.ES SlI6I96(1:S3 PM)/Rl'T/4 ES-3
run-off; and long-term sedimentation into air. sunny days. clear nights. low
Lisbon Canyon. This alternative may precipitation, high evaporation and large.
require additional mitigation to cultural diurnal temperature changes. Because
resource sites. dependent on final detailed there is neither industrial activity nor
design and layout of Waste D!lIl1P C. This urbanization, baseline air quality is
alternative also may require transport of characteristic of natural, rural air quality
additional topsoil to the site for final conditions.
reclamation.
Most of the soils in the project area are
AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT sandy loarns. with characteristics suitable
for reclamation. Vegetation in the region
Chapter 3 of the DEIS describes the is categorized into three primary vegetation
baseline natural resources and economic zones: pinyon-juniper, sagebrush, and
and social conditions found in the study grassland communities. No threatened,
area. Following is a brief summary of this endangered or sensitive plant species are
affected environment. known to occur within the project area. A
variety of wildlife species can also be
The proposed project is located in Lower found. Well-known species include mule
Lisbon Valley in southwest Utah, deer. rabbits, mice. badgers. coyotes, and a
approximately 19 miles southeast of La variety of raptors such as eagles,
Sal The nearest towns include La Sal. ferruginous hawks, prairie falcons, red-
Moab (approximately 40 miles northwest). tailed hawks and others. Current land uses
and Monticello (approximately 30 miles of the study area include mining, wildlife
southwest). A network of Federal and habitat, livestock grazing, and limited
State highways. and a number of local recreation.
roads would provide access to the
proposed project site. Surface water in the vicinity is limited to
that flowing from Lisbon Spring (outside
The proposed project is m an area the project boundary) and Huntley Spring,
characterized by historical copper and water intennittently ponded in two existing
uranium mining activity. Approximately pits, and two cattle ponds. Surface water
85 acres of this site show evidence of drainages in the project area are
previous mining in the form of abandoned characterized by dry washes typical for this
pits, stockpiles and overburden dumps that area of Utah. Ephemeral flow occurs only
were never reclaimed. after major precipitation events such as
thunderstorms. The cattle ponds capture
The affected environment includes the surface runoff for livestock and wildlife
valley floor of Lower Lisbon Valley and use. Wildlife also use the springs.
gently sloping cuestas and structural
benches (trending northwest to southeast) The distribution of groundwater at the
that flank the valley. The Lisbon Valley project site is erratic and strongly
project area is located at approximately controlled by geologic structure. The
6,500 feet above mean sea level. The· numerous faults present in the project area
semi-arid climate is characterized by dry act as barriers· to groundwater flow in
ES-4
some cases, and effectively separafe the represented by a stone "Circle site, that may
shallow aquifer into separate water-bearing have been used for vision quest activities.
units. The depth to groundwater ranges
from 60 feet to 300 feet below the ground ENVIRONMENTAL
surface. Existing surface water and CONSEQUENCES
groundwater quality exceeds Utah primary
and secondary drinking water standards for The Proposed Action and the four
several metals, radionuclides, and IDS. alternatives were evaluated for their
The shallow groundwater in the project potential impact on various environmental,
area is non-potable when compared to social, and cultural resources. A detailed
Utah drinking water standards, and has not discussion of these impacts, or
been used historically for either livestock environmental consequences, is contained
or domestic use. in Chapter 4 of the EIS. The following
discussions highlight the EIS material, with
The economy of the area is has changed . a brief discussion of impacts to each
from one driven primarily by the energy environmental resource.
and mining markets in the 1970s and early
1980s to one that is currently supported by Geology and Geotechnical Issues
tourism, especially outdoor recreation.
However, recreational opportunities in the Geologic impacts associated with the
study area are minimal, and visual qualities implementation of the Proposed Action or
are not outstanding in comparison to other alternatives would include the removal of
regional attractions. local copper resources, changes in
topography of the pit, heap leach, and
Numerous archeological surveys have been waste rock dump areas (946 acres); and
conducted within, and in the vicinity of the the covering of mineral resources from pit
Lisbon Valley area. In anticipation of the backfilling should the Open Pit Backfilling
Proposed Action, an intensive cultural Alternative be implemented.
resource survey was conducted on
approximately 3,640 acres. A total of 178 Potential geotechnical impacts include
historic and prehistoric archeological sites failure of constructed slopes caused by a
were recorded in the study area, including seismic event in the vicinity, solution pond
159 prehistoric sites, 14 historic sites, 4 overtopping during a large precipitation
sites with both prehistoric and historic event, and breach of the leach pad liner
materials, and 1 possible traditional cultural due to punctures or incorrectly welded
property. The prehistoric sites are seams. These potential impacts were
represented by camps, quarries, lithic considered when the leach pad was
procurement localities, lithic scatters, lithic designed, and measures were taken to
and sherd scatters, pinyon procurement reduce the probability ofleach pad failure.
(stone tools) localities, rockshelters, and a
wickiup (shelter). The historic sites Hydrology
include mining locations, homesteads~
brush pens, corrals, and fences. The Project operations would use up to 902
possible traditional cultural property IS gallons of water per minute (for peak
239961R3.ES SfI6196(I:S3 PM)lRPT/4 ES-5

demand in year 5), which would be pad failure, or if acid or alkaline conditions
supplied from existing shallow wells, developed in the waste rock piles or the pit
possibly some new deep wells, and mine pit 'walls. Selective layering of potentially acid
dewatering. The effects of dewatering generating material within the waste piles
would reduce the quantity of groundwater would address some acid drainage
available from the shallow aquifer in the concerns. The Open Pit Backfilling
mine vicinity during operations and for a Alternative would reduce the quantity of
period of years after mining ceases. waste rock on the surface and cover
However, results of groundwater modeling potentially acid or alkaline materials
indicate that there would be an increase in exposed in the pit walls; however, pockets
water levels near the Sentinel Pit due to of both potential acid and alkaline
discharge of ephemeral surface water flow conditions could occur in the pits and
to the pit, and subsequent groundwater waste piles. These impacts are not
recharge. Lisbon Spring and Huntley expected to be high, because of the current
Spring would not be impacted because the degraded water quality and the lack of
source of recharge to these two springs is current and potential future use of this
likely not connected to the shallow aquifer water.
in the project area. Additionally, surface
water diversion ditches around the Sentinel Three of the pits are predicted to contain
Pit would improve existing uncontrolled 106-289 feet of standing water after mining
erosion conditions in the project vicinity. operations cease. No beneficial use of this
However, if this ditch were not maintained water is currently planned, but it could
following operations, extensive erosion potentially provide water for irrigation and
would likely occur in the three drainages livestock water depending upon future
that converge upstream of the Sentinel Pit. water quality. Under the Open Pit
Backfilling Alternative, this water would
The water produced from various sources not be available for any potential future
as noted above, would be used for ore beneficial uses.
processing: dust control for the roads, and
for some washdown uses. The total Geochemistry
groundwater use by project operations
ranges from 161-1,455 ac-ftlyr. Following Based on the results of the EPA 1312
operations. the Sentinel Pit would intercept Method analyses, about 10 percent of the
up to 177 ac-ftlyr of the surface water flow waste rock material has a potential to
down Lisbon Canyon. Few impacts to generate acid; the rest of the material is
Lisbon Canyon are expected, because it is acid neutralizing. Should this material be
already an ephemeral drainage. Complete placed in the waste rock dumps such that it
pit backfilling and diversion would is exposed to water and oxygen, there is a
preserve the 177-ac-ftlyr surface flow, and small potential for acid drainage which
not intercept groundwater flows. could affect soils, vegetation, and water
quality near the waste dumps. However,
Existing water quality is 'generally poor; encapsulation, layering, or blending this
however, mining operations could further . material in the waste dumps would inhibit.
degrade water quality if there was a leach the oxidation reactions that produce acid
2J996IR3.ES S'I~:SJ PM)lRPT/4 ES-6
drainage. Additionally, backfilling of the Several erosion control measures have
pits would cover some acid-generating been included in Summo' s Proposed Plan
material in the pit walls, but .could result in of Operations, and the BLM may require
pockets of acid or alkaline water quality in additional erosion control measures to
the pits. reduce potential impacts from erosion and
increase the potential for successful
Other geochemical impacts include the reclamation.
potential development of alkaline leachates
from aging waste piles and exposed rock in Vegetation
the water-filled pits, which could produce
elevated levels of sulfates, IDS, and Implementation of the Proposed Action or
precipitate trace metals over baseline any of the development alternatives would
conditions. This could degrade shallow disturb a total of 1,103 acres: 432 acres of
aquifer water quality; however, this water sagebrush communities, 296 acres of
is not currently used for any purpose, and pinyon-juniper communities, and 290 acres
no foreseeable use is expected. of grasslands. Approximately 85 acres of
previously disturbed and unreclaimed lands
Soils and Reclamation are included in the total disturbance area.
Under the Proposed Action, 231 acres of
Potential impacts to the soil resource open pits would not be reclaimed. In
include the disturbance and alteration of addition, 296 acres of pinyon-juniper
1,103 acres of native soils and increased habitat would be replaced with sagebrush
exposure to accelerated erosion and and grassland communities in final
surface runoff Under the Proposed reclamation.
Action, 872 acres would be reclaimed and
231 acres of pits would be left open. WIldlife
Adequate quantities of cover soil material
could be salvaged for use in reclamation. Under the Proposed Action and any of the
Under the 'Open Pit Backfilling alternative, development alternatives, approximately
complete backfilling of the pits would 1,103 acres of wildlife habitat would be
include reclamation of all 1,103 acres of disturbed for the life of the project,
disturbance. However, due to the larger Previous wildlife studies in 1994 and late
area to be reclaimed, additional cover soil 1995 have not identified any threatened or
material would have to be obtained in the endangered species in the project area;
project vicinity or elsewhere. The Facility however, another survey in the spring of
Layout alternative would also necessitate 1996 is being conducted for confinnation.
obtaining addition cover soil material due
to the loss of material that would not be Additional impacts to wildlife from project
salvaged in the vicinity of Waste Dump D. construction and development include the
permanent loss of prairie dog towns and 2
Most of the soils that would be disturbed stock ponds likely used by wildlife in the
are,moderately susc~ptible to water erosion vicinity of the leach pad area, impacts from
and highly susceptible to wind erosion construction and operations such as night
when the vegetative cover is removed. lighting and blasting noise, which could
239961R3.ES SlI6I96(1:53 PM)lRPT/4 ES-7
cause the displacement of resident fauna. a strain on the local housing market.
Leach solution ponds could ,attract birds Additiominy, increased wear on county-
and waterfowl, and possible disturbance of maintained ,roads in the study are expected
raptors could occur during breeding and due to increased traffic.
nesting season.
There would be no notable social impacts
· g
Grazin on the quality of life for residents of Moab,
Monticello, and La Sal (the nearest
Project construction and development communities) due to the remoteness of the
would impact two different grazing proposed project.
allotments; 325 acres in the Lower Lisbon
Allotment and 395 acres in the Lisbon Transportation
Allotment for a total of 71.6 Animal Unit
Months (AUMs) that would be lost for the Traffic on Federal and State highways, and
life of the project. Following reclamation, on the network of local roads would
there would be a permanent loss of 7.2 increase due to worker commuter trips,
AUMs in the vicinity of the open pits delivery of supplies, shipment of copper
unless the complete backfilling alternative plates, and heavy equipment movement in
is selected. the project area; however, increased traffic
in the area would not exceed the capacity
Socioeconomics of the existing road network. It is
estimated that traffic accidents on area
The proposed project is expected to have a roads would increase by 0.88 accident!
positive impact on economics and year.
employment in Grand and San Juan
counties. The project would create 80 Due to increased traffic, road wear and
construction jobs and up to 143 jobs over maintenance costs to county road districts
the life of the project, thus reducing would increase, but this would likely be
unemployment in the project area, and compensated through increased local tax
would pay $54.5 million in payroll over the revenues.
life of the project. It is expected that the
majority of positions would be filled by During operations, stop signs, warning
residents of Moab, Monticello, Blanding, signs, and lighting w:ould keep traffic
and La Sal. congestion and delays to a minimum on the
Lisbon Valley Road through the project
The Proposed Action is not expected to site.
appreciably increase the population of the
study area; therefore, no unpacts on Hazardous Materials
housing and local facilities and services --
such as fire and medical facilities, law An estimated 10 truck trips per day would
enforcement, public utilities, and water be needed to haul hazardous materials to
supply - are projected. However, should the mine site resulting in an estimated 0.51
a large number of positions have to be ' accident over the life of the mine.
filled from outside the area, there could be Accidental spills of this material could
ES-8
contaminate soils and vegetation. and development of the proposed project.
However, each company transporting A total of 5 sites would be directly
hazardous materials, including the impacted if the Facility Layout Alternative
proponent, would have a Spill Prevention, was implemented. Mitigation measures
Control, and Countermeasures (SPCC) include site avoidance and, where
Plan. This plan would include maintaining avoidance is not feasible, data recovery and
spill containment and clean up equipment analysis. Development of a data recovery
.on site, and training of mine staff to plan would involve consultation among the
respond to spills according to Federal and BLM, State Historic Preservation Officer,
State gUidelines. Advisory Council, and project proponent.
Project personnel would be restricted from
Hazardous materials used on-site would be sites not directly impacted.
stored in secondary containment vessels on
a lined pad, and within a bermed area or on There are no lmown significant
a concrete floor above a drainage sump. paleontological resources in the project
Therefore, it is unlikely that any spills or area.
releases would result in contamination of
the surrounding environment. Spills' of Visual Resources
hazardous materials outside of the storage
areas would be controlled in two ways. The landscape in the project area is of low
First, for major spills, the mine's proposed scenic quality and sensitivity, and project
grading and drainage design would ensure activities would be within the Class IV
that any uncontained material would run BLM guidelines for this area. However,
off into the leach pad, solution ponds, or notable visual contr~s would occur in the
stormwater ponds. Second, the SPCC immediate project area along Lower
Plan would prepare personnel to contain Lisbon Valley Road. Reclamation and
and clean up the spill according to Federal revegetation measures would reduce visual
and State guidelines. impacts, but the 'Yater-filled pits, reclaimed
waste rock piles, and leach pad would
All hazardous wastes generated at the mine remain. Implementation of the Open Pit
over the life of the project would either be Backfilling Alternative would reduce the
transported off site for disposal at an size of the waste rock piles, and the pit
"appropriate facility, or treated and areas would be returned to topographic
neutralized on site to acceptable regulatory contours similar to predisturbance
levels. conditions.
I-
I
Cultural and Paleontological Resources Land Use
I
There are 178 cultural resource sites within Implementation of the Proposed Action or
the project area, of which 24 are any of the development alternatives would
potentially eligible to be listed on the change the current land uses of grazing and
National Register of Historic Places "(none wildlife habitat to active copper mining and
are currently listed). Of the 24 sites, one beneficiation on 247 acres of private (fee)
would be directly impacted by construction land; 574 acres of BLM land; and 273
239961R3.ES Sl16l96(1:53 PM)IRPT/4 ES-9

acres of State land; for the life of the associated with hunting. In addition, the
project. No changes in property ownership Three Step Hill area is occasionally used
are expected. for Christmas tree harvesting or firewood
collection. Construction and development
Following reclamation, the site would activities would result in the displacement
again be used for grazing, wildlife habitat of big and small game hunters in and
and recreation. around the project site for the life of the
mine. In addition, there may be some
Climate and Air Quality access restrictions to recreation through
the life of the project due to road closures
Particulate matter dust (PMlO) and mine traffic.
concentrations were modeled for years 5
and 9, the years of highest operations
activity. Concentrations were within the
24-hour and annual National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS). Background
PMlO levels at the project boundary would
increase by 7 to 26 J..lIIl/m3 from project
operations, which levels are well within
NAAQS standards.
Noise levels are not expected to exceed

regulatory standards for workers inside the
property boundaries, nor for local residents
and users of adjoining property outside
property boundaries. Passersby may
periodically experience impacts from
nuisance noise levels from blasting and
truck traffic. Blasting would occur only
during daylight hours, only once per day
on average, and approximately every other
day_ Residents of a planned development
several miles south of the project area may
periodically hear blasting noise as part of
background noise levels.
Recreational Resources
The proposed project area supports

minimal recreation3;i opportunities such as
seasonal big and small game hunting, and
camping and ATV activities usually
ES-IO
1.0
INTRODUCTION
Tills Draft Environmental Impact Summo proposes to construct an electric

Statement (DElS) addresses the potential power transmission line, connecting the
impacts of 'the proposed Lisbon Valley property facilities with a substation
Copper Project (the Project) in approximately three miles east of Highway
southeastern Utah. This section includes 191, approximately 10.5 miles west of the
an introduction to the proposed project, project area. This transmission line
and its facilities and location; the purpose construction is a connected action for this
and need for the pn;>ject; the environmental particular project, and the potential impacts
analysis by the U.S. Bureau of Land to the transmission right-of-way will be
Management (BLM) to assess the impacts assessed for relevant environmental
for this project; and background regarding impacts.
other mitigation, permitting, and public
involvement and scoping issues which have The proposed project includes the four pits
shaped this analysis. noted above, waste dump areas, a single
heap leach facility, surface facilities to
Summo USA Corporation (Summo), a support mining operations, and a Solvent
subsidiary of Summo Minerals ExtractionlElectro-Winning (SX/EW)
Corporation, is proposing to conduct an plant. The SX/EW plant is designed to
open pit mining, heap leach copper extract copper concentrates from the
operation at its Lisbon Valley project. The pregnant leach solution derived from leach
project is located approximately 18 miles pad operations. This plant and the other
southeast of La Sal, Utah, in San Juan project facilities and operations are
County (Figure. 1-1). Mining would occur described in more detail in Section 2.0.
at four op'en pits: the Centennial, Sentinel
#1, Sentinel #2, and GTO (Figure 1-2). ' The project boundary includes about 1,038
acres of disturbance, generally in the
The proposed project is located on private central portion of Lisbon Valley. Lisbon
(fee) land, State leases, and land controlled Valley extends for approximately 15 to 20
by BL~ upon which Summo, has miles south of La Sal, Utah, and is
unpatented mining claims. Details on the described topographically and geologically
affected land sections are given in Section in more detail in the baseline discussions in
2.0. The unpatented mining claims are Section 3.0. Study areas for each of the
administered by the BLM, ~oab Field disciplines in Section 3.0 will vary to
Office, with offices about 40 miles to the include all or parts of Lisbon Valley, and
north of the project site. sometimes beyond (such as for
socioeconomic effects). Regarding
Access and powerline corridors extend off cumulative effects discussion for each
the project area. The western portion of discipline, the study area focuses on Lisbon
the power line and the substation are Valley. (See Section 3.1.5, Potential for
within the San Juan Resource Area. Additional Copper Development.)
239961R3,l SI1S/96(l:SOPM)lRPT13 1-1
I
,•
RAN 0
:e.10 C
~ij
---T---- I
I
I
I
·~sal
Juftction \
\
\
,, .
\\'-~~o~ \ ~c
PROJECT AREA'/
" ./-
··~--L..~"
~ "
1 "
U':\
:r- ~
~
I
. J,'
'", S~mmit;- I SAN
~oint '--"'1
... I
UTAH
JUAN \ i:•
Monticello
ABAJO
0
I , I ,
t:s
a I
,
MOUNTAINS
10 Miles
SOURCE: SUMMO.1996
Job No. : 23996
LOCATION MAP
Prepared by : G.J. W. LISBON VALLEY AREA
Date: 1/24/95 SAN JUAN COUNTY, UTAH
1-1 FIG. 1-1

- - - - PROJECt' BOUNDAR\"
-FENCE
.J.!
I •
SOURCE: J.D. WELSH AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 1996

Job No. : 23996 ,
PROJECT BOUNDARIES AND
Prepared by: C.H.P.
SURFACE OWNERSHIP
Dote: 4/8/96 LISBON VALLEY COPPER PROJECT
FIG. 1-2
/-3
The Lisbon Valley area is generally Copper demand has continued to increase
isolated, with little population at the in recent years, with stable prices and the
present time. It is the site of present and promise of profitable operations. Copper
historic copper and uranium mining. companies are currently exploring and
operations, with active and historic developing mining prospects throughout
facilities, and remnants of ponds, pits, and the world.
waste piles apparent as one drives through
the valley. . 1.2 AUTHORIZING ACTIONS
Summo is proposing to construct, develop, Land status in terms of affected sections is

operate, and reclaim necessary facilities for detailed in Section 2.0. Figure 1-2 shows
mining an average of 12,500 tons of ore surface ownership of fee land, State land,
per day, over the approximate ten-year and BLM land within the '4,846-acre
mine life. project boundary. Because of these other
ownerships, Summo would also coordinate
1.1 PURPOSE AND NEED with the State and local agencies in
permitting and approvals for this project.
The purpose and need for the project is to Permitting and approval actions that would
produce copper concentrates for sale from occur in addition to the EIS are addressed
the mineralized zones on the Lisbon Valley further in this section.
property. Copper is an important base
metal, and is used world-wide in electric The proposed action is in conformance
cables and wires, switches, plumbing and with the terms and conditions of the
heating; in roofing and building ResoUrce Management Plan (RMP) (BLM
construction; in chemical and 1985a) for the Grand Resource Area
pharmaceutical machinery fabrication, to (pages 22 and 32), as required by 43 CFR
make alloys for strength and other special 1610.5. The location ofmining claims and
purposes; 'for electroplating protective administration of the mining law are
coatings imd undercoatings for other addressed on pages 22 and 32 of the RMP.
metals; and for a number of other uses. The exploration and development of
Leading producers worldwide are Chile, mining claims is managed under the 43
the United States, the former Soviet Union CFR 3809 regulations with the RMP
(CIS), Canada, Zambia, and Zaire objectives to help meet the demand for
(National Mining Association 1995). mineral development while preventing
unnecessary and undue degradation of
Summo, as an emerging copper producer, other resources. According to the 43 CFR
is proposing to develop this project under 3809 regulations, mining operations
i.ts rights afforded by the BLM authorities exceeding 5 acres during any calendar year
noted above and the land tenure rights require the approval of a plan of
afforded by the Mining Law of 1872, operations.
which allows private individuals and
corporations to explore for minerals, The proposed powerline would be
secure mineral patents, and develop and constructed primarily in the San Juan
extract min~rals from those properties. Resource Area (S~), located west and
239961R3.1 SflSJ96(l:SO PM)/RPT13 1-4
south of the Moab Field Office (formerly The proposed Summo project is consistent
the Grand Resource Area) boundary. with the San Juan County Master Plan
According to the General Management Program Goals and Policies (I 967).
Guidance in the RMP for the SJRA, the
proposed powerline would not be within a Various mitigation measures are addressed
desi~ated transportation and utility throughout this EIS that would serve to
comdor. Lands outside of designated minimize or eliminate certain impacts that
corridors are available for rights-of-way may otherwise occur. Section 2.0 lists
after site-specific National Environmental many of the mitigation measures
Policy Act (NEPA) documentation. No committed to by Summo to address
special management conditions were impacts. Impacts are then rated in Section
4.0 with these committed mitiaations in
identified for this area in the RMP, and a
mind. In addition, the discip~e-specific
powerline right-of-way could be issued in
discussions in Section 4.0 may recommend
conformance with the San Juan Resource
certain mitigation measures that serve
AreaRMP (BLM 1989).
~er to minimize or eliminate potential
Impacts of the Proposed Action or
Proposed actions that could affect public alternatives on the natural and human
lands must be reviewed for NEPA
environment. These recommended
compliance. BLM determined that an mitigation measures may be the subject of
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS),
negotiation between Summo and the BLM,
rather than an Environmental Assessment and may further be reflected in the Record
(EA), would be required to assess the of Decision prepared by the BLM
potential impacts from the plan of following finalization of the EIS.
operations. The proposed action is not
covered by any existing EAs or EISs.
A number of other action, permits, and
There have been no EAs or EISs prepared approvals would be required for the Lisbon
for B~M programmatic actions or activity Valley Copper Project. Table 1-1 presents
plans m San Juan or Grand Counties that
a list of major actions of this type for the
addres~ the impacts of heap leach mining
project. Note that both Federal and State
operatIons. The EIS being prepared for agency actions are listed. Meetings with
~e. Summo Plan of Operations (POD) is
the various permitting agencies have been
tlermg to the Grand Resource Area undertaken by Summo, some with the
RMPIEIS which was approved in July BLM. As the footnote to Table 1-1 states
this list may not be all-inclusive, and th~
1985. Tiering to the Grand Resource Area
RMPIEIS incorporates by reference the
operator is responsible for securing all the
general analysis of the issues and impacts
necessary permits and approvals.
in the RMPIEIS. The EIS for the Summo
project does not modify the decisions of
the Grand Resource Area RMPIEIS.
23996/R3.1 5/16196(1 1:58 AM)/RPT/3 1-5

TABLE 1-1
SUMMO USA CORPORATION'

PERMITSINOTIFICATIONS/APPROVALS
Agency Itcm/Pcnnlt Description Submittal Data Likely Pennit Specifications/Comments

FEDERAL
U.S. Burcllu orland POO Environmental report Including all Submittal dala include air quality, areas of BLM as lead agency. Because of the
Management EIS aspects of operation, cnvironmental critical envirorunenlal concent, cultural location, and cnviroruncntal sensitivity of the
and socioeconomic impacts, and resources, prime or unique fnnniands, project, Iln EIS is required. A pentlit is not
mitigation floodplains, Native American religious issucd; approval ora selccted nltentlltive is
concerns, threatened or endangered granled in the form ofRccord of De cisi 011
species, solid and hazardous wasle, water (ROD). TIle BLM has a Mcmo of
quality, wetlands and riparinn zones, wild Understanding (MOD) with the Utah
and scenic rivers, wildentess, Division of Oil, Gas, and Mining (UDOGM)
paleontology, and other issues. concerning mine pcnnilling.
Right·of.Way Right·of·Way grants Acccss location and use. Applicability 1I0t certain.
u.s. Environmental National Pollution Must comply wilh surface and Application fee and a characterization of To conlrol discharge of metals and other
Protection Agency Discharge Elimination groundwater quality standards for baseline conditions, surface water and potcntial effiuenls. Monitoring of discharge
System (NPDES). Water discharge and non.discharging groundwaler hydrology. and reporting would be required.
Quality systems.
Prevention ofSignific8nt Permit is required iflhe operation of This envirorunental evaluation includes all Pennit is issued to conlrol emissions of
Deterioration (PSD) • Air Ihe proposcd facility would emit climatology and air quality data and hazardous air pollutants, visible emissions,
Quality greater than 250 tons of both point identification and evalqation of all sources particulate emissions, and sulfur emissions.
source and fugitive emissions from offugitive and point source emissions, and Monitoring and reporting is required.
the facility. a modeling ofl~ose emissions to project
air quality impacts.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Threatened and Endangered Must research threatened and Information submitted as part ofEIS A permit is 1I0t issued; USFWS and State
Service Species endangered species in area of prepared by BLM. wildlife agencies use EIS as resource
project. document to demonstrate compliance.
U.S. Mine Safety and Safety Pentlit Must address operational safety Compliance with hcalth and safety Identification number assigned.
Health Administration issues. requirements.
U.S. Army Corps of Section 404 Penn its • Provides protection for wetlands by Submit water quality and other Required for stream diversions and wetlands
Engineers Dredge and Fill Activities in rcgulating dredged or fill cnvironmental data and development data. disturbance.
Watercourses disturbance.
TABLE 1-1
SUMMO USA CORPORATION l

PERMITSINOTIFICATIONS/APPROVALS
Agency Itcm/Pcnnit Description Submittal Data Likely Pennit SpecificationsiConuncnts

STATE OF UTAII
Department ofEnvironmcntal Quality
Division of Water Quality Groundwater Discharge This perlllit is required for all A pernlit application is required that Compliance with all Federal, State, and local
Pennit activities having the potential to shows all water-discharging facilitics and watcr quality parameters or site-specific
affect groundwater. their design, along with proposed standards based upon groundwater
monitoring requirements. monitoring.
Division of Air Quality Air Quality Construction Required for the construction of any Submit pennit application that describes For compliance with Federal and State air
Pcnnit facility or activity that may emit volume ofthrouglt put and the location of quality point sourcc requirements
both a point source and a fhgitivc proposed disturbance activities.
emission.
Division of Drinking Water Public Water Supply Required for projects with more than This perntit requires design and control Includes regular monitoring of an on-site
Permit 25 cmployees. systems for clean drinking water, septic water supply or purchase orders if drinking
tanks, leach fields, and a review of any water is provided from 8n outside sourcc.
proposed landfill at the project area.
Divisioll ofEnviromnental Penn its for Underground Pennits required if underground Design specification of proposed tallks Independent monitoring and leak detection
Response and Remediation Storage Tanks storage tank or tallks are proposed. along with a description of the hydrology would be required.
ofthe project area.
Division of Radiation Radiation Control Pennit For the operation of equipment with The specifications of the proposed Annual reporting and calibration reports.
Control radioactive material. equipment, the location of proposed
equipment, and training and responsible
party inforlllation.
Division of Solid and Resource Conservation and Pennit to build and operate any type All analysis and characterization of all If there is a hazard constituency to the
Hazardous Waste Recovery Act (RCRA) of solid waste disposal facility. proposed waste products that would be proposed solid waste, there may be a
Pennit disposed of (this may include waste dump requirement for lime facilities. There that
material). would be a requirement for annual rcporting
ofvolumc placcd in the facilities.
Department of Natural Resources
Division of Oil, Gas, and Notice ofrntent A proposed plan of mining All application fee, environnlental Alumni reporting requirements of production
Mining operations, reclamation plan, and description, a mining plan, and as well as reclamation activities and bonding
envirolllllental impacts. reclamation plan. requirements. A MOU is in place with the
BLM to address bonding and other issues.
Division of State Lands and Lease Must address all impacts on state Plan of Operations, reclamation plan, AlUlual fees and a report on through pllt and
Forestry' lease lands. proposed bond to guarantee reclamation, reclamation activities.
and a schedule.
239961R3T.I-1 May 15,1996(4:30 PM)/RPTI2 Sheet 2 of3

TABLE IMI
SUMMO USA CORPORATION'

PERMITSINOTIFICATIONSIAPPROVALS
Agency lIemIPennit Description SubmiUal Data Ukcly Pemlit SpccilicatiollSlCommcnls

Division ofWatcr Rights Water Right Pemlit 'fllis pennit requires an A filing, fee, welllocotion, and Annual reporting requiremcnts ofvolnllle of
appropriation for a beneficial use, of infonnntion on surrounding wnter used, lind water level monitoring.
which mining is eOflSidered 10 be n appropriations.
primary use.
Impoundment Penn its Approval for any impoundment Impoundment design specifications. Leak detection monthly, quarterly, and
(dam) or the storage ofwlIter or mumal reports as well as water level
solution. htfonnation.
Division of Wildlife Vegetation and Wildlife Review of mining impacts on Infonnation on surface disturbance, as
Resollrces No fonnnl pennil required.
Impacts Federal and State listed sensitive well as 0 review ofthe reclamation plan to
species, as well as threatened and ellSurc compliance with surrounding
endangered species. vegetation and wildlife utilization; as a
part ofthe BlS.
Other Agencies
Utah State Historic I Compliance wilh the A review of project area for A cultural resources report showing the
Preservation Office NHPA Mitigation of any potcntial adverse effects to
significant archaeological and
historic sites. , results of literalure review, field surveys,
and NRHP (National Register of Historic
Federal and State significant sites.
Places) significance evaluations.
Notes and Sources:

I Adapted from information provided by Summo (I 996). This list may not be all-inclusive; the operator is responsible for securing all the
necessary permits and approvals for the project.
2 Mining activities that would occur on State lease lands.
1.3 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND • A public meeting was held by BLM
SCOPING ISSUES and Summo with the San Juan
COunty Planning Commission and
Public participation is a key requirement of the general public in La Sal, Utah
the NEPA process, and vital to the on January 9, 1996.
development of alternatives and
consideration of impacts in the EIS. The A list of commenting agencies and details
initial opportunity for public involvement regarding the extent of public participation
occurs at the beginning of the EIS process, are presented in Section 6.0, Consultation
when scoping is conducted. The scoping and Coordination.
sessions allow compilation of
environmental issues related to the
Early review of project plans ~d
Proposed Action and identify public and
comments from the public prior to the
agency views of the perceived, important
impacts of the proposed project. The scope formal public scoping activities noted
of this EIS was established by the agency above, identified a preliminary set of issues
understanding of the proposed action and and concerns which are addressed in this
technical concerns, as well as the issues DEIS as described below.
identified through oral and written
comments received from the public and 1.3.1 Alternatives Analyzed in Detail
commenting agencies.
Fo~ alternatives to the Proposed Action
To identify the issues and concerns related were developed based on NEPA
to the Proposed Action, public scoping requirements, public and agency comments
was undertaken by the BLM as follows: received during the initial scoping process,
and a review of Summo's Plan of
Operations.
• A Notice oj Intent to prepare the
EIS was published in the Federal
No Action Alternative - An evaluation of
Register on October 5, 1995. This
the No Action Alternative is required
provided. a summary of the
under 40 CPR 1502.14 (d) of CEQ
proposed action and supplementary
regulations implementing the National
information regarding the Summo
Environmental Policy Act. This alternative
POO in Lisbon Valley.
evaluates the possibility that the Proposed
• A public scoping meeting. to Action would result in undue and
present the project to the public unnecessary degradation of the
and solicit public and agency environment, and therefore, Summo would
comments was held in Moab, Utah not receive approval to develop the
during the evening of November 1, proposed Lisbon Valley Project on public
1995. lands.
• A second public scoping meeting
for the same purpose was held in Open Pit Backfilling Alternative - This
Monticello, . Utah during the alternative was developed in response to
evening of November 2, 1995. public and agency comments receiv~d
during the initial scoping process. This
23!l95/R3.1 May 15. 1996(4:32PM)lRPTI3 1-9

alternative addresses impacts to visual Mining Alternative - Summo proposes to
resources as a result of lea0ng four pits conduct mining operations by open pit. An
open following mining operations, along ~ternative mining method is underground
with four waste rock piles. mining. Underground mining is technically
Implementation of this alternative would and economically infeasible at the Lisbon
require backfilling of the pits with waste Valley Project for several reasons. First,
rock, thus returning the landscape to the ore is not conducive to underground
conditions similar to that prior to mining. Copper is not found in veins that
disturbance. can be effectively and efficiently mined by
underground mining techniques. Instead,
Facility Layout Alternative - This the ore is scattered throughout the host
alternative also addresses concerns rock, necessitating surface operations to
identified during the public scoping process recover all of the copper ore. In summary,
regarding visual impacts to the public the copper concentration in the ore is not
traveling along the Lower Lisbon Valley high enough to economically support
Road. Under this alternative, Waste Dump underground mining.
D, located adjacent to the road in the
Proposed Action, would be eliminated. Second, underground muung does not
Waste Dump C, slightly less visible from promote mineral conservation. Copper is
the road, would be expanded to found throughout the host rock.
accommodate the additional waste rock Underground mining requires that pillars of
material. unmined material be left in place to provide
roof support for miner safety. Ore would
Waste Rock Selective Handling be wasted when left in these pillars. Thus,
Alternative This alternative was this alternative has been eliminated.
developed to address concerns about the
potential for acid rock drainage and Site Access Alternative - Summo's
resultant impacts to groundwater, surface proposed operations would be located on
water, soils, vegetation and wildlife. both sides of the Lower Lisbon Valley
Road. Haul trucks would need to cross
Section 2.3 contains additional infonnation this road in one location to transport ore to
on the alternatives included in the analysis. the crushing facilities and waste rock to
Waste Dump C. Th.e potential safety
1.3.2 Alternatives Considered and concerns of haul trucks crossing this
Eliminated county road could be mitigated by
constructing a bypass road to route public
As indicated in Section 2.3, numerous traffic around Summo's mining and
alternatives were identified duririg the EIS leaching facilities.
process. The following five alternatives
were evaluated based on environmental, A bypass road would need to be
engineering, and economic factors, and constructed either to the east or to the
were eliminated from further consideration west of Summo's operations. Constructing
in thisEIS. a road to the east would require bisecting
Lisbon Canyon and Lisbon Gap;
239961R3.l Mzy 15. 1996(4:32PM)lRPTI3 1-10
constructing a road to the .west would Haulage Alternative - Summo proposes
require traversing Three Step Hill. to use haul trucks to transport waste rock
Significant environmental degradation to the dumps and ore bearing rock to the
would result from constructing either of crushing facilities. An alternative to truck
these roads due to the steep terrain to be haulage is installing and using conveyors.
traversed (i.e., need for significant road Conveyors would be employed to transport
cuts and fills to achieve suitable grades) ore from the· crushing facilities to the heap
. and disturbing additional areas. For . leach pad. Conveyors. are not technically or
example, cattle and wildlife habitat would economically feaSible to transport waste
be impacted due to the loss of vegetation. rock to the dumps and ore bearing rock to
Visual impacts to the traveling public the crushing facilities for several reasons.
would be increased since Summo's First, conveyors are designed to handle a
operations would be· below this road, in certain sized material. Crushing facilities
places, and not blocked by natural would need to be installed and maintained
topographic features. Thus, this alternative at each pit to reduce the size of the ROM
has been eliminated. material to accommodate conveyance
requirements. These additional crushing
Processing . Alternative - Summo has facilities have the potential to increase
proposed to use heap leaching to process environmental degradation (e.g., additional
the host rock for copper recovery. air emissions) and would increase project
Alternative processes include vat leaching, costs.
conventional milling, and off-site
processing. Vat leaching is technically Second, conveyors would not be used to
infeasible because the mineralogy of the transport waste rock to the dumps. Due to
ore requires a longer sol~tion contact time increased costs and air emissions, crushing
to recover the copper resource than would of the waste rock to accommodate
be provided by vat leaching. Moreover, conveyance requirements is impractical.
vat leaching would increase costs and air As such, haulage. of waste tock by trucks
eniissions Que to repeated handling of the would occur even if conveyors were
ore bearing rock (i.e., reusable vats would installed and used for ore transport to the
be employed' necessitating disposal of crushing facilities.
leached material prior to reloading with
fresh ore). Conventional milling is Third, conveyors are typically used when
technically infeasible because the ore activities can be conducted at a location for
grades at the Lisbon Valley Project are. too an extended period of time, and are usually
low for efficient recovery; also this ore impractical at multi-pit operations. Mining
contains too much oxide to float copper in is proposed to occur for several years from
a conventional milling process. Off-site three pits: Sentinel #1, Sentinel #2, and
processing would result in increased air Centennial. Subsequent mining would
emissions, safety considerations, and costs occur at two pits: Centennial and GTO.
from addition.al truck traffic to haul ore Conveyors would need to be constructed
bearing rock. Thus, alternative' ore from each of these pits to the processing
processing has been eliminated. area· at a significant capital investment.
239961R3.1 5115196(1 :50 PM)IRPT/3 1-11

Based on the foregoing reasons, this ponds also would increase the costs of the
alternative has been eIin$lated. project. Based on the foregoing, alternative
water balance has been eliminated.
Water Balance Alternative - Summo has
proposed to rely upon evaporation to 1.3.3 Issues and Concerns Analyzed
reduce excess water volumes. That is
. .. .
lITIgation sprinklers would replace drip
' The following issues and impacts are
emitters near the middle of the leach pad thoroughly analyzed in this EIS. These
(i.e., not along the edge of the pad) during issues were brought forth either during the
periods of excess water to increase scoping process or through the NEPA
evaporation and reduce water in the process.
system. Moreover, such sprinklers would
be installed at the end of the project to Geology and Geotechnical Resources .
eliminate the solution'in the ponds to allow
for closure. Installing irrigation sprinklers No specific issues regarding geologic
on top of the leach pad is the typical way resources were raised during the public
of resolving excess water balance concerns scoping process; however, impacts on
at heap facilitj,es in the western United topography from the development of four
States. open pits and the construction of four
w~e rock piles are assessed in this EIS.
Water for the project would be obtained Also, current and future mineral
from groundwater wells. An alternative to development is addressed in the analysis of
using irrigation sprinklers is to re-inject the geologic resources in Lower Lisbon Valley
water to the aquifer. Re-injection is not iIi Section 4.1.
economically feasible and has
environmental disadvantages. For example, Geotechnical issues revolve around the
numerous additional areas would need to potential for failure of structures or
be disturbed to install the pipelines and facilities constructed for mining operations
pumping Stations at a sufficient distance due to seismic events, stonn events, or
away from the site to avoid re-injected improper· engineering design. The
water from being recycled at the project by p~tential for failure of constructed slopes,
the dewatering wells. failure of the leach pad or pond lining
systems, over-topping of the solution
Another water balance alternative would pond, breach of the leach pad liner or
be to construct additional storage ponds settling foundation material that could
and allow for evaporation from these result in environmental impacts are also
ponds without using irrigation sprinklers analyzed in Section 4.1.
on top of the pad. Constructing additional
storage ponds would significantly increase Hydrology
the acreage being disturbed at the Lisbon
Hydrology issues for both surface water
Valley Project. In addition, the ponds
and groundwater focus on three primary
would need to be l41ed to prevent leakage,
categories: quantity of water, water
as outlined in Section 2.2.4.2. The .
quality, and accelerated erosion and
development and maintenance of these
239961'R3.1 5115196(1:50 PM}'RPT13 1-12

increased sedimentation in surface water Sentinel Pit following mine closure was
drainages. brought forward and potential impacts
were assessed.
Water supply issues include impacts to the
local water table and the watershed as a Geochemistry
result of water withdrawn from the aquifer
for dewatering of the pits, use in Impacts from waste rock generating acid
processing operations, and road watering conditions or mobilizing dissolved
for dust control; these all could result in a constituents is the primary geochemistry
decreased availability of groundwater in issue. Impacts from acid-generatina
the project vicinity. Impacts to Lisbon material left exposed in the pit walls ar:
Spring and Huntley Spring (groundwater), also assessed in Section 4.3. As a result of
ephemeral streams in Lisbon Canyon and the analysis process, potential impacts from
McIntyre Canyon, and perennial flows in alkaline conditions, post-closure, in the
the Dolores River are also assessed in water-filled pits; or periodic alkaline water
Section 4.2. runoff from the waste rock piles, are also
addressed in this section.
Potential impacts to the quality of
groundwater in the shallow aquifer and Soils and Reclamation
surface water drainages as a result of
Issues regarding soils resources include the
accidental spills of fuels, reagents, and
availability of a sufficient quantity of good
leaching solutions, over-flow of solution
quality cover soil material that could be
ponds, the use of poor quality groundwater
salvaged, stored and redistributed as a
for dust control, blasting operations, and
growth medium for revegetation of the site
runoff water from the waste rock piles are
following mining activities. Additionally,
also discussed in Section 4.2. Water
impacts from accelerated soil erosion,
quality impacts also include an assessment
including rill and gully development, loss
of water quality characteristics such as
of topsoil, and increased sedimentation due
potential .increased or decreased pH,
to disturbance· of native soils during
salinity, increased concentrations of metals,
construction and operations, are assessed
and IDS above natural conditions.
in Section 4.4. The effectiveness of the
Additionally, the depth, quality, and
proposed reclamation plan and the
potential uses of water impounded in the
potential for returning the site to pre-
four pits after mining ceases are evaluated
mining conditions are also evaluated in this
in this section.
section.
Impacts to water quantity and quality for
Vegetation
domestic use near Summit Point are also
assessed in Section 4.2. Impacts to existing vegetative communities
include both short-term impacts from
During the environmental impact analysis, construction and development activities in
the potential for increased sedimentation which vegetation is removed; and long-
- and accelerated erosion as a result of re- term' impacts to those communities that
routing storm water runoff into the would not be reclaimed, or would be
239961R3.1 SIlSI96(1:50PM)lRPTJ3 1-13
reclaimed to a different type of community, Transportation
or those communities that require decades
to regenerate, are addressed in Section 4.5. The issues for transportation include
Impacts to threatened, endangered, or increased volumes of commuter and truck
sensitive plant species/communities, and traffic on local highways and county roads
the long-tezm loss of species diversity are within commuting distance of the project
also addressed in this section. . site, particularly Moab, Monticello, La Sal,
Blanding, and Dove Creek. Related'
Wildlife impacts include the potential for increased
accidents, and road wear and maintenance
Direct impacts to wildlife through the loss requirements. In addition, impacts to the
of habitat (food, water, and cover) and traveling public from mine traffic crossing
indirect impacts from operations such as Lisbon Valley Road are assessed in Section
noise, nocturnal lighting, exposure to 4.9.
acidic solutions, and increased traffic are
addressed for species such as raptors, Hazardous Materials
prairie dogs, black-footed ferrets, mule
deer, burrowing owls, shrikes, and Impacts related to the transportation,
rattlesnakes in Section 4.6. storage, use, and. disposal of a variety of
hazardous materials that would be used at
Grazing the mine; as well as wastes generated
during operations, are ass~ssed in Section
Short- and long-tenn impacts, due to 4.10. Potential environmental impacts as a
construction and operation of the proposed result of accidental spills, uncontrolled
project, to the Lower Lisbon and the releases, or routine uses of hazardous
Lisbon grazing 'allotments .and the loss of materials are all discussed in this section.
Animal Unit Months (AUMs) are discussed
in Section 4.7. . Cultural and Paleontological Resources
Socioeconomics A cultural resources survey has been

conducted for all of the areas proposed for
The impacts to local economies in Grand direct impacts, including the powerline and
and San Juan counties, particularly the associated access roads. Impacts to
towns of Moab, La Sal, and Monticello, significant cultural resources located in the
are discussed in Section 4.8, including proposed project area are addressed in
affects on employment, tax revenue, Section 4.11, as required under Section
housing, infrastructure, fire and medical 106 of the National Historic Preservation
services, schools and utility services; as Act (NHPA).
well as social impacts and affects on the
quality of life as a result of implementation Visual Resources
of the proposed project.
Visual impacts that would result from the
amount of contrast created between the
proposed facilities and the eXIstIng
landscape condition, and visibility of the
2J9961R3.1 SIlSl96(l:SO PM}'RP'I'13 1-14
facilities to sensitive viewpoints within the recreation post-closure are discussed ill
viewshed of the project are assessed in Section 4.16.
Section 4.12. Visual impacts are addressed
for both effects during operations and 1.3.4 Issues Considered but Not
residual effects following reclamation. Analyzed
Land Use All of the issues noted above, including all

of those raised during the scoping process
Land-use related issues .are evaluated in and NEPA review, have been analyzed in
Section 4.13. Impacts include potential this EIS. However, a few issues required
conflicts with existing land use plans on to be addressed by the agencies are not
federal and state lands, proximity to relevant to this EIS. These issues are as
residential or other sensitive areas, and follows.
tennmation of existing land use or land use
incompatibility. 1. No direct or indirect effects are
expected from this project to
Climate·and Air Quality Native American trust rights, .per
the Secretary of Interior directive
Impacts to air quality outside the proposed (Babbit 1994).
project boundary as a result of dust 2. No direct or indirect effects are
concentrations exceeding National expected from this project to low
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) income or minority populations, to
or air contaminants exceeding background address the social (environmental)
levels, are assessed in Section 4.14. justice policy (Babbit 1994).
3. Regarding critical elements
Noise required to be addressed by BLM
(BLM 1988), the following are
Noise le-yels impacts both within the
considered not applicable to this
pr~posed project boundary and outside the
project:
project area are assessed in Section 4.15.
Work-place impacts would occur if noise
• Areas of Critical Environmental
exposure limits exceeded the Federal
Concern (ACECs) .
Occupational Safety and Health Act
(OSHA) and/or the Mine Safety and • Prime or unique farmlands
Health Act (MSHA) requirements. Noise • Floodplains
impacts to area residents and passersby • Wetlands and riparian zones
from operations, blasting, and truck traffic, • Wild and scenic rivers
are also assessed in this section. • Wilderness
Recreational Resources
Impacts to established recreational

resources or access to established
recreational resources, impacts on the
recreational environment, and impacts to
239951.R3.1 5115196(1:50PM)JRPTJ3 1-15
2.0
ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING nm PROPOSED ACTION
2.1 OVERVIEW 2.2 PROPOSED ACTION
This section provides a description of 2.2.1 General

Summo's Proposed Action to conduct
copper mining and heap leaching activities The Proposed Action is described in the
at the Lisbon Valley Project. This section POQ for the Lisbon Valley Project
also addresses the reasonable and viable (Summo 1995a), as supplemented by a
alternatives to the Proposed Action. utility right-of-way application (paci:fiCorp
Alternatives to the Proposed Action and 1995), and by additional infonnation
mitigation of impacts are considered under provided by Summo. Summo proposes to
NEPA regulations, primarily 40 CPR conduct its operations in compliance with
§ 1502.14, which requires: all applicable Federal, State, and local
laws, rules, and ordinances. A listing of
• Evaluation of all reasonable major pennits and approvals required for
alternatives, including the No this project is provided in Section 1.0. The
Action alternative Proposed Action would consist of the
• Discussion of reasons for following primary facilities:
eliminating alternatives (Section
1.3.2) • Four open pits
• Evaluation of appropriate • Four waste rock dumps
mitigation measures not included in • Ore crushing facilities
the Proposed Action or alternatives • Heap ore leach pad
• Various stonnwater and solution
The NEPA process was initiated by storage ponds
Surnmo's submittal of a proposed POQ to • Solution processing at a SX-EW
the BLM for the Lisbon Valley Project. plant
Based on the submitted document, BLM • Water production!dewatering wells
determined that an EIS was required to with pipeline corridor
comply with NEPA As noted in Section • Numerous support facilities (e.g.,
1.3, BLM completed a scoping process to administration building)
solicit comments from the public and other • Runoff diversion structures
concerned parties on the Proposed Action. • Haul roads
Based on the information submitted by • 69-kV powerline from the Hatch
Surnmo and comments received during the substation to the project site
scoping process, BLM developed and
refined a range of alternatives for Summo's activities would occur on both
evaluation in the EIS. sides of the Lower Lisbon Valley Road, a
road rnairitained by San Juan County, Utah..
23996JR3.2 5115196(2:25 PM)/RPT13 2-1
t;\
Figure 2-1 depicts the overall layout of the Mining and milling activities previously
proposed facilities. occurred at this site and have resulted in
the disturbance of about 85 acres. These
Mining and heap leaching activities would disturbed areas include open pits, waste
occur on a combination of Federal, State, dumps, and other surface disturbances.
and fee (i.e., private) lands. The Federal These areas are included in the disturbed
lands are administered by BLM and include acreage in Table 2-1 and would be
258 unpatented lode mining claims, as addressed under Summo's proposed
identified in Appendix A The State lands reclamation plan.
are held by Summo under lease from the
State of Utah; the fee lands are controlled Summo would commence development of
and/or owned by Summo. Table 2-1 the Lisbon Valley Project in the first
summarizes land ownership by project quarter of 1997 after all necessary permits
facility. and approvals have been obtained.
Construction of the mine and leach
The Lisbon Valley Project would facilities would take approximately 10
encompass all or parts of the following months, and full scale operations would
sections: commence in about November 1997.
Mining would occur at an average rate of
• Sections 22, 23, 24, 25, 26,27, 34, 12,500 tons of ore per day over a projected
35, and 36, T 30 S, R 25 E 10-year mine life. Final closure and
• Section 1, T 31 S, R25 E reclamation would take approximately five
• Sections 30 and 31, T 30 S, R 26 E additional years.
The powerline is discussed and mapped in 2.2.2 Mining Activities

Section 2.2.8. Summo proposes to fence
the majority of the areas proposed to be 2.2.2.1 General
disturbed, as shown in Figure 2-1, to
preclude public access. Fencing would not Summo would conduct open pit mmmg
be installed where natural topographic activities at the Lisbon Valley Project.
features (e.g., cliffs) preclude public Open pit mining involves stripping or
access. In such areas, fencing would abut removing the waste or non-ore bearing
the natural topographic feature. The rock to access the ore bearing rock. Two
fencing would be standard three-strand types of waste rock are typically
barbed wire. Gates would be installed, as encountered in open pit mining: waste
necessary, to provide access to the site. rock initially encountered at the surface,
However, the gates would be locked by which is overburden; and waste rock
Summo, except for the gate at the security encountered between horizons of ore
entrance to the mine and at the intersection bearing rock, which is interburden.
of the haul road and the Lower Lisbon Overburden and interburden are
Valley Road, as furthet: discussed in collectively referr~ to as "waste rock."
S~on 2.2.2.5. Ore and waste rock typically are either
ripped with a dozer or are drilled with a
rotary driller and blasted using a mixture of
2-2
:;-
!
-
0
I
- -
1000 2000
'
4000
SCALE IN FEET
_ _ _ _ PROJECT BOUNDARY
~ RECLAUATION SOIL STOCKPILE
<ll SEDIMENT REtENTION STRUCTURE
( _~ _____ PROPOSED FENCE UNE

A A' APPROXIMATE CROSS-SECTION
LOCATION
LISBON VALLEY COPPE~.PRO)~CT

FIG. 2-1
TABLE 2-1
PROPOSED DISTURBANCE BY FACILITY

AND SURFACE LAND OWNERSHIP
Facility Acreage
Total Federal Land State Land Fee Land
Open Pits
Sentinel #1 38 38 0 0
Sentinel #2 9 9 0 0
Centennial 116 89 27 0
GTO 68 0 40 28
Waste Rock Dumps
Dump A 186 106 80 0
DumpB 90 0 90 0
DumpC 118 118 0 0
DumpD 55 55 0 0
Leach Pad Area 266 56 0 210
Process Area and Facilities 21 19 0 2
Miscellaneous
Haul Roads 33 21 12 0
Plant Growth Medium 39 18 13 8
Stockpiles
69-kV Poweriine 64 45 11 8
Totals 1~lO3 574 273 247
Sources: Gochnour 1995; PacifiCorp 1995.
23996IR3.2 5115196(2:25 PM)/RPT13 2-4

ammonium nitrate and fuel oil (ANFO) to outcrops on the surface. The average
facilitate loading and hauling. ,Open pits are stripping ratio would be 0.93:1 (waste
wide at the surface and narrow as the pit is rock:ore), with an average annual stripping
deepened, with sequential benches ratio varying from 0.03:1-2.69:1. Mining
established at regular intervals based on would continue for an approximate seven-
rock integrity. Blasted ore and waste rock year period at an average rate of about
typically are loaded onto off-road end- 1,600,000 tons of ore per year over the
dump haul trucks by hydraulic shovels or first six years and approximately 275,000
front end loaders. The haul trucks tons in year 7. The total amount of
transport waste rock to the disposal or material mined would be about 19,100,000
dump areas and ore to the ore stockpile tons: 9,900,000 tons of ore and 9,200,000
area. Haul trucks move within the pit tons of waste rock. In general, further
using temporary roads on the surface of discussions of the Sentinel Pit will refer to
each bench with ramps extending between Sentinel Pit #1 unless otherwise noted.
two or more benches. More permanent
haul roads are constructed outside the pit Centennial Pit. This pit also would be
to the waste dumps or the ore stockpile developed with the commencement of
area. Summo's operations and would be located
west of the Lower Lisbon Valley Road.
2.2.2.2 Open Pits The average stripping ratio is 1.71:1, with
a high of 3.22:1 during years 3 and 4 as
Mining operations at the Lisbon Valley pre-stripping activities commence in Phase
Project would be conducted in four pits: III, described below. Mining would
Sentinel #1, Sentinel #2, Centennial, and continue over a nine-year period at an
GTO. The:final pit configurations are average annual production rate of about
depicted on Figure 2-1. Prior mining 3,000,000 tons of ore. A total of
activities removed some of the ore bearing approximately 74,300,000 tons of material
rock from all four pits. Summo's would be mined: 27,400,000 tons of ore
operations' would greatly expand the areal and 46,900,000 tons of waste rock.
extent of these existing pits. Summo would
commence mining in the Sentinel and Mining would occur in three phases due to
Centennial Pits, and would commence the existence of three distinct ore bodies
mining in the GTO Pit in approximately that have differing leaching characteristics.
year 7 after depleting the reserves in the
Sentinel Pits. Summo's proposed mining • Phase I would consist of mining
of the currently economical reserves oxidized ore with a high ore (i.e.,
associated with these four pits is detailed copper) grade. Year 1 pit
below. production would be restricted to
Phase I ore. Year 2 production
Sentinel Pits #1 and #2. These pits would would complete mining of Phase I
be east of the Lower Lisbon Valley Road and target certain higher grade ores
and would be included in Summo's initial contained in Phase IT.
site development activities. The pits would • Overall, Phase IT ore is more
have a low stripping ratio because the ore oxidized and has a lower average
2-5
grade than Phase lore. Phase IT during daylight hours, only once per day
production would occur from year on average, and approximately every other
2 into year 4. day. Broken waste rock would be loaded
• Phase ill ore is less oxidized and into 150-ton haul trucks by a 14-cubic yard
underlies a thick layer of waste front end loader beginning in year 1 and a
rock. Pre-stripping of the Phase ill 24-cubic yard loader beginning in year 3.
waste rock would occur in years 3
and 4 with mining occurring from Blasting of waste rock may not be required
~pproximately year 4 to year 9. for Phase Ill' of the Centennial Pit and the
GTO Pit based on the rock quality or
GTO Pit. This pit woUld be to the south of characteristics. Mining of waste rock in
the Lower Lisbon Valley Road and would these areas would be done by a contractor
have the highest strip ratio of the areas (only for GTO Pit) using dozers to rip and
mined at this project. The ore is covered scrapers to haul the waste rock material.
by a minimum of 100 feet of waste rock. Waste rock would be ripped using a large
Stripping of the waste rock would begin in dozer and hauled with 44-cubic yard
year 6 with a total of about 13,500,000 scrapers.
tons of waste rock mined that year. Mining
would occur through year 10 with an 2.2.2.4 Waste Rock Dumps
average stripping ratio of6.95:1. The total
material mined over the life of this pit Waste rock would be hauled from the open
would be approximately 42,500,000 tons: pits to four waste dumps: denoted A, B,
5,300,000 tons of ore and 37,200,000 tons C, and D, as depicted on Figure 2-1. The
of waste rock. acreage of each dump is presented in Table
2-1. The dumps would be able to contain
It is anticipated that groundwater would be the approximately 89,100,000 tons of
encountered by each of the pits to be waste rock. As an initial matter, suitable
mined. Water would be removed by a plant growth medium would be salvaged
combination of (a) pit water removal (i.e., from the waste dump sites and stockpiled
pumping water that flows into the pit) and for future reclamation purposes. The
(b) pit dewatering (i.e., establishing and dumps would be constructed by a
pumping wells located around the pits.) combination of end dumping from hau1
trucks and dozing the material over the
2.2.2.3 Mining Procedures side of the dump in 40- to 50-foot lifts
while . maintaining an overall 2.5:1
Summo would use dozers to rip ore and (horizontal:vertical) outslope.
waste and/or drill'and blast to fragment the
rock in the Sentinel Pits and Phases I and Waste rock from the Sentinel Pit #1 wou1d
IT of the Centennial Pit. Drilling would be be disposed in Dump D, which would be
performed using a 10-inch rotary drill, with located northwest of the pit and east of the
ANFO as the explosive. Blasting would Lower Lisbon Valley Road. The dump, as
occur in compliance with Mine Safety and designed, would hold over 2,100,000 tons.
Health Administration (MSHA)
regulations, Blasting would occur only
239961R3.2 5f1 5/96(2:25 PM)lRPTI3 2-6
The waste rock from Sentinel Pit #2 and A haul road would intersect the Lower
Centennial Pit would be disposed in Lisbon Valley Road northwest of the
Dump C, which would be to the north of Centennial Pit. The haul road would be
the Centennial Pit and east of the Lower used by off-road haul trucks to transport
Lisbon Valley Road. This dump, as ore bearing rock from the Sentinel Pits to
designed, would accommodate the ore crusher facilities and to transport
approximately 26,700,000 tons. waste rock from the Centennial Pit to
Dump C. Summo proposes to install stop
Two dumps would be developed near the signs at this intersection to stop traffic
GTO Pit, both sited west of the Lower along the county road and give the right-
Lisbon Valley Road. Dump A would be of-way to the haul trucks. In addition,
constructed to the west of the pit to hold signs would be installed along the Lower
about 30,800,000 tons. This dump would Lisbon Valley Road to warn pe0ple
accommodate waste from the GTO Pit. traveling this road of the mining operations
Dump B would be developed to the north and the upcoming haul road intersection.
of the GTO Pit and hold approximately Finally, the speed limit along this county
29,500,000 tons. This dump would accept road would be reduced to further minimize
waste rock from the Centennial and GTO safety concerns for the traveling public
Pits. Table 2-2 provides summary from Summo's operations. Proper lighting
infonnation on the four waste dumps. for nighttime operations would be
provided.
2.2.2.5 Haul Roads
2.2.2.6 Major Mine Equipment
Haul roads would be installed inside and
outside the pits, and among facilities to Various pieces of major mine equipment
access the pits, waste dumps, and the ore would be used at the Lisbon Valley
crushing facilities. Approximately 15,000 Project. Table 2-3 identifies this
linear feet of haul roads would be equipment.
constructed: 6,500 feet with the Sentinel
Pits, 800· feet with the Centennial Pit, 2.2.3 Crushing Activities
5,350 feet with the GTO Pit, and 2,350
feet common to several of the pits. 2.2.3.1 General
The typical haul road design would have a Ore bearing rock that is hauled from open
maxim~ grade of 10 percent and a ~dth pits (also known as run-of-mine (ROM)
of approximately 80 feet, inclusive of material) would vary in size. Crushing in
berms, to accommodate haUlage vehicles. multiple stages typically is perfonned to
Haul roads would vary from this design in reduce the ROM material to a consistent
three instances: (1) the haul road accessing size to allow conveyance and enhance
the bottom 120 feet of Sentinel Pit #1 recovery during the leaching process.
would have a 12 percent grade, (2) the Crushing would be used at the Lisbon
haul road accessing Sentinel Pit #2 would Valley Project to reduce the ROM material
be 50 feet wide at 12 percent grade, and to an unifonn size of 1Yz to 2 inches.
(3) the haul road accessing the bottom 60
feet of GTO Pit would have a width of
about 50 feet.
23!196fR3.2 M3:y ]5.1996(4:33 PM)IRPT/3 2-7
TABLE 2-2
WASTE ROCK DUMPS
Waste Dumps Acreage Approximate Volume Location

(Tonsi
Dump A 186 38,800,000 West ofGTO Pit
DumpB 90 29,500,000 North ofGTO Pit
DumpC 118 26,700,000 North of Centennial Pit
DumpD 55 2,100,000 Northwest of Sentinel Pit # 1
Summo identified a material swell factor of 40 percent (i.e., the difference between
naturally occurring rock and broken rock) and a loose density (i.e., volume conversion
factor) of 102 pounds per cubic foot or 0.73 cu. yd. per ton.
Source: Summo 1995b.
239961R.3.2 5/15/96(2:25 PM)/RPT13 2-8

TABLE 2-3
MAJOR MINE EQUIPMENT
Number of Pieces Equipment Description 1

1 Ingersoll Rand TB5 blast hole drill
1 Caterpillar D-9 dozer
1 Tradestar ANFO truck
2 Caterpillar 992 14 cu. yd. front end loader
1 Caterpillar 994 24 cu. yd. front end loader
7 Caterpillar 785B 150-ton haul trucks
1 Caterpillar 14G grader
1 Caterpillar D-9N dozer
1 15,000 gal. capacity off-road water truck
1 Caterpillar D-7 dozer
3 light plants
4 light duty pick-up trucks
1 maintenance truck
1 fuel and lube truck
1
The specifically listed equipment, or its equivalent, would be used by Summo at the
Lisbon Valley Project.
Source: Summo 1995c.
23996JR3.2 S11S196(2:2S PM)/RPT13 2-9

2.2.3.2 Crushing Facilities primary jaw crusher. The jaw crusher
would use a nominal setting to crush the
The crushing facilities would be located ore to 6 inches or smaller. Throughput
west of the Centennial Pit to the west of from the jaw crusher and grizzly undersize
the Lower Lisbon Valley Road. Suitable material would be collected on the 36-inch
plant growth medium would be salvaged wide primary crusher collecting conveyor.
and stockpiled from this area as part of Ore from the primary crusher would be
pre-production activities. ROM material transferred to a double deck vibrating
would be hauled to the site by ISO-ton off- screen. The top deck would have 3-inch
road haul trucks and deposited in the ROM screen openings and the bottom deck
stockpile. The ROM stockpile would be would have I ~-inch screen openings.
located adjacent to the ore receiving Oversize from the top and bottom decks
hopper and encompass an area capable of would be diverted to the secondary cone
holding approximately 100,000 tons (i.e., crusher.
roughly one week of production). Ore
from the stockpile would be retrieved by Secondaty Crushing Facility. The
front-end loader and deposited in the secondary cone crusher would operate
hopper; no direct dumping from the haul with a setting of 1~ to 2 inches.
trucks to the hopper would occur. Throughput from the cone crusher would
Crushing would occur through both join the vibrating screen undersize product
primary and secondary crushing facilities, and be conveyed to the heap leach pad.
as generally portrayed on Figure 2-2. The
crushing facilities would operate two or 2.2.3.3 ConveYing and Stacking
three shifts per day as necessary to meet
the needs of the heap leaching facility. Crushed ore would be transferred to the
heap leach pad by a series of conveyors,
Primary Crushing Facility. The hopper and stacked on a synthetically lined pad via
would be fitted with a stationary grizzly (or a radial stacker. Crushed ore would be
grate) with 24-inch openings. Material stacked in three 36-foot-high lifts, as more
passing through the grizzly would fall into fully described in Section 2.2.4.2.
a 30-yard surge hopper, while oversize
rocks would be removed and stockpiled. 2.2.4 Processing Activities
The oversize material would be crushed to
a smaller size by other methods (e.g., 2.2.4.1 General
portable crusher) and returned to the
hopper if the grade and quantity justi:fY Conventional copper recovery ill the
further treatment. United States primarily involved
processing high grade ore through various
A vibrating grizzly feeder would feed aqueous solutions and treatments in a mill.
material from the ore receiving surge The by-products of the milling process
hopper at an average rate of approximately were generally copper concentrate and
7S0 dry tons per hour. Ore not· passing saturated tailings. The tailings typically
through the grizzly (i. e., greater than were piped to a dammed area to allow for
6-inch diameter) would be routed to the evaporation and eventual reclamation.
239961R3.2 SIlS/95{2:2S P.M)I.RPT13 2-10
6'
'(:-t
) 1M-fill > .~ 'I 'I 'I
SI,nc (lb/llV
01240.
DUSI
CIILl£CtaR
02"01
"1_0" 0
Pick;'vP-P0W15
DUS,
CCCUCtOR fAA
02~,6.61
~
\
~.
fEEOER tt)o'tlO'j'Ul
lOJJ)£R 0Cf,o,,('(0ft
COlMYOR omOl
OJ260'0
NOTE:
1. OP£'R,'.11i»Q SCIIE()Ul£1 116-11"/0....... 70AYS/l'tEEI(
Ilf>
1<10
21~: I ~;
SOURCE: SUMMO 1996.
11.'1-0-1)
TO
Job No. 23996 PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
~
AREA 02 AND 03
Prepared by CRP CRUSHING AND SCREENING
OJ LISBON VALLEY COPPER PROJECT
m Date: 2/7/96 SAN JUAN CO., UTAH
Lower grade copper ore that is suitable plant growth medium. The
uneconomical for milling now can be facilities would consist of a heap leach pad,
processed by rather recently developed (pad), PLS pond, raffinate pond, one
leaching procedures. The ore-bearing rock stormwater pond, and associated solution
is crushed but not to the small size required collection channel and runoff diversion
for mill processing. The crushed ore is ditches. The facilities would be designed
placed, or heaped, on a synthetically lined to contain all solutions (i.e., process water
pad area (i.e., heap leach pad) where dilute and direct precipitation from a design
solutions of chemicals (i. e., sulfuric acid) storm event) within the system without
are introduced on top of the heap. The discharge to the environment.
solution trickles through the ore and is
collected at the bottom. The collected A conveyor corridor, access road, and
solution is typically referred to as pregnant diversion ditch would be constructed along
leach solution (PLS) because it is the south side of the pad. The conveyor
"pregnant" (or heavily laden) with ,copper. corridor would be installed directly south
The PLS is stored, as necessary, in a pond of the pad and would be about 60 feet
prior to being processed through a Solvent wide. The conveyor corridor and leach pad
ExtractionlElectrowinning (SX!EW) Plant. is then bounded by an approximate 6-foot-
In the SX!EW Plant, the copper is stripped wide berm. The diversion ditch would be
from the leachate, resulting in a solution constructed south of the perimeter berm to
typically barren of copper and referred to the dimensions discussed below.
as raffinate. The raffinate is routed to a
storage pond, enhanced with chemicals, Heap Leach Pad. The pad would
and recycled to the heap to continue the accommodate up to 45 million tons of ore
recovery process. and cover about 11.6 million square feet,
or 266 acres. The ore heaped on the pad
Summo would conduct only heap leaching would be placed in three lifts over four
at the Lisbon Valley Project. The heap different stages to accommodate ore
leaching fitcilities would be designed to production schedules.
process an average of750 tons per hour of
ore to produce 17,000 tons per year of The proposed pad would be graded to
copper cathodes. The system would be follow the natural topography of the valley
designed to produce London Metal to allow for solution flow via gravity
Exchange (LME) Grade A 99.99 percent dramage. Drainage would be to the north
copper cathodes. Each of the major and east. A solution collection channel
processing facilities of the Lisbon Valley would be constructed along the north edge
Project is discussed below. of the pad to route solution to the PLS
pond. The PLS pond would be located at
2.2.4.2 Heap Leach Facility the northeast comer of the pad.
The heap leach facilities, as depicted in

Figures 2-1, 2-3, 2-4, 2-5, and 2-6 would
be constructed to the west of the Lower
Lisbon Valley Road after removing the
239951R3.2 SflSf96{2:2S PM)JRPT/3 2-12

-
\ )J
Job No. : 23996
Prepared by : C.H.P
PLANT SITE PLAN
to
mL.__________
o
·~S~O~U~R~CE~:_J~.D~._W_E_L_S_H_A_N_D_A_S_S_O_CI_AT_E_S~I_IN_C_._1_9_96_.•D_a_te_:____~4/~1/_96____~__~LI~SB_O_N__VA~L_L_EY__C_O_PP_E_R__
PR_O_J_E_CT_.___
UFT 3
UFT 2
. ". .
·······:·:·.:'i~
". '1~ '.,
r COUECIION
ClWiNEl
-----------------
......:
~.
UFT 1
A HEAP CROSS SECTION 'SCAlE If FEi

2-4 UPGRADIE~T SIDE
SCALE: 1 40' = i .~ AND COLLECTION
o ,~ SECTION
. SCAlE IN FEEl"
'P
II
"I5
~~.
~, .
~~
.1 ••· . '.
--------
,."" .:...;:~. PERIMETER BERW AND .
~'" .: '.. ,. .
(COUECIION CHANNa
(SEE CROSS SEcnON D)
. : ... ORE. .
'.: ...... ."':." : . '-"""""' -
. . '-lEACH PAD ' .
UNER SYSTEM
'SECTION SOOl£ If F<ET
r~ SIDE
·40' i
o
'.00
1
i.6.~....:l
...... ~
~::j' ~LEACH
r PAD
UNER
10' UINIWUN
SECTION © CELL BERM CROSS SECTION
2-4 SCALE: 1# - 5' SCAt£ hi FtEf
o
I "I5
(C\ PERIMETER BERM CROSS SECTION

liB! SCALE: 1#
~
5'
If FEEl"
396
_ _ _ _"'I
LEACH PAD DETAILS
l, I.P
'"----1
1/96 LISBON VALLEY 99PPER P-ROJECT.
FIG. 2-4
.:,~.:>:·,,:.:'>.·i./·< ::>::_____ ORE
...... "..~ PROTECTIVE COVE~
DRAINAGE LAYER
I.
.' '.'. DRAIN PIPES (4" DIA, SLOTTED
OR PERFORATED) ON 50' CENTERS
~~~~~~~~~_ SYNTHETIC LINER (80 MIL HOPE)
.... ~__ CLAY LINER (COMPACTED SHALE)
~~~N~geE~W~TEW ff6,gf'
. ::',' . ' .. '.. '.,: .. ! : ":: ,":: '" ' .. - - YD.,
': ., .... ':":'.:,.: .... : ....: ...., ·~;SECONDARY LINER (COMPACTED SUBSOIL) 1.5'
. MIN,'
. . .. ' '~SUBSOIL
BANb'DRAIN (4" WICK
DRAIN) ON 20' CENTERS
ANCHOR DETAIL'
SCALE IN FEET
1 LEACH PAD LINER SYSTEM DETAIL
2-5 SCALE: 1 = 2' 1 --'1
SCALE IN FEET o 2
.1
o
'12
GEOGRID BETWEEN
SYNTHETIC LINERS
EXTENDED TO TOP OF
POND OR BERM SLOPE
INNER SYNTHETIC UNER
(80 MIL HOPE)
SOBSOIL .
POND LINER ANCHOR DETAIL.

POND LINER SYSTEM DETAIL SCALE: 1 = 2' SCALE IN FEET
SCALE: 1 = 2' SCALE IN FEET 1 --"""'i2'
-'\ o
o 2
Job No, : 23996
LINER DETAILS
Prepared by : C.H.P
mL-__________________________
~
CD
..____________________ ________________
SOURCE: J.D. WELSH AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 1996. Dote: 4/4/96
..________________________
~~
~~~~
FIG. 2-5
"-
~
$~fmrX ,.-----~---------~>------------------------"l~ :4
) ~ 'I
~=
~
III:.1J' LrAtll
ILS
>-----i~
LEACHSJ~~UII:r--· .~. ~
1
~'""' ~i :"''" rrr'''''''''''

INTERMEDIATE
)M-RWl8 SQlfA1£
m",oo g, ' \
m .w
••
. 1; kiJ ElLWASIl <€>
1
'
),'&,la$IIo."" >
"'''''' . °1
"' """,
=..!I .
_)_PR_OC" E;:; S ;';W: :':~: ': lER: '- .J>- - - - ~~

I" ---------------------~
FERROUS ---------------
SULFATE MIX
AGITATOR ... 1 FERROUS
SULFATE MIX
-------------------
----------------
"";::,
~
--
5'
FERROUS
SULFATE
MIX TANK
SULFAlt
MIX TANK
FERROUS SULFATE
DOSING PUMP
-~-- -~------- --------------"--------------------------

~ -----------------~
" II
'9 RECOV£REO OROANIC
I
5 I 6
151'""~ (
~I
( to t t t t ~ nl
~
TO IIHTER
IWT PIlm IPIS51m~OONC
LEACH I LEACH D T' ~I
0 1
IWflllATE PONO AAfnNA1E
PUMPS
IIfN' sow SOlU IWl' I
POND
_I
w
SOlH I SOlH I SOUl I !oCtD I SOUl
~~
w
" I
SlOR./J WAfER PUN!)
7
o 0
215.2 J01B.1 2878.7 2m.S 27l1.9 11.2 27l7.9 0.0 284,0 SOURCE: SUMMO 1996.
W W W W W ~ W W
M ~ M ~ ~ M M M
Job No. : 23996 PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
~ AREA 03 HEAP LEACHING
~ Prepared by : CRP LISBON VALLEY COPPER PROJECT
m __________ __________________________
~L- ~ ~~~
Date: __ 2/7/96__ ~~ ~~ ______________________
SAN JUAN CO., UTAH •
~
An impervious liner system would be below the ore heap until the ore stack is 10
constructed on the pad prior to placement feet high.
of any crushed ore. The liner system
would consist of, in ascending order, of (a) Finally, the solution collection channel on
one-foot of compacted in-place low the north side of the pad would have a liner
permeability soil, (b) wick ~rain and system consisting of, in ascending order,
geofabric for leak detection purposes, (c) (a) 2- feet of compacted clay material, (b)
,one-foot of clay material that is compacted 40-mil HOPE synthetic liner, (c) geogrid
to obtain a permeability of 1 x 10-7 cm/sec, for leak detection' purposes, and (d) 80-mil
(d) 80-mil thick high density polyethylene HOPE liner. The 80-mil HOPE liner
(fIDPE) synthetic liner, and (e) a 24-inch would be a continuation of the leach pad
thick layer of free-draining crushed ore for liner to provide a liner system to contain all
liner protection (Welsh 1996). The clay solutions. Within the collection channel,
material would be imported from the solution would be routed -from the pad to
Centennial Pit and an existing waste dump the pond system via PVC pipes (Welsh
stockpiled from historical mining of 1996).
Centennial Pit. The 80-mil HOPE sheets
would be welded together to fonn' a Design cross sections views are provided
continuous impermeable synthetic liner. in Figures 2-4 and 2-S.
Solution collection pipes would be placed Ore would be stacked or heaped on the
on the synthetic liner to enhance drainage pad in three lifts, each lift 'being about 36
of the solution from the pad and minimize feet in vertical height. The first lift would
the depth 0f solution (i.e., head) over the be offset from the edge of the pad a
liner. The pipes would be spaced minimum ef ·IS· feet to provide a buffer
approximately SO feet apart to control the zone between the toe of the lift and the
hydraulic head on the liner for, reduced edge of the lined pad. Subsequent lifts
seepage potential and to enhance the would be set back from the crest of the
stability of"the stacked ore. ' previous lift The face of each lift would be
sloped at the angle of repose of the
The conveyor corridor along the south side crushed ore, and result in a lift slope of
of the pad would have a lining system about 1.S:1 and an overall heap slope
comprised of, in ascending order (a) 2-foot (considering the set backs) of2:1.
compacted clay layer, (b) a 40-mil HOPE
synthetic liner, (c) a geogrid drainage layer, The pad would be constructed in four
and (d) an 80-mil HOPE synthetic liner. stages from east to west in an upgradient
The 80-mil HOPE liner would be an direction. Stage 1 would be about 2.S
extension of the 80-mil HOPE liner million square feet and contain up to 22
component of the leach pad. This corridor months of production in two 36-foot lifts.
would be lined because solution would be Stage 2 would be about 2.S million square
applied to the conveyed ore to agglomerate feet and increase the pad capacity to 42
I
I
and wet the ore prior to placement on the
pad. This lining system would extend
months of production in two lifts. Stage 3
would be -about 2.S million square feet and
increase the pad capacity to about 62
r 23996/R3.2 SIJSI96(2:2S P.M)JRPT/3 2-17
I
months of production in two lifts. At this The pond system is laid out such that
point, a third 36-foot lift would be placed stormwater flow is directed to the
over the existing Stages 1-3 pad prior to stonnwater pond and the raffinate pond
constructing Stage 4. Adding the third lift from the PLS pond. Runoff and solution is
would increase the operating time of the transferred via spillways.
first three stages to about 88 months.
Stage 4 would encompass about 4 million A liner system would be installed on the
square feet and provide the required solution ponds consisting of a 80-mil
capacity for the remainder of the project. HOPE liner over a 40-mil HOPE liner with
a leak: detection system between the liners
Solution Ponds. The solution ponds would (Welsh 1996). The lower, or secondary,
separately store the two types of leach liner would be placed over a 2-foot
solutions - PLS and raffinate - plus compacted clay subgrade with a prepared
contain runoff from the lined areas due to surface suitable for liner placement. A
the design stonn event. The ponds would geogrid material would be placed over the
be sized based on the criteria noted in secondary liner to act as a drainage
Table 2-4. pathway for the leak detection system.
The geogrid would be covered by the,
A stormwater pond would be built to upper, or primary, synthetic liner.
collect and store overflow from the
solution ponds. Summo designed the The leak detection system would consist of
stormwater pond to contain 100 percent of a gravel sump installed in the low corner of
the runoff from the lined areas due to a the floor of each pond. The sump would
major design storm event based on a one collect seepage, if any, from the geogrid
month wet cycle of precipitation. material. A riser pipe would extend from
the sump to the crest of each pond to serve
A water balance model was constructed to as a monitoring well. The riser pipe wpuld
simulate several precipitation and runoff be a 6-inch diameter pipe to accommodate
scenarios, ·along with varying degrees of a sump pump for solution removal in the
leach pad development. During these event of leakage in the primary liner.
simulations, it was concluded that a one
month wet cycle of heavy precipitation in A liner system also would be installed in
October was the worst case stormwater the stonnwater pond. An SO-mil HOPE
condition. The return frequency for this synthetic liner (i.e., primary liner) would be
cycle is 100 years. During years 1 through placed over a 2-foot compacted clay
5, the expected runoff from the one month subgrade with a prepared surface suitable
wet cycle is 64.6 acre-feet. Stormwater for liner placement.
storage required for years 6 through 10
was found to be 69.6 acre-feet. Along
with operational storage of 23.2 acre-feet,
the total volume for all three ponds is 88
acre-feet for years. 1 through 5 and 92.7
acre-feet for years 6 through 10.
2-18
7()
TABLE 2-4
POND DESIGN CRITERIA

Criteria Design
Operation 24 hrs. at 3,000 gal. per minute (gpm)
Stonnwater Maximum accumulation of stormwater from a one-

month wet cycle with a 100 year recurrence interval,
as calculated by a water balance
Freeboard Minimum of 3 feet above maximum capacity
Sources: Welsh 1996.
The solution ponds would not be covered The diversion ditches around the project
or netted. However, a mitigation plan site would be designed to pass the peak
would be developed by Summo in flow resulting from the 100-year, 24-hour
consultation with Federal and State storm event. Based on the topography and
regulatory officials if problems occur with upgradient .drainage areas, the typical ditch
resident and avian fauna. Experiences at cross section to carry the estimated peak
the Sanchez Copper Project and other flows would be a trapezoidal section with a
copper heap leach projects in Arizona minimum 6-foot bottom width, side slopes
suggest no avian mortalities from open excavated at 2:1, and a depth of 2 feet.
p~nds (BL~ 1992). The slope of the ditch would not exceed 1
percent.
Diversion Ditches. Diversion ditches
would route natural runoff from areas 2.2.4.3 Heap Leaching
upgradient of the Lisbon Valley Project
around the heap leach facility. The primary Solution for the leaching process would be
ditch would be installed along the south stored in the raffinate pond. Sulfuric acid
side of the pad and to the east beyond the and make-up water would be added, as
facilities. This diversion ditch would needed, to this pond to maintain the acid
merge into a natural drainage that exits the strength at a pH 'of about 2.0, and solution
property to the north. Runoff from the volume necessary for leach recovery.
west side of the pad would be diverted into Pumps at the pond would deliver raffinate
a diversion ditch along the north side of the to a main header, which feeds branch lines
pad. This ditch also would intercept runoff at approximately 100 foot spacings. The
from the north side of the valley. No branch lines would connect to a network of
diversion ditch is required on the east side pipes laid out on top of the portion of the
of the pond. heap'to be leached. The branch line would
239961R3.2 S/lS/96{2:2S PM)/RPT13 2-19

have spray or drip irrigation emitters to would consist of two separate circuits: the
distribute the raffinate to the heap. SX Circuit and the EW Circuit.
The solution would be applied primarily SX Circuit. The SX circuit would consist
with drip emitters to minimize evaporation of three mixer/settlers and associated
losses, minimize solution drift from the storage tanks. The function of these
pad, and reduce fresh water maIce-up components .is explained below and
requirements. In order to maintain the detailed on Figure 2-7.
water balance during periods of heavy
precipitation or snow melt, some of the The plant would have two extraction
drip emitters nearer the middle of the pad mixer/settlers (designated EI and E2) and
maybe replaced with spray (e.g., sprinkler) one stripping mixer/settler. Each mixer/
nozzles to increase evaporative losses and settler would consist of a pump mix box,
reduce water volumes in the system. The an auxiliary mix box, and a settler with
spray emitters would not be used in, high covers. The pump mix box would contain
wind situations to reduce the potential for an impeller designed to mix the PLS and
solution drift off of the lined pad area. organic (i.e., extraction) solution, and to
provide hydraulic head. Solution from the
The raffinate solution would be applied at pump mix box would flow through the
an average application rate of 0.004 auxiliary mix box for a total retention time
gallons per minutelfoot2 (gpm/£Y). The of at least two minutes before entering the
solution would percolate through the heap covered settler.
dissolving copper in the ore as a copper
sulfate solution. To maintain the grade of The PLS would be pumped at about 3,000
copper in the PLS pond, an intermediate gpm to'the EI extraction mixer/settler. In
solution sump would collect leach solution the mixer, PLS would contact the organic
from partially leached ore. The solution. The organic solution would
intermediate solution would be pumped to contain an organic chelating agent
fresher ore on the pad to increase the PLS (extractant) dissolved in a high flashpoint
grade. The final PLS, which would contain kerosene (diluent). The chelating agent
about 3.0 grams per liter (gil) of copper, preferentially absorbs copper from the
would be collected by collection pipes and PLS. The partially stripped PLS would
routed to the PLS pond. PLS would be separate from the organic solution in the
pumped from this pond to the SXfEW settler and flow to the E2 extraction
Plant. .Figure 2-6 provides a general mixer/settler. In this second mixer, most
schematic ofthe heap leaching process. of the remaining copper would absorb onto
fresh organic solution. The organic
2.2.4.4 Solvent Extraction/ solution would be separated from the
Electrowinning Plant
The SXlEW Plant would be constructed to

the east of the heap leach pad and west of
the Lower Lisbon Valley Road. The plant '
2399&'R3.2 SlISJ96(2:2S PM)lRP'TI3 2-20

·.Jf~r
~ ~;u';;::nJa;
r~~s~
1: ~Kp RElURH PU'"
041102
SOURCE: SUMMO 1996.
Job No. 23996 PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM

a Prepared by : CRP AREA 04 SOLVENT EXTRACTION
~ LISBON VALLEY COPPER PROJECT
<0
OJ
Date : 2/7/96 SAN JUAN CO .• UTAH
~
FIG. 2-7
~
stripped acid (or raffinate) solution in the first heat exchanger or electrolyte
settler. The raffinate solution would flow interchanger would recover heat from
through a flotation column to remove and electrolyte solution being pumped back to
recover entrained organic material before the SX circuit. The second heat exchanger
being pumped back to the raffinate pond would use hot water to heat the strong
for re-use on the heap pad. The organic electrolyte solution if cold weather or start-
solution does not achieve 100 percent up conditions make the extra heat
recovery; thus, the raffinate would contain necessary. The water would be heated
approximately 0.3 gil of entrained copper. with propane or natural gas.
The loaded organic solution containing The strong electrolyte initially would flow
copper would flow to the stripper through scavenger EW cells and then
mixer/settler tank and would be mixed with through commercial EW cells. Both cell
a high strength sulfuric acid solution to types use electrolysis to plate out copper
form the copper-rich aqueous electrolyte. on specifically designed stainless steel
The copper ions would transfer to the cathodes. . The scavenger cells would
aqueous phase and be separated (i. e., protect the majority of the copper in the
stripped) from the organic. The pregnant other cells from impurities, which might
aqueous strip solution (strong acidic pass the electrolyte filter.. In both the
electrolyte) would be filtered before being scavenger and commercial EW cells,
directed to the EW circuit. copper would be deposited onto the
cathodes. During this process, water
The solutions used in the leach and SX would dissociate to generate oxygen at the
circuits would be recycled in a closed loop anodes. Additional sulfuric acid also
system to reduce losses. Losses would would be generated. Solution from the
occur through evaporation, entrainment in scavenger cells would flow to the
the heap, or entrainment in the orgamc electrolyte recirculation tank.
solution to the EW circuit.
Guar and cobalt sulfate solutions would be
IICrud" or impurities would be collected in added to both the strong electrolyte
the SX settlers and from the flotation solution before it enters the scavenger cells
column overflow. The crud would be and the electrolyte recirculation tank.
decanted into a pair of tanks so that the Guar, a plant (i.e., legume) derivative,
organic and aqueous solutions can be would be added to create smoother copper
recovered and recycled. 'cathode plates; cobalt sulfate would be
added to reduce the anode corrosion rate.
EW Circuit. The EW circuit is designed to
plate out the copper from the strong acidic Electrolyte solution from the electrolyte
electrolyte onto cathodes. This circuit is recirculation tank would be pumped
descnoed below and detailed on Figure through the commercial cells, where
2-8. additional copper would be plated out, and
then returned to the electrolyte
The strong electrolyte solution would be recirculation tank. A portion of the
heated in a pair of heat exchangers. The recirculation tanks solution would be
2-22
11
:r~·· :-··i·rrr~:-i~-:- r·i ·:···iV;·.r~·~==-~·::~==== -------~-- -----------------)~~,~
[)::
R[(;tlntR
059101
1]~J~t£~<W}~~ttr_.-:~~i ....._.~_ ;i~ touafRCW. c(us
.. . . _. ___ . _ . _, ~&o:k U A
.... ;..._h I~
fort U(CIRO'MIII/IIIO crus I rEEO£R
~ .,~.~ . -
---~1~~~~t~~1-~~~~~~3~B~r ..........~ ~
I A 0",""
I 1.
".__._. --- ._........... - -". .-. '.'- ............... -" ..........

SfellO"
_...... -_ ...-..__ ......... - ..... ,. , _... A
'J( '{y
..........
~~~4~r-~r8[C5~n~S ElECIROMHHIHO ttLlS J5U,?n~~cg}6mLS
1._. . . . _. _._._ .............I
._------------------
r----- ~UAA LliXII!O
[()UCTOA lit
rUlIIIEl057801
!I V
~
lV/l (LECIROlYIE
UISO. PORf,AOl[
PUIJP
mfU: s.\IJPIlR OSII04 II .& 0
~
O~790.
t Wc1R~8tn~1I
--~~----
PUlIl'S &0
-
____
__ _ __ _
~
---<= A\'.a~1$\I'l' ~
<
~-~-- mo.,
C~f,~, ~.~
~mStfOwtR
ru:<tASII/ <f,f.*flt§ _
STRWI No,
0!S<"'1lOIl
.....,, 1m",."• """,
.ft,
II~ ~
I
01"
I
" .g~
fI:I ".11:
II
~~~ ~~
II
..
..
fi'
-r
\I
?i ~
" ..,.
.~
" mil
\I II
'''1:''
...... ';;r&;
II
= "
" W8l. /I
'frm " » . .. r--:-!L f-:!:L "

/I
= ,." "'" ....""" :I't,

Hm tou.,
.t!ll.
=..
W
~ lltlt !&'ll ~
Oft "fr ffi/t'1W"-S:
lila""
~
,.
'" '"
I(J
~
HI HI
~ ~ ~
HI HI .. . NO
""'"
,.
NJ .
,... 14 .. .
'"'" '"'"
,, , ..., ""~,
1<0
'" '"'" .... "'",
"M
'"" COIOI COIOI
lIose POI,ns l- -(n
l-{-fwt713u
uooo
"" u." 1.11" t.I'" 1.'1
. •, "--- '" o;SlRlSt/llOII
~QJ~
IlI'Y "'J .101
1.11 " '..", .., "'1.1."
U. 'U.
f'OI
I,ll
lit /I lit
'''' ...1.1. I
'"'0> IHI
-_. 1+ , , 0' U I
• r+-
t,l' 1.1' I,U f," 1.11 1.11
--- ---
,1.1 "
--- m. . , .n--- ._- ---" ---m" ---• •-- • --• ---" •
III II•
---" -.-" --" '"--- ---'" I-ffii"
"I
~
0
... , ~
--- --- --- --- 0_
100.0 sro
lJO<JIO CPU ""
t.11
,/I fU ... 11. "'.
I... 1.11 UI ....
'10'
t.11
110.
1.11 ""
t."
II
t.1I
I."
II II
1.11
II
1.1'
Itt
1.1.
1.11 1.11
I
, • to. I-+- lI.t IIU
1.1l "! ~- --- , , !rl-
UI OJ U I
""""1£'" --- --'"

III
_.- --- >1. ILl
_.-
--- --- -- --'" --- '" --- ---
"I ILl IU /U
_.-• _.-!~ -- ---
" 0
._- --- ._- --- • 0
_00 00-
- -- SOURCE: SUMMO 1996.

Job No. : 23996 PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
;1
I')
Prepared by : CRP
Date: 2/7/96
(AREA 05) ELECTROWINNING
SAN JUAN CO., UTAH
FIG. 2-8
~
pumped through the electrolyte building, and would be used to perform
interchanger to recover heat before being various tests to maintain correct ore grade
pumped back to the S 1 stripper mix box as in the mine and enable the process plant to
lean electrolyte. Sulfuric acid and water maintain high copper qUality. The
would be added to the electrolyte laboratory building would include a wet
recirculation tank, as needed for proper bench area; fine bench area; coarse reject
operations. bench area; and bench area for jaw crusher..
Cathode Handling. After the copper is Shop. The truckshop repair building would
plated out, the cathodes would be removed be constructed to the south of the SXlEW
from the EW cells and transferred to the Plant. The building would be a two-story
cathode handling system with a bridge building to accommodate mine equipment
crane, as generally portrayed on Figure and would contain oil storage and
2-9. The cathode handling system would dispensing tanks and equipment, overhead
wash the cathodes with hot water, flex and crane, antifreeze storage tank and
separate the copper plates from the mother dispensing equipment, wash bays, waste oil
blanks, weigh and sample the copper storage tank' and evacuation equipment,
plates. and band the plates for shipping. and drainage sump to contain spills within
The plates would be shipped off site for the truckshop area. The sump would
further fabrication purposes. contain an oil separation tank and storage
tank for collection and proper disposal.
2.2.5 Support Facilities
Warehouse. A warehouse would be housed
Numerous facilities would be constructed within the same building as the truckshop.
and installed to support the Lisbon Valley The warehouse would store the nec~ssary
Project. These various support facilities spare parts and supplies required to
are addressed below and depicted on maintain Summo's operations. The
Figure 2-3: warehouse and truckshop would be
separated by offices to house the
Administration Building. The administra- warehouse personnel, operating personnel,
tion building would be a one-story building and truckshop personnel.
constructed north of the SXlEW Plant.
The building would include offices for all Fuel Storage. A fuel storage and
of the administrative personnel required for dispensing station would be built near the
the project, a separate locker room with truckshop/warehouse building for diesel
showers for both male and female mine fuel and unleaded gasoline. The station
personnel, a first aid room for emergency would be used to operate the mine fleet
medical situations, a lunch room, and a and small vehicle fleet. Diesel fuel would
conference and training room. Sewage be stored in two IS,OOO-gallon above
would be directed to a septic tank and ground storage tanks and unleaded
drain field. gasoline would be stored in a S,OOO-gallon
above ground storage tank. Annual fuel
Laboratory. A' laboratory would be· requirements are summarized in Table 2-S.
constructed south of the administration The fuel storage area would be bermed,
2-24
,I
,I
ELEClROVllHlIlI!O
BRIDGE ClW.r.
057.J01
~l[CJriOWiiiNiifG-NifA'_••• _.•_.......J@j£~f.q......~...... =. . 0 . . . -.. . r·-·····--- ..·.-".
I
__ ~.~.. FsOL.. -'" CMIIODE LlFIING [ .----------''- :3~~~f~;7_~
"l
IIAlES 059JOI
·--i.;:--··_···_····_··_·_·_·__ ·_···__··_·J
'--"-"-"-"- -"-"-"-"-"-"-"-"-"-"-"-"-"
A ~
"-"-"-"--'-"-"-"-"-
~~~~NG tt~~~E . !
2 F~~~~'''''-'-----!<e> ~~J:~~~~GWtJl!mRE& ~-g;J~ftll~r°i':~I~~I~gR~~c~~tLE1E I,
I'
WASil
- • Y_
-t;; -I
~\~~:~~
.Yi
W - ITIil
Smr;~NG
~
CAlIIODE
FOR S1UDY PURPOSES. IIIE SlnlPPll1G
MACHINE VlILl DE A SEMI·AUTOMATIC
/MCIIiNE AS MANUFACTURED BY VlIIIMEC.
'
,I
)
Ir ~:ilECYC~;'~
-4
~ t ....... _.= :···. ·7..·-
-~
Slim SPRAY
..·-..-..· - - Pv91mhl
9
~
----~
WIIX MilKE-UP
I
I
I
'--' ~
WAX !AOto
m
0,'J',,1WB2b. /.,/
~7 I,
~
____ ~ _____ _____ ~ .. EieEJ ~~--·-·-STiifi'::t1:'Ur·~···-:•
• •••••• ....-wTn. ••••• • ••••• • ~•••••••••••• ,=i'iW. ~ .. -.-----.-..--.-...
OF.SCEIIUER CAlIIOOE lMNSfER W CIiAiN CONY. I a Q
, PUMP COll'IEYon WElg~lI~~~~E fi~1:~7~J Ullif g~:;~J~ES I" FORKLIFT
,
'1
L._.._.. _j_. _. _. ___. _. __. :. . _. _. _. __. ._. _. _. __ ._. _. _. _._. _. J
--~
~ TO SIOflAGE
CAli/ODE WASH
ilEAl EXCIIANGER
056703 ~---~
1 fr
4g-
CATiIDOE MfA
SU[.[P PUMP
051301
mrtiJI{owER
05980ZA & D
siRriiiiiO.- . . -T- J - 4 - '5- 6 -"'-j- 9 10 --1-1- --i2" "iJ

- _...---.... CiiiiOOi C-'.IHOO[ HOI rna RElURI. CAnlooc Iioi'- -WASil' IV""- ViiX- SiiiiP 'Wi.SiI BUlIOlE' '1101
nOM RINSI: TO WASIl WAIER WASIl WAIER TIIIK REcr~L IW<E- PUMP flllK IJAlli0Dt WAIER
O[SCRIPnOH r:H .1tA1 RtClRe WASil unoII' UP OISCIIllC onew TO CAlli
EXCIUIG (Ib/l,,) (Ib/Iu) WASIl
COmR WAiiii- WMER -WA1ER • WAiER WAltR YiAiEii' W""- IiAX Wi:1"@' WAIER ••£Q.PPtR Wi.iER
,W!:!!....._U""M.8
199.9Q, ___ - - ""'i9oOO
54.6
--
;~~"""'--~II-"-- 21.0 400.0 400.0 400.0 400.0 .!.~_ B_ iJ8- 100.0 __~ •• ..::.:::.. .m.o_
- - 'ToO 1.00- IJiij- -'r.oo 1:00 ..!:QI!... • ___ .J.:..OQ... MQ.. . _ _ 1.00
49.0' - - - ---- 49.0 SOURCE: SUMMO 1996.
17000 _ _ • _ _ .-- - -.. - - --IiiiOO'
4.0 .lliL 31+.0 • ..!00.0 Too.O 400.0 "'TII- T,iO- '0:0- "4.0" -:::::::-. ~8.0
I....J='---,_ _--'I__---'~ _1.00 1.00 I.<!O_ 1.00 I.IX1, 1.00 1.00 Job No. : 23669 PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
~ (AREA 5) CATHODE HANDLING
~ Prepared by eRP LISBON VALLEY COPPER PROJECT
________________________________________________ ________________ ________________________ __--,
~
~L- ~
Date: 2/7/96
~
SAN JUAN CO., UTAH

~
FIG. 2-9
TABLE 2-5
CHEl\1ICAL STORAGE AND USE ESTIMATES
Material Estimated Annual Quantity

Sulfuric Acid 60,000 tons
Extractant 4,200 gal.
Diluent (kerosene) 30,000 gal.
Ferrous Sulfate 3.0 million lbs.
Cobalt Sulfate 20,000Ibs.
Chlorine 9,000Ibs.
Gasoline 250,000 gal.
Diesel 2.~ million gal.
Ammonium Nitrate 2,700 tons
Source: Ac41pted from Gochnour 1996a.
lined with a HDPE synthetic liner laid over occasionally in the EW circuit, and for
a minimum 3-inch sand layer underliner, agglomeration of ore on the conveyor.
and sloped to a low point to collect any Sulfuric acid would be added to the
sp~ed mat~rial. raffinate pond, and the raffinate solution
would be applied to the copper ore mass
Chemical Use and Storage. The various on the leach pad as described in Section
chemicals that would be used at the Lisbon 2.2.4.3. After application to the leach pad,
Valley Project and annual quantities are the copper-laden acid solution (PLS)
summarized in Table 2-5. All chemicals would be routed through the SX!EW
would be stored on lined bermed pads circuit and returned to the raffinate pond,
within the fenced, security patrolled area. to be used over and over again. Since the
The bermed areas would be designed to sulfuric acid solution is cycled in a closed
store. at a minimum, 150 perc~nt of the loop process, no waste product or waste
volume of the largest storage tank. Signs solution containing sulfuric acid would be
would be posted around the storage areas generated for disposal. Since acid is
to provide warning of the potential hazards consumed in the leaching process,
associated with the stored materials. additional sulfuric acid would need to be
added to the solution periodically. Annual
Sulfuric acid would be used primarily for consumption of sulfuric acid would be
heap leaching of copper ore, but also about 60,000 tons. Sulfuric acid would be
2399&'R3.2 SIlSJ96{2:2S PM)/RPT13 2-26
shipped to the mine by tanker truck and returned to the SX circuit within the PLS.
stored in a tank that would, be located It is estimated that annual consumption of
within a bermed area to minimize migration diluent would be 30,000 gallons. Diluent
of accidentally spilled material. would be shipped to the mine by tanker
truck and would be stored in a tank in the
Extractant would be used in the SX circuit SX plant area. This tank would be located
for absorption of copper from the PLS. It in a secondary containment vessel within a
would ,be introduced into the circuit in bermed pad area to minimize the migration
mixers within the SXlEW plant. As the of spilled material and contamination of
process solution reaches the end of the soils.
circuit, the organic extractant solution is
separated from the stripped acid solution Ferrous sulfate would be used in
(raffinate) and recirculated in the SX maintaining the chemistry of the process
circuit. Extractant is generally contained solution. Since solution is cycled in a
within this "closed loop" process, with . "closed loop" process, no waste products
minimal losses to the raffinate pond or waste solution containing ferrous sulfate
expected. The modest quantities of would be generated for disposal. Annual
extractant that would escape the SX circuit consumption of ferrous sulfate would be
with the raffinate would be either about 1,500 tons. It would be shipped to
evaporated/volatilized in the raffinate the mine by truck in sacks and stored in
pond, or would be sprayed on the heap those sacks near the raffinate pond in a
leach pad with the raffinate solution and bermed area to minimize migration of
returned to the SX circuit within the PLS. accidentally spilled material.
It is estimated that annual consumption of
extractant would be 4,200 gallons. Cobalt sulfate would be used in the EW
Extractant would be delivered to the mine circuit to control anode corrosion. No
by truck and would be stored in the barrels waste products or waste solution
it is shipped in from the manufacturer. containing cobalt sulfate would be
These barrels would be stored at the generated for disposal. Annual
SXlEW plant within a bermed area to consumption of cobalt sulfate would be
minimize the migration of spilled material about 10 tons. It would be shipped to the
and contamination of soils. mine by truck in sacks and stored in those
sacks near the SXlEW plant in a bermed
Diluent (kerosene) also would be used in area to minimize migration of accidentally
the SX circuit in the extraction solution. As spilled material.
described for extractant, diluent would
generally be contained within the "closed Chlorine would be used at the mine for
loop" SX process, with minimal losses to water treatment purposes. It would be
the raffinate pond expected. The modest shipped in cylinders that would be stored in
quantities of diluent that would escape the a secure area.
SX circuit with the raffinate either would
be evaporated/volatilized in the raffinate Gasoline would be used to power light
pond, or would be sprayed on the heap vehicles . at the mine. It would be
leach pad with the raffinate solution and completely consumed by mine vehicles, so
239961R3.2 5/15196(2:25 PM)lRPTI3 2-27
no waste would be generated for disposal. transported to an appropriate off-site
Annual consumption of gasoline would be facility for recycling or disposal.
about 250,000 gallons. It would be shipped
to the mine by tanker truck and would be Antifreeze is composed primarily of
stored in a 5,000-gallon above ground ethylene glycol and would be used in
storage tank in the fuel storage area near virtually all mine vehicles. Antifreeze
the truck shop. The fuel storage area would be shipped to the mine by truck in
would be constructed within a bermed, drums or tanks and would be stored in the
HDPE-Iined area to minimize the migration truck shop on a concrete floor above a
of spilled material and contamination of drainage sump to prevent spills on the
soils. ground and soil contamination. Routine
maintenance of heavy equipment and other
Diesel fuel would be used in large mine vehicles would generate waste
quantities to fuel heavy equipment at the antifreeze, which also would be stored in a
mine and would be mixed with ammonium tank in the truck shop. This waste
nitrate for blasting (ANFO). Diesel would antifreeze tank would .be periodically
be completely consumed by mine vehicles emptied by a contractor and the waste
and in the blasting process, so no waste antifreeze would be transported to an
would be generated for disposal. Annual appropriate off-site facility for processing
consumption of diesel would be about 2.3 or disposal.
million gallons. It would be shipped to the
mine by tanker truck and would be stored Ammonium nitrate is used for blasting
in wo IS,OOO-gallon above ground storage when combined with fuel oil (Le., diesel)
tanks in the fuel storage area near the truck (ANFO). Since ammonium nitrate would
shop. The fuel storage area would be be completely consumed during blasting
constructed within a bermed, HOPE-lined events, no waste products would be
area to minimize the migration of spilled generated for disposal. Annual
material and contamination of soils. consumption of ammonium nitrate would
be about 2,700 tons. It would be shipped
Oil and lubricants would be used by light to the mine by truck and stored in silos or
and heavy mine equipment and, to some bins in a bermed area to minimize
extent, in drilling and other activities. They migration of accidentally spilled material.
would be shipped to the mine by truck in
drums or tanks and would be stored in the 2.2.6 Water Supply
truck shop on a concrete floor above a
drainage sump to prevent spills on the Water to meet the operational
ground and soil contamination. Routine requirements of the project would come
maintenance of heavy equipment and other from wells developed near the site.
mine vehicles would generate waste oil and (potable water would be provided by
lubricants, which would be stored in waste bottled water.) A number of test holes
oil tanks in the truck shop. These waste oil were drilled at the site and identified an
tanks would be periodically emptied by a aquifer at approximately 250-300 feet
contractor and the waste oil would be . below ground surface. The aquifer would.
provide the process water requirements for
2399&R3.2 Sl151!l6(2:2S PM)/RPT13 2-28
the project of up to 1,000 gpm. Well increasing the moisture content of ore
water would be stored in a fresh water placed on the leach pad.
storage tank located southeast of the ore
crushing , facility. A minimum of a 2.2.7 Work Force
100,000-gallon reserve would be
maintained for fire protection. Personnel requirements for the Lisbon
Valley Project are separated into two
The well water contains chloride salts. A phases: construction and operations. The
reverse osmosis (R.. 0.) desalinization plant construction phase would take
would be constructed to remove approximately 10 months and employ
impurities, including chloride ions, from approximately 80 people.
the well water for water used in the
SX!EW Plant. Chloride would pit cathode A maximum of approximately 143 people
mother blanks if it became too would be employed at anyone time during
concentrated in the electrolyte. A small the operations phase, with a majority of the
electrolyte bleed stream would be routed work force coming from the surrounding
to the raffinate pond to control chloride communities. The operations work force
and iron concentrations which could build would consist of people who have mining
up in the EW circuit. experience from other mining operations.
The anticipated total operations work force
Water from the fresh water storage tank is identified by year in Table 2-7, and by
would be pumped to the RO. plant. Water shift in Table 2-8.
processed through the plant would be
stored in the RO. water storage tank. 2.2.8 Electrical Power
Brine from the R O. plant would be routed
to the raffinate pond. Power requirements for the plant are
approximately eight megawatts. The
The water balance for the Lisbon Valley . existing line to the site does not have the
Project presumes a processing flow rate of capacity required to meet this power
approximately 3,000 gpm. That is, the demand. Power is available from either a
SX!EW Plant would be designed to 69-kV powerline or a 138-kV powerline,
process 3,000 gpm ofPLS. This flow rate both of which are located approximately
would be recovered as PLS from the heap 6.5 miles west of the Lisbon Valley Project
leach pad, stored in the PLS pond, routed (Figure 2-11). A transfonner would. be
through the zero discharging SXfEW required to step down the power from the
Plant, and returned to the raffinate pond 138-kV line to a new 69-kV powerline
for reuse on the heap. Figure 2-10 depicts feeding the plant.
a simplified water balance for the project.
A 69-kV powerline would be built for
Approximately 907 acre-feet per year on approximately 10.8 miles along a 50-fo'ot
average would be consumed by the project right-of-way from the existing Hatch
( for the life of the ~e (Table 2-6). Water substation east to the Lisbon Valley
would be consumed by evaporation and by Project.
! 239961R3.2 5/1SI96(2:25PM)JRPT13 2-29

f.VAPORATIOH AOO EVAPORATION AOO
SPRAY lOSSES SPRAY LOSSES
\66. GPI.I
r-------
PRECIPITATION 157.9 CPM
IlArrlNAl£ IIIEAP r
IL~J.J~2~4;.'~C~P~M_[=~~=}3,:::,:'517,~t~O:PMi:=]~=j
llEAP 3,000 Q,P'M
t---------..;P;.:.;LS..;;.;;...;;.;..;,;;..-.---4) TO PROCESS
(INTEilMEDIATE ltACli SQWTlOU)
n
ffi
627.2 CPM2
903,206 GPD
316,122,100 G/YR
.----------------------.::::::::::::.....::!.!!!....-......-,-<"
M~~ / PROCESS RETURN
.(33.5 GP"O
<
J
WEll WATER MAKEUP WATER
503.0 GPM 27,566 CPO
PUMPS
9,648,000 O/yR
724,320 GPO
PLANT WATER 253,512,000 GIY
STORACE TANI( 5,472 CPO
\ l 1,915,200 C/YR
RAFFINATE POND
178,986 GPO 1(124,2 OPM)

62,610,100 G/YR I
I
I
I 25,248 OPO
I S
• WO J7. Ce6'~1;)°L
I 8,836,BOO G/YR
I
I FIRE WATER
l SYSTEM Ji'!PB.AJjJS 10,800 GPO
) ~:Wd':?' LOSS)
RESERVE= 100,000 GAL. 3,780,000 C/YR
CAPACITY= 1,500 GPM
5,400 GPO !
l,a90,000 G/YR (Jb'if LOSS)
MOO GPO
I'lOltS:
1,890,000 C/VR 108ir[8~~) )
1. WATER REQUIRED TO WET ORE
~+478 IPH - 0.10 (10% = 15%-5% MOISTURE) 84,000 GPO
m57.RO~S~UST
W ~ 53.11 STPH WIITER ~ 212.4 GPM 29,400,000 CjVIl
• OPM = GPO
1440 MIN./OAY
• 350 O/Y
2. 627.2 GPM IS AN AVEMGE PfAK SOURCE: SUMMO 1996.

DEMAND OVER lifE Of MINE.
Job No. : 23669 SIMPLIFIED WATER BALANCE
~ Prepared by : CRP
..
<0 LISBON VALLEY COPPER PROJECT
8l Date: 2/7/96 SAN JUAN CO., UTAH
~ --------------------------------------------------------~------------------~-----------------------------------'
FIG. 2-10
TABLE 2-6
PROJECT WATER USE BY YEAR
Flow Water Consumed

Required for Operations
Year Activities {gpm2 {ac-ftlyr2
Year 0 Construction Period 100 161.33
Year 1 Sentinel and Centennial Pit start; 570 919.58
processing starts
Year 2 Sentinel and Centennial pits; processing 612 987.34
Year 5 Peak: water demand; GTO pit starts 902 1455.20
Year 6 Centennial Pit reaches final depth, mining 833 1343.88
continues
Year 7 Sentinel Pit completed at end of year 772 1245.47
Year 8 Centennial Pit completed at end of year 556 897.00
Year 9 GTO pit only; processing continues 538 868.00
Year 10 GTO pit completed; processing continues 522 842.14
Year 11 Mining completed; rinsing pad 500 806.65
Year 12 Mining and processing complete; 100 161.33
reclamation only
Sources: Adrian Brown Consultants 1996; Gochnour 1996
(
! 2399600.2 5/15/96(2:25 Plv1)IRPTl3 .2-31
TABLE 2-7
ESTIMATED TOTAL OPERATIONS WORK FORCE (EMPLOYEES)

Employment Type . Year
1 and 2 3 4and5 6-10
Admin,istrative and 14 14 14- 14
Processing - Salaried
Processing - Hourly 38 38 38 38
Mine - saiaried 12 12 12 12
Mine - Houdy 46 61 72 79
Total 110 125 136 143
Source: Gochnour 1996a.
TABLE 2-8
ESTIMATED WORK FORCE BY SHWr (posmONS)l

Year
Shift Day 1 and 2 3 4and5 6-10
Day Mon-Fri 45 50 55 58
Sat & Sun 17 22 27 29
Swing Mon-Fri 14 16 18 19
Sat & Sun 12 14 16 17
Night Mon-Fri 12 14 16 17
Sat & Sun 12 14 16 17
Total1 112 130 148 157
1
The estimated total work force positions that would be required by shift, as presented in
this table (i.e., Table 2-7), is higher than the yearly employee totals presented in Table 2-6
to take into account employees that would work multiple shifts and similar variables.
239961R3.2 SlIS196(2:2S PM)/RPT/3 2-32

- --- ------.~~~--~--~----~~--------~--------~
~lhr~·I·f~~~~~~~?\~~'~~EI
OJ
<.F
.SOURCE: SUMMO 1996.
Job No. : 23996

o 2500 5000 10000 ELECTRICAL POWERLINE
Prepared by :
SCALE IN FEET CORRIDOR MAP
Dote : 2/15/96
FIG. 2-11
In addition to crossing portions of the would be installed to support the
Lisbon Valley Project Area, the powerline weight of long spans or tension of
would cross the following sections: angles.
3. The electric wires (i.e., the
Sections 28, 31, 32, and 33; DOS, conductors) would be strung on the
R25E poles. Large warning balls would be
Sections 5 and 6; DIS, R25E installed on some conductors as a
Sections 20, 21, 26, 27, 28, 35, and safety precaution.
36; DOS,R24E 4. The powerline would be energized.
5. The powerline route and staging areas
Construction would commence in 1997 would be cleaned and reclaimed.
and take about four months. As part of
construction, an office trailer and staging In addition to operating the plant, power
area of approximately 1,000 square feet would be used to light various facilities at
would be established within the right-of- night. Visual impacts from light pollution
way at both the Hatch substation on the would be reduced by installing shrouds
west end and the proposed Summo around major lighting structures. The
substation on the east end. Supplies (e.g., shrouds would direct light down towards
poles, reels, and insulators) would be the area of work and minimize the amount
stored at each staging area. The office of light that would be emitted upward or
trailer would have its own sewage holding off site.
tank, with the contents hauled to a
commercial sewage dump station in Moab. 2.2.9 Waste Management
The powerlines would be 'suspended 65 to Sewage, Liquid. and Solid Waste. A

85 feet above ground on wood poles. All system of septic tanks and drain fields
poles would be raptor-proof designed. would be installed to handle sewage from
Travel during construction would use the project. Separate systems would be
existing paths (e.g., roads, seismic trails, installed for the shop/warehouse area,
two-track trails) or cross country with administration and laboratory area, and the
neither the access route nor the right-of- SX-EW Plant., A separate system would
way bladed. be installed to drain the laboratory sinks to
the raffinate pond.
Activities associated with the installation of
the 69-kV powerline would occur in five Receptacles would be placed around the
phases: site, as necessary, to collect solid waste
(e.g., trash from lunchroom). A contractor
l. Holes would be dug by augers, or would be hired by Summo to haul the solid
blasted and dug by augers, to a depth waste to an approved landfill site.
of 8 to 11 feet for poles and 14 feet
for anchors. Spill Prevention Control and
2. Poles with cross anns and insulators Countermeasures (SPCC) Plan. A plan to
would be installed in the holes. mitigate spills and provide notice to the
Double and triple pole structures appropriate government agencies is
23S961R32 MaylS.1996(4:34PM}'RPT13 2-34
required under various laws. Summo County Lower Lisbon Valley Road. The
would develop a spill prevention plan in majority of the traffic would be from Moab
conjunction with Federal, State, and local south on US Highway 191 to La Sal
officials. The developed plan would be Junction, east on Utah State Highway 46
available in the administration building for to the Lisbon Valley Road located just
review by governmental officials. The plan west of La Sal, and then south to the
would address, at a minimum, the Lisbon Valley Project. The remainder of
following matters: the traffic would be from Monticello east
on Utah State Highway 666 to the Ucolo
• Name of the facility turnoff and then north on the San Juan
• Location County road to the Lisbon Valley Project.
• Date and year the facility began Table 2-9 summarizes the anticipated
operations vehicle trips that would be made daily to
• Identification of hazardous the Lisbon Valley Project. Note that three
materials or more workers per vehicle are assumed.
• Maximum-storage capacity of Summo would encourage carPooling, and
hazardous materials the remote location may make such
• Description of the facility, including estimates realistic. No buses or vanpoqls
storage and handling procedures are planned by'Summo.
• Spill event action program to
outline roles and responsibilities No San Juan County maintained road in
the Lisbon Valley Project area would be
• Medical emergency procedures
closed or realigned due to Summo's
operations. However, certain trails or
The objective of the spill prevention plan
would be to address the following matters. roadways around the Lisbon Valley Project
area would be closed for public safety
reasons. These trails or roadways, as
• Reduce the potential for spills and
depicted on Figure 2-1, include the
env.ironmental contamination
following.
through a well-defined materials
management program.
• Trail through Lisbon Canyon
• Provide the operational personnel
with the necessary information to • Roadway to the Wood ranch house
properly respond to a hazardous • Roadway around the south side of
material spill event. the Centennial Pit
• Clearly define line of function • Trails and roadways'that access the
responsibilities for a spill situation. GTOPit
• Provide a response and cleanup • Trails and roadways west of the
program which minimizes GTO Pit where Dump A would be
environmental impacts. sited
2.2.10 Transportation Finally, Summo proposes to install warning

signs, stop signs and night lighting along
The primary access road to the Lisbon the . Lower Lisbon Valley Road, as
Valley Project is the existing San Juan addressed in Section 2.2.2.5.
239951R3.2 May lS.1996(4:34PM)IRPT/3 2-35
TABLE 2-9
ESTIMATED DAU..Y VEmCLE TRIPS

Type Year
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Employees (Cars, 33 33 38 41 41 73 1 43 43 43 43
Pickups)
Acid (I8-Wheeler Tank 5 5 5 6 7 7 6 5 4 4
Trucks)
Tires and Truck 2 2 4 5 5 81 4 4 4 4
Components (6-Wheel
Trucks)"
Cathodes (18-Wheeler 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Trucks)
Other Deliveries 1 1 2 3 3 41 2 2 2 2
(Various Size Trucks)
Visitors (Cars, Pickups) 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
45 45 53 59 60 961 59 58 57 57
1
Daily vehicle trips would be higher in year 6 because a contractor would be hired to
conduct pre-stripping activities in the GTO Pit.
2.2.11 Air Emission Controls Water would be sprayed from a water

truck to control dust in all active mine
Various emission controls would be areas, including the haul roads. If the use
employed at the Lisbon Valley Project. The of water for dust control becomes too
equipment at the site would be maintained time-consuming or water-consuming,
to reduce emissions. Each vehicle would Summo would apply other dust
be equipped with standard vehicle emission suppressants (e.g., magnesium chloride).
control devices. In addition, Summo
would attempt to purchase low sulphur Two different dust reduction methods
diesel fuel for the heavy equipment at the would be employed at the ore crushing
site. facilities. Dust would be controlled in the
primary crushing facility by means of a
water spray system. Dust control in the
Z39961R3.2 SIlSI96(2:2S PM)/RPT13 2-36
secondary crushing plant area would be operations. The activities include the
accomplished with a dust collector system. following measures.
Dust suppression in other disturbed areas • During site preparation, disturbed

would involve the prompt revegetation of areas would be contoured to
the area with a BLM-approved seed minimize erosion and provide
mixture. Seeding would be done in adequate drainage. Sediment traps
conjunction with the seasonal planting would be installed down gradient
schedule. from disturbed areas. Erosion
control structures (e.g., rock check
2.2.12 Reclamation/Closure dams, straw bales, silt fences)
would be installed to prevent the
Two primary goals of the Lisbon Valley accelerated erosion and sediment-
Project reclamation plan would be to ation of surface drainages.
ensure long-tenn protection of the • Suitable plant growth medium
environment and return disturbed areas to would be removed from the areas
a suitable post-mining land use consistent to be disturbed and stockpiled for
with current land uses. The current future reclamation purposes. The
primary lands uses are wildlife habitat, soils investigation, conducted as
livestock grazing, and mineral part of baseline investigations,
development. indicated that sufficient plant
growth medium exists for
In addition, reclamation would mmnruze reclamation purposes. Details on
public safety hazards and, to the extent the amount of suitable plant growth
practicable, diminish the appearance of medium to be salvaged are
mining disturbances. Reclamation also provided in Section 4.4.
would mitigate the adverse effects of past • During the life of the mine, areas
unreclaimed mining activities. no longer needed would be
Approximately 85 acres of unreclaimed reclaimed and revegetated with
mining activities exist at the project site; plant species that meet the
these areas would be reclaimed along with proposed post mining land uses.
the disturbances related to Summo's This would eliminate or minimize
proposed operations. the requirement for all disturbed
areas to remain disturbed during
Reclamation at Lisbon Valley Project the entire mine life. A preliminary
would fall into two categories: seed mixture is detailed in Table
concurrentfmterim reclamation and final 2-10.
reclamation. • A revegetation test plot would be
constructed at the beginning of the
2.2.12.1 ConcurrentlInterim project. The goal of the test plot
Reclamation would be to test the species
identified in the preliminary seed
Concurrent/interim reclamation are those mixture (Table 2-10) to determine
activities conducted during active mining species that would grow tinder the
239961R3.2 5115196(2:25 PM)/RPT/3 2-37
TABLE 2-10
PRELIMINARY SEED :MIXTURE

Species Rate Ibs/ac1
High Crest Crested Wheatgrass 1.0
Intermediate Wheatgrass 1.0
Pilot Orchard Grass 1.0
Basin Wad Rye 1.0
WtldRye 1.0
Indian Ricegrass 1.0
Ladac Alfalfa 1.0
Lewis Flax 1.0
Yellow Sweetclover 0.5
Forage Kochia 0.5
Mountain Big Sagebrush 0.1
Fourwing Saltbush 1.0
Bitterbrush LO
Total 11.1
1
The rate provided is pure live seed to be applied by drill seeding method. The rate would
be doubled for areas that would be broadcast seeded.
conditions that exist at the Lisbon 2.2.12.2 Final Reclamation

Valley Project. Treatments would
be developed to simulate various Final reclamation activities relate to site
conditions of the mine site at closure. These activities are noted below
closure, and would assess ,plant by facility. All areas to be revegetated
species composition, fertilizer would be seeded with the mixture noted in
requirements, plant growth medium Table 2-10 which was developed in
depth requirements, and slope and conjunction with the Utah Division of Oil,
aspect. Gas & :Mining (UDOGM). This list may
be modified by results from the
revegetation test .plots.
2-38
Open Pits. The closure plan for the open indigenous tree species (e.g., pinyon pine
pits is directed primarily to:ward public and Rocky Mountain juniper). The
safety with some revegetation activities. vegetative material would act to partially
Rock berms or fences would be installed screen the open pits.
to block public access to the pits. The
berms or fences would be marked to No backfilling or other reclamation
provide adequate notice to the public. The activities would be conducted in the four
structures would be designed to satisfy open pits to preserve evidence of copper
BLM and MSHA requirements. mineralization, as allowed under 43 CFR
§ 3809.0-50) (1995). That is, the pits
No revegetation of the bench walls would would remain open and not be backfilled to
occur. After mining activities have been allow for future access to the copper
completed, pit walls and benches would be mineralization that would not be mined
allowed to fill with rubble from natural during Summo's currently planned mining
sloughing activities. Haul roads that operations.
. . accessed the pit bottom would be scarified,
covered with soil, seeded, and, if Waste Rock Dumps. Benches would be
necessary, fertilized to promote healthy installed during development of the waste
vegetation stands. dumps to maintain an overall slope of
2.5: 1. As such, some grading of the waste
Pit dewatering activities would be dumps is required to break up the
discontinued. Based on a study individual bench levels prior to the
commissioned by Summ() (Adrian Brown application of growth medium during final
1996), it is estimated that water would reclamation activities.
collect in each of the pits: (a) a pool of
water about 289 feet in depth in the The surfaces (tops) of the waste ·dumps
Sentinel Pits, (b) a pool about 106 feet in would be ripped to a depth of about 4 feet
depth in the Centennial Pit, and (c) a pool and scarified to form a roughened seedbed
about 247 feet in depth in the GTO pit. surface. The surface would be contoured
to encourage infiltration rather than
In addition to berms or fences, the pit ponding. Undulations would be used to
perimeter would be planted with enhance revegetation efforts.
After site grading, plant growth medium percolation. In addition, heap reclamation
r would be applied to the. entire dump area at would enhance runoff and
the optimum thickness. (OptimUIJ:? evapotranspiration from the heap surface.
[ thickness would be determined from the
revegetation test plots.) The areas would Leaching activities would continue until
be seeded and fertilized, as required by soil the economically recoverable copper ~
tests. been obtained. The leached ore heap on
the pad would be flushed with fresh water
Heap Leach Pad. The leached ore heap on to reduce the chemical characteristic of the
the pad would be reclaimed to minimize effluent to levels deemed acceptable by the
leachate discharge by preventing water BLM and UDOGM. If rinsing with fresh
from entering the heap from surface water does not reduce the effluent to
239961R3.Z 5115/96(2:25 P.M)IRPT13 2-39
~\
acceptable levels, other treatments would growth medium as determined from the
be used (e.g., lime amendment). Pumping revegetation test plot, . seeded, and
activities also would be perfonned to fertilized, as needed.
reduce the solution inventory by the use of
high evaporation sprinklers. Ancillazy Structures. All equipment at the
Lisbon Valley Project would be removed.
After the leached ore heap has been No chemical or electrical hazards would
decontaminated, the heap would be remain after closure. The powerline may
recontoured. The slopes of the heap remain. All buildings and other facilities
would be reduced from the operational would be dismantled and removed from the
slope of 2:1 to an overall slope of 2.5:1. site or buried.
The benches and top of the heap would be
graded to establish positive drainage. The Foundations would be removed and buried
top and sides of the heap would be either elsewhere on the site or buried in place.
covered with compacted soils or treated Facility areas would be contoured to create
with commercially available products if a natural appearance and to prevent
needed. Waste rock would be placed on erosion. Plant growth medium would be
top of this prepared layer at a minimum of applied and the areas seeded. Fertilizer
several feet to provide for an adequate would be applied at a rate that is dependent
rooting zone. Plant growth medium would upon site specific soil conditions.
be spread on top of the waste rock cap to
the depth determined from the test plots, Roads and Other Facilities. Roads and
and the area would be seeded. other facilities not deemed essential by
BLM would be reclaimed. The areas
Other components of the heap leach pad would be ripped, as necessary, to alleviate
closure would include removing all exterior compaction, graded to route runo:tr:
piping and retention of diversion structures covered with plant growth medium,
to route precipitation and runoff away seeded, and fertilized, as indicated by test
from the area. No perforation of the liner results.
is planned.
2.2.12.3 Long-Term Care
Solution and Stormwater Ponds. The
ponds would be retained to allow for Upon completion of reclamation activities,
solution containment while reclamation monitoring would be conducted to ensure
occurs at other facilities (e.g., heap leach compliance with permit standards and to
pad). The ponds would be allowed to dry detennine reclamation success. At a
and, if necessary, the process solutions minimum, the site would be monitored for
would be treated, as dictated by results of at least two years following completion of
laboratory testing of the solution. Once all final site reclamation activities.
the ponds are dry, the liners would be Components of the monitoring plan would
folded into the ponds. Waste rock would be developed, in cooperation with the
"be hauled and placed over the liners. The BLM and DOGM, as the project nears its
areas would be graded to achieve a" identified end-of-life.
positive drainage, covered with plant
~.2 S11S195(2:2SPM)/RPT13 2-40
2.3 ALTERNATIVES on the public (i.e., Federal) lands. The
project could not be developed in a feasible
Various alternatives were identified based manner without use of the State and
on a review of the POO, as supplemented, Federal (BLM) lands shown on Figure 1-2.
agency comments, public comments, .and
experience at other mining and heap The environmental conditions, as described
leaching sites. The alternatives were in Section 3.0, would continue to exist
evaluated based on environmental, unchanged by activities related to this
engineering, and economic factors. Based mining and heap leaching proposal. In
on this evaluation, some alternatives were addition, the approximate 85 acres of
eliminated from further consideration and existing disturbance from past mining and
are addressed in Section 1.3.2 Four milling activities, including open pits,
alternatives are analyzed in detail in this dumps, and other swface disturbances,
EIS: would remain unreclaimed and continue to
pose a public safety concern.
• Alternative 1 - No Action
• Alternative 2 - Open Pit Backfilling 2.3.2 Open Pit Backfilling
• Alternative 3 - Facility Layout Alternative
• Alternative 4 - Waste Rock
Selective Handling An ·alternative identified during the public
scoping process (discussed in Section 1.3)
Each of these four alternatives is discussed was backfilling the open pits. Two
below. scenarios were identified to encompass the
various scoping comments: partial pit
2.3.1 No Action Alternative backfilling and complete pit backfilling.
Each of these scenarios is addressed below.
The No Action Alternative evaluates the
possibility that the Proposed Action of Scenario 1. Under this scenario, the pits
mlning and heap leaching might involve would be partially backfilled. Analyses
undue and unnecessary degradation that is performed by Summo and reviewed as part
prohibited by 43 CFR § 3809 (1995). of the EIS process, revealed that
Acceptable impacts include the reasonable groundwater would be intercepted by open
and necessary degradation associated with pit mining activities. In addition, water is
the disturbance required for the extraction expected to pool in the pits after cessation
and processing of minerals. .of mining. The pits would be partially
backfilled to a depth sufficient to eliminate
Under this alternative, Summo would not the projected pool of water in the pits.
receive approval to develop the Lisbon
Valley Project, copper mining and heap Partial backfilling of the pits would be
leaching activities would not occur, and the comparable to the Proposed Action with
proven ore reserves in the area would the following exceptions. The four waste
I remain undeveloped. As such, the
opportunity to develop mineral resources,
rock dumps, addressed in Section 2.2.2.4,
would exist; however, the height and areal
as authorized by law, would be foregone. extent of the dumps would be decreased.
I 239961R3.2 5115196(2:25 PM)/RPT13 2-41
In additio~ the time required to complete dumps near the GTO Pit would be hauled
final reclamation activities of .the GTO Pit to backfill the GTO Pit. Due to the swell
would be extended to accommodate the factor of the waste rock, dumps would
partial backfilling activities; partial remain northwest of the Sentinel Pit # 1 and
backfilling of the other pits would be near the GTO Pit, as more fully described
conducted while the GTO Pit is mined. in .Section 4.1. Moreover, the time
required to complete final reclamation'
Scenario 2. Under this scenario, the pits activities of the GTO Pit would be
would be completely backfilled. Complete extended to accommodate the final
backfilling would return the pits to the backfilling activities.
approximate original contour that existed
before any mining activities occurred in the 2.3.3 Facility Layout Alternative -
area. BLM Preferred Alternative
Complete pit backfilling would not Some concerns identified during the public
eliminate the disturbance created by or the scoping process were the visual impacts to
need for waste rock dumps. Dumps would the public traveling along the Lower
be needed to store waste rock during pit Lisbon Valley Road and encountering
development and until backfilling activities Summo1s mine and heap leach facilities. A
could commence. In additio~ dumps way to mitigate some of the visual impacts,
would remain after backfilling due to the as voiced during the scoping process,
swell factor of the waste rock (i.e., the could be to modifY the layout of some of
broken waste rock would encompass more the facilities. Relocating facilities was
space than in-place rock). However, the considered during the EIS process, but
size and areal extent of the waste rock rejected. Instead, to potentially reduce
dumps would be reduced. visual impacts, consideration was given to
eliminating Waste Dump D and placing
Complete pit backfilling would be materials from the eliminated dump in an
comparable to the Proposed Action with increased Waste Dump C.
the following exceptions. Waste rock from
the Sentinel and Centennial Pits would be As depicted on Figure 2-1, Waste Dump D
deposited in waste dumps until the Sentinel is proposed to be located directly adjacent
Pits have been mined to their economic to the Lower Lisbon Valley Road
limits. Waste rock from the Centennial Pit northwest of Sentinel Pit #1; Waste Dump
then would be hauled to. backfill the C would be located southeast of Sentinel
Sentinel Pits. Upon backfilling the Sentinel Pit #2. Under this alternative, Waste
Pits, waste rock from the Centennial and Dump D would be eliminated, and the
GTO Pits would be placed in dumps until approximate 5,000,000 tons of waste rock
mining of the Centennial Pit is completed. from Sentinel Pit #1 would be transported
Waste rock from the GTO Pit then would to Waste Dump C. Waste Dump C would
be used to backfill the Centennial Pit. be expanded by approximately 50 acres to
Mining of the GTO Pit would continue the southeast to accommodate the
until the economical ore reserve has been additional volume. In this way, all waste
mined. At this time, waste rock from the disposal activities would be confined to a
239951.R3.2 Mzy ]5. 1996(4:36PM)/RPT/3 2-42
11
single, large dump north of the Lisbon location). The site is directly adjacent to
Valley Road and not be divided into two and would parallel the Lower Lisbon
smaller dump sites. Valley Road for approximately one mile.
As such, visual impacts to the traveling
The various other facilities were not public would be greatly increased by
considered for relocation for the following relocating the leach pad to this site.
reasons. First, the open pits cannot be
. relocated. The grade of ore proposed to Finally, the solution ponds and SXlEW
be mined by Summo exists in certain plant have beeri proposed in the most
locations due to' geologic constraints. appropriate locale given the site for the
Thus, the pits cannot be moved to reduce heap leach pad. Solution ponds should be
visual impacts to the traveling public. constructed on natural grade dOWngradient
of the pad to collect solution by
Second, Waste Dumps A and B are gravitational means. The valley where
proposed for areas that would be only Summo proposes to construct the pad
glimpsed by the traveling public due to generally flows to the east and north.
screening by natural topography; the Thus, the solution ponds and processing
dumps would be viewed for a very limited plant should be sited to the east of the pad.
time by those traveling north on the Lower
Lisbon Valley .Road. No other areas for Based on the foregoing, activities under
relocation of these two dumps were this alternative would be comparable to the
identified that would lessen the visual Proposed Action, except for the
impacts to the traveling public. elimination of Waste Dump D and the
expansion of Waste Dump C.
Third, the heap leach pad is located in an
area that minimizes visual impacts to the 2.3.4 Waste Rock Selective Handling
traveling public. The pad is proposed to be Alternative
constructed in a valley to the west of the
Lower Lisbon Valley Road: This valley is Summo provided data from static test
.naturally blocked from view along most of methods that were performed on 186 rock
this county 'road due to topographic samples. Approximately 21 percent, or 39,
features; only a small portion of the valley, of the samples had the potential to be acid-
and concomitantly the leach pad, can be generating based on the sulfide-sulfur
viewed from the Lower Lisbon Valley content. Moreover, 18 of the 39 samples
Road. No other area in the immediate were coal or coal-bearing, which is
Vicinity of the open pits affords less of. a equivalent to 9.8 percent of the total
visual impact than the current site. The number of samples. The waste rock will
only other relatively flat area in close total about 90,000,000 tons of which
proximity to the open pits with sufficient approximately 10 percent or 9 million tons
area to accommodate the heap leach pad is will be coal or coal-bearing material. The
in portions of Sections 25 and 36, T 30 S, remainder of the waste rock is either non-
R 25 E, and Sections 30 and 31, T 30 S, acid forming or has the ability to neutralize
R 26 E. This area is southeast of the acid. A concern exists about the overall
Centennial Pit. (see ;Figure 2-1 for general acid-generating potential of these materials
23996J.R.3.2 May IS. 1996(4:36PM)/RPT13 2-43

over time and, therefore, the potential for recognized during the mining operation by
acid rock drainage CARD). its dark (black) color. Based on the color
recognition, the coal/coal-bearing waste
The results of EPA Method 1312 rock can be placed in the waste dumps in a
(Synthetic Precipitation Leach Procedure), manner that precludes potential
conducted on four composite samples of environmental impact. Selectively placing
the waste rock material, show that only the coal/coal-bearing waste rock within the .
dissolved iron is likely to be leached from central part of the waste dumps and away
the waste rock at concentrations that only from the top or sid.es of the dump will
slightly exceed the applicable drinking inhibit contact with water and oxygen and,
water standard. thus, inhibit acid generation.
The rate and amount of acid formation and 2.4 FEATURES COMMON TO ALL
the concomitant quality of water is a ALTERNATIVES
function of three factors:
Various features or primary facilities would
• Rock material with a net acidlbase exist at the Lisbon Valley Project under the
balance that favors the production Proposed Action or the various alternatives
of acid identified for further consideration, except
• Presence of water the. No Action Alternative. That is, no
• Presence of oxygen facilities would be developed under the No
Action Alternative. The features common
Attempting to avoid mining the rock types to the various alternatives, other than the
that have the potential to generate acid is No Action Alternative, are identified
not feasible at the Lisbon Valley Project below.
because these rock mediums are
interspersed throughout the pits. Thus, the • Four open pits during active mining
goal of a selective handling program would operations
be'to control the presence of oxygen and • Waste rock dumps
water. That is, a selective handling • Ore crushing facilities
program would place the rock types that • Heap (ore) leach pad.
have a potential to produce acid in areas • Various stormwater and solution
void of oxygen or water. storage ponds
• Solution processing by a solvent
Selective handling would require an in-field extraction and electrowinning plant
identification of the acid-generating • Water production wells with
lithologies and disposal of these materials pipeline corridor
in a manner that would prohibit contact • Numerous support facilities (e.g.,
with water and oxygen, such as covering administration building, truck shop,
with non acid-generating waste rock after warehouse)
placement in the waste dumps. As noted, • Runoff diversion structures
the majority of. the potentially acid-
• Various haul or access roads
generating waste rock is coal or coal- .
• 69-kV electric powerline from the
bearing material that can be easily
Hatch substation to the project site
2-44
2.5 SUMMARY OF. Canyon. This alternative may require
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS additional mitigation to cultural resource
FROM EACH ALTERNATIVE sites, dependent on final detailed design
ANALYZED and layout of Waste Dump C. There may
also be a requirement to bring additional
Table 2-11 presents the summary of topsoil into the site for final reclamation.
impacts by alternative, based upon the
analysis in Section 4.0 by resource
discipline. Quantitative comparisons are
given where available and appropriate. In
other cases, qualitative comparisons are
made. This table allows the reader and
decision maker to weigh impacts and
compare and contrast them, by discipline,
across alternatives.
2.6 AGENCY PREFERRED

ALTERNATIVE
In accordance with NEP A, Federal

agencies are required by the Council on
Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1502.14)
to identify their preferred alternative for a
project at the Draft EIS stage. The
preferred alternative is not a final agency
decision: but rather an indication of the
agency's preliminary preference. This
preference may be changed in the final EIS
based on additional information provided
and/or obtained during the draft EIS
comment period.
The BLM preferred alternative for the

Lisbon Valley Copper Project is
Alternative No.3 - Facility Layout
~ternative. Under this alternative, the
proposed action would be implemented
with the exception of requiring Waste
Dump D to be combined with Waste
Dump C, in the proposed location of
Waste Dump C. This alternative would
mitigate adverse impacts from concurrent
and post-mining drainage run-off: and
long-term sedimentation into Lisbon
23995IR3.2 5/15195(2:25 P.M)/RPT13 2-45
TABLE 2-11
LISBON VALLEY EIS IMPACT SUMMARY
Impllcls by Allcm'lIf1ves
Type ofPotentlAllmpllct by Proposed Attlol' Open Pit DllcldlUlng FllcUlly Ll\yout Allcmllt(ve Selective \Vltate Rock IIlImlllllg
Issue (PA) No Acllon Altemallve Alternative
GEOLOGY AND GEOTECIINICAL ISSUES
• Topography WIlSIe dUmps, leach pads, pits N~ change to cKisling disturbed Reduction in depth of pits lind Minor variations from FA; pits, No change from PA
affect 946 IIC; 1,103 nc planned landscape, pits, dumps heights of dumps compared to FA dUmps, pnds now IIffect 941 110
total disturbance
• Mineral Resources are, waste rock mined; copper

cnthodes produced
No mineral use; development
opportunities foregone
Future mineral development
improbable due to pit backfilling
Lillie or no change from FA
regarding mineral recovery
No change from FA
• Constructed Facilities· Small slope failures easily None; eKisting dumps and pits are Slope failure potential reduced No change from PA No change from FA
Potential Failnres remedied; liner breaching, in stable, angie-or-repose compared to PA; remainder of
foundation sellling, and large condition issnes are no change from PA
slope failures, pond overtopping
considered in leach pad design
HYDROLOGY
• Water Supply Up to 902 811m peak demand for
project needed Yr 5; derived from
No change from existing
condition; no impacts; erosion of
No implications for water supply,
except water in pits covered by
Less impacts 011 surface
drainages ncar Lisbon Canyon
No change from PA
shallow and possibly deep wells, current drainages from periodio backfill and not available for any with one larger dump instead of
and pit dewatering; proper surface stonn flows continues future bcneficial uses two smallcr
engincering of drainage in leach
pad area would eliminate
accelerated chlllmel erosion
downstream between heap leach
pad and Sentinel #1 pit.
• Water Use Water above used in ore As above Complete pit backfilling and
diversion would preserve 177 nco
No change from PA No change frolll PA
processing, dust control for roads,
and for some washdown uses; may ft/year surface flow, and not
litnit potential fhture uses; total intercept groundwater flows
groundwater use by project
operations range from 161·1455
ac-ft/year, and project pits lIlay
intercept up to 177 ac-ft/year of
surface flow
TABLE 2-11
Impacts by Alternatives
Type of Po tenllat Impact by Proposed Action Open Pit Bacldllllng Facility Layout Altemlltlve Selective Waste Rock Handling
Issue (PA) No Action Altematlve Altemotlve
• Water Quality Existing water quality generally
POOfj sulfate releases from
As above Backfilling and double handling
would expose more waste rock to
Better control at one waste
dump versus two intenns of any
Selective layering and covering of conly
waste rock effectively addresses any acid
accidental leach pad failure could both potential acid and alkaline water quality elTects needing drainage concems
alTect quality in minor sellSej as generation (in pockets) in pits and mitigation
would minor acid conditiollS (Fe pile vicinitiesj reduced quantity of
and AI) in pile vicinity caused by waste rock exposed to these effects
leaching of coaly waste rock, on surface would be favorable, as
potential for elevated levels of would covering of potentially acid
sulfates, TDS, and precipitate or alkaline materials exposed in
trace metals due to aging of high pit walls
(8.0-9.0) pH waters.
• Other Project Pits predicted to contain 106-289 As above Double handling of waste rock Sec above See above
Constmction/Oper- feet of standing water post-closurej and water quality implications
ations/Closure ElTects on following closure, breaching of both ways (see above) perhaps
Water Resources surface water diversion around provides little benefit to
Sentinel pit could cause backfilling except topographic
backcutting and topographic restoration
elTects in 3 ephemeral drainages
converging on Lisbon Canyon
GEOCHEMISTRY
• Acid Oeileration Potential Little potential for toxic elTects No change from current conditionj Backfilling would cover some Consolidation of dumps would Selective handling would likely eliminate
from Fe and AI noted in 1312 liIt1e or no acid drainage elTects potential acid- or alkaline· decrease total area of exposed any water quality concems from acid
testing; major volume of rock has currently observe'd on surface from generating lithology, and decrease rock to geochemical proceSseSj drainage
neutralization potential (see Wnter past shallow open pit mining the amount of similar types of see PA discussion
Quality above) waste rock exposed in surface
dumps; however, re-placement of
this rock in pits may cause pockets
of acid or alkaline water quality
there as well
• Other Oeochemical Issues - Alkaline effects from aging waste

piles and exposed rock in water-
As abovej no excessive alkaline
elTects noted on surface from past
See above See above Alkaline issues are ubiquitous and could
Alkaline Conditions and not be addressed with selective handling
Related Effects filled pits could produce elevated mining
levels of sulfates, TDS, and
precipitate trace metals
239961R3,2 5115/96(2:25 PM)/RPT/3 2-47

TABLE 2-11
Impacls by Allernallves
Type of Pot enlinI Impact by Proposed Aellon Open Pit Baddllllng FacWty Lnyont AlIernAllve Sclecllvc WlIste Rockllnmlllng
Issue (PA) No Action A1ternatlve A1ternallve
SOILS AND RECLAMATION EFFECTIVENESS
• Disturbance Disturbance lind alteration of
1,103 lie of native soils in project
No new disturbance and no
impacts to soils resources
Initial disturbance II! for PA but,
under the complete backfilling
Disturbance impacts shined Less potential for acid generation from
from Bnmum soils to the rock coaly wasto to affect vegetation, soils, and
area: loss of soil prome scennrio, all 1,103 ae of outcropfRizno comple" Intermittent surface water flows in waste
development; increased exposure disturbance would be reclnimed dumps vicinity
to accelerated erosion and surface
nmom compaction and mlling;
reduced productivity; 872 ae
would be reclaimed and 23 I ae of
pits would be len open.
• Soil Quantity for Approximately 1,462,216 cu yds No impact Less coversoilmaterial required Loss of approximately 18,800 Samens PA
Reclamation of soil material stockpiled and for dumps reclamation, but about eu yds of suitable eoversoil
later used for reclamation 402,494 additional eu yds of material not salvaged in Waste
material required for pils Dnmp D vicinity; more
reclamation, necessitating material needed to meet quantity
additional disturbance to obtain required for PA
this material in project vicinity or
elsewhere
• Erosion Control and Most of disturbed soils moderately Same conditions as present, with Partial pit backfilling would SallleasPA Increased reclamation effectiveness
Recfamation Effectiveness susceptible to water erosion and some erosion occurring, would reduce slope angles and erosion compared to PA in waste dumps vicinity
highly susceptible to wind erosion; persist potential on pit walls
constmction and operations would
increase such effects due to
disturbance and removal of
vegetative cover; potential for
localized areas of acidic soils
resulting in phytotoxic impacts to
vegetation and increased erosion
-
TABLE2-11
Impacts by Altemlltlvcs
Type of Potent hiI Impact by Proposed Action Open Pit Bacldllllng FaclIlty Layout Altcmatlve Selective Waste nock HandUng
Issue (PA) No Adlon Altcmnllve Altemnllve
VEGETATION
• Disturbance of Communities Total of 1,103 IIC disturbed, No additional impacts to existing Same as PA except 1,103 nc Shift impacts from SS ac ofSB SameasPA
PJ.Pinyon.Juniper GR· including powerline: 432 SB, 296 vegelative conullunilies reclaimed. "- 1050 ac ofP!.
Grassland- Rangeland PJ, 290 GR, and 85 in previously
SB-Sagebmsh disturbed areas. Reclamation of
872 acres. Permanent loss of296
ac PJ to be replaced with sa and
GRspecies.
WILDLIFE
• Hnbitat Effects from No habitat for sensitive species No impacts to faunal conulIllllity Similar to PA; sec Vegetation Shift of impacts from SS ac of Same as PA
Dist\lrbance idcntified in I, I03 ac lolal project currently present discussion above for acreage sa habilat to 50 ac orPJ and
disturbance; habitat loss for other rock outcrop habitat compared
conullon species (e.g. deer, prairie toPA
dogs) would occur
• Project Constmction and Leach pad conslmction will Same as above SimiiartoPA Same as above Same as above
Operations Effects to eliminate prairie dog towns and 2
Wildlife slock ponds likely used by
wildlife; leach solution ponds
could attract birds and waterfowl;
night lighting and blasting noise
would lutve effecls; possible raplor
nesting disturbance
• Project Closure Effects Loss of231 ac of habitat Same as above All disturbed areas reclaimed Same as above Same as above
• Sensitive Species None yet identified to be possibly

affected; Spring 1996 survey for
Same as above; no sensitive
specics presently identified on site
SameasPA Same as above Same as above
confirmation
239961R3.2 5/15196(2:25 PM)IRPT/3 2-49

TABLE2-U
Impllcls by AllcrnMlves
Type of Polenllllllmpllct by Proposed Acllon Open Ptf BnckfUllng FncllUy Lnyout Allcrnnllve Selecllve WIlSie Rock HlIl1dllng
Issue (PA) No Acllon Altcrnnllve Allcrnnllve
GRAZING
• Disturbance Of Orazing
Lands:remporary &
720 new ac disturbed by PA no
longer available for grazing
Existing B5 ac disturbance
remains for pits
Comparable to PA-no grazing
assumed on pit floors
No change from PA since site 10
be fellced; net reduction in
Samoas PA
Permanent Acreage Losses temporary grazing loss of 5.3

AUMs ifimplemonted lind no
fencing occurs arollnd deleted
Waste Dump D
• Animnl Unit Months (AUM) 71.6 AUMs temporarily lost

(mininll1m 13 yrs); 7.2 AUMs
No effects to current AUMs Similar 10 PA; partial bnckfilling
assumes no future grazing lise on
Asabovc Asnbove
effects
penl1anently losl pit floor and same losses as PA;
fidl backfilling assumes temporary
loss of71.6 AUMs during mining,
1\111 reclamation and no loss of
AUMs in long-teml
• Final reclamation Reseeding ofwasle dumps and No reclamation specified on See above Asabovc Asnbove
haul roads with plant species current disturbance
compatible to grazing will cause
minimal long·temt impacts
SOCIOECONOMICS
• Economics and Employment 80 construction jobs for 1 yr; up None of the economic or Same as PA; except that final Same as PA Same as PA
to 143 jobs over 10-yr life of employment effects would be backfilling of pits would prolong
mine operations created; $54.5 experienced economic and employment effects
million in payroll over the 10 yrs; for 1 yr
reduced unemployment and
increased economic growth in
Orand and San Juan counties;
influx oflarge amounts of non·
local workers unlikely
TABLE 2·11
Impacts by Alternatives
Type of Potentlnllmpact by Proposed Action Open Pit Backf1lllng Facility Layout Alternative Sclectlve Waste Rock Handling
Issue (PA) No Action Alternative 'Alternntlve
No housing impacts Backfill workers reside in area an Same as PA Sallie as PA
• Housing Constnlction temporary housing
options appear ~ore than adequAte additional I yr
ill Moab and Monticello; during
operations, some strains to
housing in these towns could
occur ifmany in-migrants (see
Employment above)
No effects on local infrastnlcture Effects on local infrastructure SameasPA Same as PA

• Local Facilities and Services Local e!fects in Lisbon Valley and
La Sal areas on roads and prolonged I yr due to backfill
nmintenance, fire and medical workers
services; Hille immediate local
population increase to affect
utilities; powerline to be built into
project area
No effects Same as PA Same as PA Same as PA

• Social Selling No notable impacts because of
project remoteness; proposed uses
continue historic mining use of
area
239961R3.2 5/15196(2:25 PM)IRPT/3 2-51

TABLE 2-11
II11pncts by Allemnllves
Type ofPofenllal Ilnpllct by Proposed Action Open Pit Dncldllllng FnclUty Layout Allcl11nllve Seledlve Wade RocklInnllllng
luue (PA) No Action Allemallve Allemflllve
TRANSPORTATION
• L<lcal Mine·lnduced Traffic Worker commuter trips, supplies No effects on current light use of Impacts similar to PA but SnmeasPA Same as PA
delivery, shipment of copper area roads extended for about I yr to local
plntes, nnd heavy equipment rond network due to backfilling
movement would modestly activity
increase traffic in area but not
el<ceed capacity of existing road
network
• Mine Operations Traffic Planned stop signs, waming signs, No effects Similar to PAj no increase in haul No change to PA regarding No change to PA regarding waste rock
lighting, and cnrrent good sight trips anticipated across Lisbon waste rock hnultrips haul trips for selective handling
distance would keep congestion Valley Road intersection
and delays at major mine truck
crossing at Lisbon Valley Road
intersection to a minimum
• Accidents Increase in accidents on area roads

by .88 accidents/yr, a S.I %
No change to present condition Same as PA Same as PA Same as PA
increase over 1994 levels
• Road Maintenance Road wear and maintenance needs No change to present condition Additional wear 011 county roads Same as PA Same as PA
are more extensive due to an for I yr due to backfilling.
increase of traffic in areaj increasing road maintenance costs
increased costs to county road to County
districts likely compeltSated by
increased local tax revenues
TABLE 2·11
Impncts by Alternntlves
Type of PotentiRl Impact by Proposed Acllon Open Pit Dnckflll1ng Fftc111ty Lnyout Altcrnatlve Selcctlve Waste Rock Hnndllng
Issue (PA) No Action AltenlRtlve Altcntntlve
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
• Transportation 10 truck trips estimated per day to No wustcs generated Same us PA SameasPA Same as PA
haul hazardous materials to mine,
resulting in likely maximum of
0.51 accidents over life of mine;
accidental spill could contaminate
soils, plants, and wildlife; operator
will have SPCC Plnns
• Storage and Use Spills from storage and use As above As above As above As above
generally contained ill storage
areaj failure of process piping or
pad or ditch lillers could cause
major spillj SPCC Plalls and
ullderdrains to contain spills; wind
drift ofraffinate solution during
wiudydays
• Generated Wastes during Lab waste, SXlEW crud, sludges, As above As above As above As above
Operations waste oil and solvents generated
during routine operations
CULTURAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES
• Impacts to Culturally 24 potentially significant cultural
resources in project area; all but I
Illegal collection and vandalism
could occur in the undeveloped
Same as PA 4 additional potentially
significant cultural resources (in
SameasPA
.Significant Sites Under
NRHP Criteria (currently within waste dump C project area addition to the 1 affected in the
area) are located outside of areas PA) would need to undergo data
of direct impact; no adverse recovery and mitigation because
effects under 36 CFR 800 arc of direct effects
predicted with implementation of
proper mitigation program
• Impacts to Significant No known significant
paleontological resources in
No effects Sallie us PA Sallie as PA Same ns PA
Paleontological Resources
project area
239961R3.2 5/16196(10:44 AM)IRPT/3

TABLE 2-11
Intpllcls &y Allemnllvcl
Type ofPolenllnllmpact fly Proposed Acllon Open Pit DllckfllUng FadUty Layout Allenlllllve Sclccllve WIlSie Rock HRndllng
Issue (PA) No Aclloll Allernnllve A1lernllllve
VISUAL RESOURCES
• Visual Contrasts during Notable visual contrasts will oceur Past, unreclnimed features (smnll Same as PA during operations See residual effects belowj SameasPA
Project Operations Ininullediate project nrelllllong pits with Infrequent p'onded water, similar lessening of visunI
lower Lisbon Valley Road; waste piles, stmctural renulants) effects and disturbance during
impacts to view from Lono Pine would relllnin as visible operations
Peak (SO 1111 distant In Colo) disturbance on existing Inndscnpe
would likely be minil11al;
landscape Is of low scenic quality
and sensitivity, and project
activities would be within
guidelines for Class IV lands
• ResiduRI Visual Effects SOI11O mitigation would have As above Long-term effects less than PA duo Consolidation of Waste Dump Asnbove
aRer Reclamation and occurred by reduction of color and to decreased height and extent of D into Waste Dump C would
Revegetation line contrasts; medium-sized wasle piles, and partially or 11IIIy lessell the overall visual impacts
water-filled pits, reclaimed waste backfilled pits presenting less frol\1 two dumps to one larger
rock piles and heaps will remain, visual impacts one, at the Dump C location,
Intruding onlhe visual condition eKpanded by 50 ac
LAND USE
• Land Use Changes Project will change current uses to
active copper mining and
No change from current passive
grazing use on historically mined
Use changes extended I yr froll1
PA due to backfilling
No change from PA No change from PA
benefaction on 247 ac of private areas

(fce) landj 574 ac ofBLM land;
and 273 ae of State land; for a
total of 1,094 acres affected; for
1O-yr mining and S-yr reclamation
periods
• Property Ownership Property ownership secured as As above As above As above As above

Changes above at this time; no changes
expected
TABLE 2-11
Impacts by A1tenmtlves
Type of Potential Impact by Proposed Action Open Pit Bacldllllng Facility Layout Alternative Selective Waste RockllRlldUng
Issue (PA) No Acllon A1ternallve A1tcl11lltlve
AIR QUALlTY
• Compliance with National PMlo (particulate matter dust) No change to current conditions Not capable of being modeled Similar .to PA; likely no Same as PA
Ambient Air Quality concentrations modeled were with existing methodology; additional notable air quality
Standards (NAAQS) within NAAQS 24·hr and alUllInl additional particulate emissions impacts
standards at southeast and would occur from "double·
norlhwest properly boundaries in handling" of waste rock
years 5 and 9 of operations
(highest activity)
• Increments of Air Background PMlo levels of26 As above As above As above As above
Contaminants Exceeding flg/m' impacted by 7 to 26 Itg/m'
Background Levels from project operations: 33·52
Itg/m' total is well within NAAQS
of50·150 1tg/llIl
NOISE
• . Noise Levels Impacts in No exceedances predicted to No change from current low nlral Noise from project operations No chnnge from PA No chnnge from PA
lnullediate Project Vicinity workers insido properly use levels extends 1 yr due to backfilling
. in View of OSHA, MSHA, boulldaries, and to local residents
and EPA Standards and users of adjoining properly
outside property boundaries frolll "
mining operations; nuisance levels ,
from blasting and traffic
periodically an issue to passersby
• Noise Level Impacts to Area No residents within Imi; planned

development Is several miles
As above As above As above As above
Residents
away, and project may
periodically create blasting noise
heard as part ofbackground
23996fR3.2 5/15/96(2:25 PM)tru'T/3 2-55

TABLE 2-11
Impncls by AllernAllves
Type of Po·tcnUnl InlpRct by Proposed Aelloll Open Pit Dncllf1l11ng FndUly Lnyout Allcmnllvc Sclecllve WAsie Rock IInlllllIng
Issue (PA) No AclloH AJlernnllve Allernllllvc
RECREATIONAL RESOURCES
• Displacement of Displacement of big lind small
gallic hunting IIctlvlties In and
No change from current use No dilferent from PA except
impacts extended aile yr due to
No change from PA No change from PA
Recreational Activities
around the project site backfilling
• Property Access SOllie potential Recess restrictions No change from current As above As above As above
to recreation through life of recreational use for general
project due 10 road closures and purposes
millelraffic
3.0
AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
To evaluate the potential impacts resulting which overlay them, have been deformed
from the Proposed Action or the other into northwest trending anticlinal folds
alternatives described in Section 2.0, it is (Cater 1995), one of which is the Lisbon
necessary to understand the current Valley Anticline.. Lisbon VaIley was
environmental condition of the project formed by the dissolution of salt and
study area. The study area for this project subsequent collapse of the crest of this
varies for each environmental resource, but structure (Weir and Puffett 1981).
it is generally the Lisbon Valley area. This
section describes the natural resource and Lisbon Valley is a broad, flat-bottomed
economic and social conditions found in valley approximately one mile wide and
the project study area. four miles long. The valley is bounded in
some areas by steep waIled mesas and
3.1 GEOLOGY AND ridges, which rise 500 to 700 feet above
GEOTECHNICAL ISSUES the valley floor. These mesas are dissected
by canyons that generally drain away ~om
3.1.1 Study Area the Lisbon Valley. Elevations in the area
range from approximately 5,600 to 7,200
The study area for geologic impact analysis ft. above mean sea level (msl).
is bounded on the north by State Highway
46 (Le., southern terminus of the La Sal 3.1.2 Geologic Setting
Mountains), on the south by U.S. Highway
666 (i.e., approximately Monticello), on Lisbon VaIley is near the center of the
the west by U.S. Highway 191, and on the Paradox Basin, an asymmetric sedimentary
east by the border between Utah and basin of Pennsylvanian age. The structure
Colorado.' Lisbon Valley is located and stratigraphy .of the basin are dominated
roughly just to the north and east of the by the thick evaporite deposits of the
center of the rectangle described by the Paradox Formation which were deposited
boundaries defined above (Figure 2-1). . in a restricted seaway that was bounded on
the northeast by the Uncompaghre Uplift.
The study area lies within the Salt It is hypothesized that basement structures
Anticlines physiographic subprovince of Created local lows in the basin aIlowing for
the Colorado Plateau physiographic the accumulation of abnormally thick salt
province. The Southern Rocky Mountains sections (Weir and Puffett 1981). The
and Basin and Range physiographic evaporite (salt) deposits were then buried
provinces flank this province on the east by clastic sediments shed from the rising
and west, respectively (Hunt 1967). The adjacent highlands. Plastic deformation of
Lisbon Valley project is located within the the salt, caused by the weight of the
Paradox Basin, a geological subprovince overlying sediments, started in the middle
which contains thick evaporite deposits. Pennsylvanian and continues to the
These deposits, and the younger rocks present. The lower density of the salt,
239961R33 5/14/96(3:47 PM)/RPT/4 3-1
compared to the younger, overlying, clastic cross section displayed in Figure 3.1-3
rocks, has caused the salt to rise, forming crosses Summds proposed Centennial Pit
northwest trending salt anticlines. Some of and is representative of the structure and
these anticlines have salt exposed at the stratigraphy of the Lisbon Valley Project
surface, as at the Moab Anticline and (Summo 1995d).
Paradox Anticline. In others, like the
Lisbon Valley Anticline, the cover rocks Sedimentary rocks. exposed in Lisbon
over the salt are folded and faultep, but the Valley consiSt mainly of fluvial sandstones
salt is not exposed at the surface. Figure and claystones. These rocks are
3.1-1 displays the geologic map of the interbedded with limestones and
project area located on the southeast end conglomerates that were deposited during
of the Lisb()n Valley Anticlines. . the Cretaceous Era (Craig 1981; and
Woodward-Clyde 1982).
The structure of the project area is
dominat~ by two features: the southeast
3.1.3 Geologic Resources
end of the Lisbon Valley Anticline which is
The Lisbon Valley and surrounding area
shown in Figure 3.1-1, and the Lisbon
have been the site of numerous mineral
Valley fault zone. The Lisbon Valley
exploration and exploitation efforts since
Anticline is approximately 20 miles long
the early 1880s. Resources that have been
and includes the Lisbon Valley topographic explored in the Lisbon Valley area include
feature along its crest at its southeast end. copper, uranium, vanadium, oil, gas, ml:d
potash. Each of these resources IS
The Lisbon Valley fault zone cuts the crest discussed in tum below.
of the anticline along its entire axis, and
extends further north to approximately Copper was first discovered at the head of
Kane Springs, a total distance of about 30 the Big Indian Valley, located north of
miles. Fault planes in the fault zone Lisbon Valley.· Early exploration and
typically . dip to the' northeast at development was mainly centered around
approximately 50 to 60 degrees. Ground- two deposits: the Big Indian Mine and the
water flow along the fault zone caused Blackbird Mine. (Summo's Lisbon Valley
dissolution of the salt core of the anticline Project would be at the same location as
resulting' in partial collapse of the structure
the Blackbird Mine.) The deposits were
(Woodward-Clyde 1982). The Lisbon mined until 1947 and 1958, respectively.
Valley topographic feature is a result of Average ore grades at these mines ranged
that collapse. The Lisbon Valley fault zone from 1.5 to 2 percent copper and were
spreads out into a complex, fan-like splay mainly contained within rocks of the
offaults.
Dakota Sandstone. Ore mineralization is
typically concentrated in rocks surrounding
The stratigraphic section for the area is large fault planes, and malachite and
shown in Figure 3.1-2. Rocks exposed at azurite are the most abundant copper
the surface within and surrounding the minerals. Numerous other prospects were
Lisbon Valley range in age from the
explored in the area, but the larger
Pennsylvanian, represented by the Hermosa commercial operations were limited to
Fonnation, through the Quaternary. The these mines (Weir 1981).
23996IR3.3 Sl14l96(3:47PM)IRPT/4 3-2
/10
/JJ.X FIG. 3.1-1
LEGEND
Contact:
Long dashes where approx1ma1.p]y Id
1nr",rred or ind
u
- 0 - - - -..
Cutler formation
•. Hlgh-anglp. !
Dashed whore app,·oXoi_l.cly 10ca1.o~aon, red, ~ple, ~d mottled gra71~-yellow and grayj.sh-
U up1.hrown sid... D d urple cong.o:nerate, conglomeratic and coarse- to f1oe-
I " • '\rained arkosic sandstone 10terbedCed v.!.th dark: brolil1, red,
---.i Uld pur~!.e s1::'tstone; some thin gra7 cher!. beds and !.!o ..
'-1'-t,ated gray lilnestone lenses near base. lIasal =ontact 10-
!~lly gradaO:ior.al. Sand:sl.one lenses in upper part of Cutler
Synclin~ormation in weste=-::. part of quadrangle contain amall
Shov:lrog trace of axial plane and t>t.rBnium-vanadi= deposits; sandstone beds along 1'aults in
plunge or al°utheastern part of: quadrangle contains smal.l. copper de-
!C:sits. !
,;(:s " prODlinent llght-b~own sandstone unit that in the west-
S1.r1ke alld dt lentral part or thi:s' quadrangle and in the ealltern part of
p lhe adjacent Haunt Peale 3liE quadrangle is truncated by the
(Z& iJlcon:t'onnity at base 01' Chinle !orlll&tion ~d underlies
./ ~g" uranium deposits ill the Ch!,..le rormation
Approximate strike an~
--::=55~
"..--
"..-- - ----
Struct.ure can'
, ~hu ,
, ';f!!i' :,", '

;:'"fhp
Hermosa rormat10n
Structure conlours are .
of various units across1Y fossiliferous marlne llJIIestone interbedded 1d. th brcnm
."d reddish-brow !'lne- to coarse-grai!led sandstone and
~eddi"h, ~!lllOldsh, and gree,..1sh-gray 1IIIlds1.one; top of
~ormation locally gradational with overl71ng Cutler ror-
/"
i'Stion; contact placed at top ortJU:k, persistent. gray
r - - - ,...."....·
...
n.n'-.e lilnestone '
.'" t:
U
, Qea 11, 'I1llPer un!.t; base Dlaced at base at lid1t-brown tine-
'-_ _":\tr'i'"",ailled sandstone containing foesU plant tragmer.ts. Con-
EoUan and alluvial!;a:!.na more beds 01' redcl!~ sandstone than laver un! t
L, lower unit, base :tot exposed; known trom drill hole
II>
Light.-brown, re<J, and grayish-yeJ1?ta to overlle Fhp
"" silt. in thin sh" .. tl1kp d~poS1t'l\l, the Paradox member of the Hermosa to:r:ll&tion; a thick
"":i
I .... plat..&u,,; eolian material gener......porite sequence v!U.eh eonsists chienT ot sal.t 1ocludi.ng
G
water and grades 1n1.o et.ream-d~u.s .. ium sal.ta. (Show only in section) ~
......,
t:
<>
ley botl.o....
0
...,
.... Landslide dO!!
~,
Irregular hWllmOcky deposits and t

D.
D.
moved material, ch1eny JIIIIdp. up
t:> derived !rom the Burro Canyon t
11l.on" and mudstone from the Bru'
the Herrison formal.1on. Incluti
head" of landllUdes
UNCONFOliH
r
. ~
!!ancoa ISh
.,"'" Dark-gray to black riall11e ahale.:
..,.
() "",rine peleC)'pOd..Jrypha;a newb .
patches in Lower Jlbon AJ.I;y-
:!<
...,..
to'
~
D.
t:> Dakota .. and, • 1994 MONITORING WELL
"-
Light-brown and yellowillh-brovn .. ,
cOll1l1lClnly containing plant ilIIprej
!ray 1.0 black carbonaceou.. muds
ineludes cobble" and boulders £1
+ 1994 BORING (DRY) ,
UNCONFO~
8
* EXISTING MONITORING WELL
LOCATION OF CROSS-SECTION OF
~:rei
8'
if..
0
:"!<
., Grayj..h-browt.
s11ic1£1ed in and
Burro Canyon
Ught-brovn
part sand,' - - - - -....
to gray quar~*
CENTENNIAL PIT SHOWN ON
FIGURE 3.1-3
----------------------------t
den ... limestone and interbedded ~996
~
.J
I
:a
...
0
"tone. Lower contact mapped a1.
sandstone J gradational. v:l1.h l.op j
,------1 GEOLOGIC MAP ,LEGEND
r 1<.1'1.
r
,)
~
FIG. 3.1-1
Alluvium and Colluvium
Mancos Shale
Dakota Sandstone
Burro Canyon Formation
Morrison Formation
Brushy Basin Member
/. ~::;};~;~.~~J~·ti1~~f~: Morrison Formation

Salt Wash Member
.. ::...... '. ..
:-: :.1 :-: :...: ~. ~ :-: -::: ~;:
~:.p:~:;:1:~:#~7· ~. ~~
Summerville Formation
Entrada Formation
. Slick Rock Member
Entrada Formation
-_ .. _.. _... _... - Dewey Bridge Member
Carmel Formation
Navajo Sandstone
Kayenta Formation
Wingate Sandstone
Chinle Formation
Moss Back Member
~
:::E
~ Cutler Formation
W
0..
:Z
z
I..LI
0.. Honaker Trail Formation
SOURCE: ADRIAN BROWN CONSULTANTS, INC. 1996

Job No. : 23996 STRATIGRAPHIC SECTION
Prepared by : G.J. W.
SAN JUAN COUNTY, UTAH
Date: 4/1/96
FIG. 3.1-2
3-5 I
\,':J
-
......
~
A A'
Centennlo.l Pit
6600 /<
6500
6400
6300
,Jill 6400
6300
6200 6200
FINAL PIT
FLOOR
6100 6100 EL. 6060
6000 6000
.'
·I~I Fo.ults
QAL - Quo. terno.ry o.lluvluM
KM - Mo.ncos F OrMo. tlon
~: . :..zi Kcl 345 - upper Do.koto. FM., becls 3, 4/ 5
Kcl 678 - Do.koto. FM./ coo.ly becls
Kcl 9 - 13 - lower Do.loto. FM., becls 9-::13

O~~
L 30~O~~~~600
.... I
Scale (ft)
Kbc14 - upper Burro Co.nyon FM.
l(be15 - lower Burro Co.nyon FM. '
JM - Morrison F OrMo. tion CROSS-SECTION LOCATION SHOWN ON FIGURE 2-1

SOURCE: GOCHNOUR 19960.
1111111111111 Je - Entro.clo. FOrMo. tion
Job No. : 23996
~
b:-: :. .: I TrJn - No.vo.jo FOrMo.tlon
Prepared by : C.H.P.
CROSS-SECTION A-A'
CENTENNIAL PIT AREA
~ Date : 4/16/96 LISBON VALLEY COPPER PROJECT
fmL---------------------~------------------------~~------~~--~---.-------------------------J
The copper ore to be mined at the Lisbon Uranium and vanadium were first
Valley Project occurs in rocks of the discovered in the Lisbon Valley area in
Dakota Sandstone and underlying Burro 1912 but the first major uranium discovery
Canyon Formation. occurred in 1952. Subsequent exploration
and development activities established, in
Ore deposits at the Lisbon Valley Project its time, the largest uranium mining district
are generally tabular in shape, parallel the in Utah. Ore was contained in the Moss
sedimentary bedding planes, and are Back member of the Chinle Formation and
elongated along the axis of the Lisbon the upper part of the Cutler Formation.
Valley fault. The Lower Cretaceous Burro These deposits form an arcuate band,
Canyon Formation underlies the Dakota approximately 24 miles long and one half
Sandstone of Upper Cretaceous age. mile wide, along the southwest flank of the
Lisbon Valley Anticline, west of the Lisbon
The stratigraphy and structure of the Valley (Figure 2-1). Active mining in this
proposed mine area are displayed in trend stopped in 1988 due to lowered
geologic cross sections found in Figures uranium prices (Chenoweth 1990).
3.1-3 through 3.1-7. These sections cross
the proposed Centennial, Sentinel, and Oil and gas exploration in southeast Utah
GTOpits. beg~ in the late 1800s. Commercial
deposits have been developed in rocks of
The Burro Canyon Formation consists of :Mississippi through Pennsylvanian age in
brown and grey, commonly silicified the Lisbon Valley Anticline. Oil and gas
sandstone and conglomerate overlain by development continues in the area.
interbedded limestone and mudstone. The
Dakota Sandstone consists of yellow and Potash minerals exist in the evaporite
brown, predominantly medium-grained deposits of the Paradox Formation (not
sandstone with some conglomerate. exposed in the Lisbon Valley area). These
Interbeds of coal and carbonaceous minerals were identified during drilling for
mudstone are present in the Dakota oil and gas. However, potash has not been
Sandstone (Weir and Puff'ett 1981). heavily explored or developed to date. The
deposits that have been located are fairly
Copper ore mineralization in the Burro deeply buried (Weir and Puff'ett 1981).
Canyon and Dakota Formations
predominantly consists of the copper 3.1.4 Geotechnical Considerations
oxides, azurite and malachite, with minor
copper sulfide minerals (mostly Geotechnical considerations are evaluated
chalcocite). Ore minerals are found during the engineering design of a project.
coating sand grains, filling fractures, and as This section discusses geotechnical aspects
intergrain matrix. that may affect or be affected by
construction of the Proposed Action or an
Copper mineralization also occurs in other alternative. Two geotechnical
formations including the Cutler Formation,
considerations were identified: geologic
Entrada Sandstone, and Morrison
hazards and climatic hazards.
Formation (Thorson 1996a).
23996JR3.3 S/14l96(3:47P.M)IRPT/4 3-7
B B'
6500
~-------~Centennlo.l Plt--------~.I
~llliiJ
6400
6300 ,& 6400

6300
6200 6200
FINAL PIT
6100 6100 FLOOR
EL.6060
I~I Fo.ults
QAL - Quo. terno.ry o.lluvluM
t..):;"·J Kcl 345 - upper Do.koto. FM., becls 3, 4, 5
Kd 678 Do.koto. FM., coo.ly beds
~~~~~~~~ Kcl 9 - 13 - lower Do.loto. FM., becls 9-13
Kbc14 - upper Burro Co.nyon FM. o 300 600
Kbc15 - lower Burro Canyon FM. Scale (ft)
JM - Morrison F OrMo. tlon
Trc - Chinle FOrMo. tlon

CROSS-SECTION LOCATION SHOWN ON FIGURE 2-1
_ Pc - Cutler ForMotion
Job No. : 23996 CROSS-SECTION 8-8'

..."'"~ Prepared by : C.H.P. CENTENNIAL PIT AREA
m~ ______________________________________________~____
Date : ________~________
4/16/96 LISBON__
VALLEY COPPER PROJECT
---------
'C'
c Sentinel #2 Pit
6400.~
6300
~ 6200
-0
I~I Fo.utts
o 200 400
QAL - Quo. terno.ry o.ttuvlUM
Scale (ft)
Kd - 13 - lower Do.loto. FM., beds 9-13·
9
Kbc14 - upper Burro Cnnyo~ FM.
Kbc15 - lower Burro Co.nyon FM.
SOURCE: GOCHNOUR 1996a.
JM - Mor'r'ison FOI"Mo. tion
23996
FIG. ·3.1-5
Sentinel #1 Pit D'
6500 6500
6400 6400
6300
63001illl~
6200l 6200
6100 6100
FINAL PIT
6000-t~~a~a~aa~a~a~a~aa~a~a~a~aa~a~a~a~~~mrn 6 o00 FLOOR
EL. 5960
0000000000000000000000
0000000000000000000000
000000000
I~I FQults
QAL - QUo. ternQry QlluvluM
1====1 KM - MQncos FOrMQtlon
12-<>(9 Kd 345 - upper DQkotQ FM" beds 3, 4, 5

o 300 600
Kd 678 - DQkotQ FM" COQly beds i
, Scale (ft)
Kd - 13 - lower DQlotQ FM" 'beds 9-13
9
Kbc14 upper Burro CQnyon FM,
Kbc15 - lower BlAI"I"O Cnnyon FM,
JM - Morrison FOrMQtion Job No, : 23996
CROSS-SECTION O-D'
Prepared by : C.H.P. SENTINEL PIT AREA
...
N
CD
Date: 4/16/96 LISBON VALLEY COPPER ,PROJECT
C1l
m ,~~--~~--.~---------
E E'
i<E---------,GTO Pit----------:;!>ol
1---...1 Fo.ults
QAL - Qua. terno.ry o.lluviuM
KM - Mo.ncos ForMa. tion
Kcl 345 - upper Da.koto. FM., loecls 3, 4, 5
F··· .. ·.....~
.......... Kcl 678 - Do.koto. FM., coo.ly loecls
~~~@~~~~ Kcl 9 - 13 - lower Do.loto. FM" loecls 9-13
Kloc14 - upper Burro Co.nyon FM.
Kloc15 - lower Burro Co.nyon FM.
Trc - Chinle FOrMo.tion
~ Pc - Cutler F OrMo. tion
JM - Morrison ForMa.tion CROSS-SECTION LOCATION SHOWN ON FIGURE 2-1

Job No. : 23996
a 300 600 1----------1 CROSS-SECTION E-E'
~i~~~__~~~~~; Prepared by : C.H.P. GTO PIT AREA
Scale eft)· Date: 4/16/96 LISBON VALLEY COPPER PROJECT
FIG. 3.1-7
B-I{
3.1.4.1 Geologic Hazards silt material) and are in a loose state. based
on surface and subsurface explorations
Geologic hazards in the area could have an (ConeTec 1995).
effect on the proposed Lisbon Valley
Project and have the potential to cause 3.1.4.2 Oimatic Hazards
alterations in the leach pad facilities or
"waste rock dumps preventing optimal Summo consulted ,historic records of
perfonnance. Two geologic hazards may precipitation and 'evaporation ,in the Lisbon
be encountered. First, seismic events could Valley Project during engineering design to
occur in the area tliat may induce slope evaluate how the capacity of the solution
instability on the leach pad or waste rock ponds would need to be modified above
dumps. Second, loose, uncompacted operational and draindown conditions to
surficial foundation materials under the accommodate runoff from a large
leach pad may settle during pad loading precipitation event (e.g., rain water)
activities, which could al1;er the flow of without discharge to the surrounding
leach solutions. environment (Welsh 1996). A water
balance analysis was perfonned and a pond
During engineering design of the Lisbon system was developed to accommodate the
Valley Project,. Summo consulted data on resulting runoff; as described in Section
historic seismic events in the Lower Lisbon 2.2.4.2.
Valley area to calculate the force that
would be induced on the mine facilities 3.1.5 Potential for Additional
during a seismic event and to determine if Copper Development
leach pad stability could be maintained.
The peak ground acceleration was Copper-bearing minerals have been
determined to be 0.21g ("gil is the identified in rock from a variety of zones in
gravitational constant), which is the highest the Lisbon Valley. Exploration efforts have
recorded ground acceleration at the site spanned over 100 years; however, only
(Welsh 1996). A peak ground acceleration two significant deposits have been
of 0.21g is indicative of a seismically active identified. and these deposits have been
area (Welsh 1996 ). 'For comparison sporadically mined. The Big Indian and
purposes, a region that is characterized as Blackbird Mines were the largest mines in
a highly active area would have a higher the valley and have similar' geologic and
number (e.g., north-central Nevada has a ore body characteristics. The Blackbird
peak ground acceleration in excess of 0.3 Mine mined high grade material from the
to OAg). The 0.21g event used in the same ore body that is proposed to be
geotechnical engineering design at the developed for the Lisbon Valley Project.
Lisbon Valley Project has a 90 percent
probability of not being exceeded in excess Numerous small mines and exploration
of250 years (Welsh 1996 ). activities have existed for short periods
during the long history of resource
Foundation soils in the area of the leach ' exploration and exploitation in the Lisbon
pad are granular in nature (i.e., sand and Valley area. The numerous other copper
239961R3.3 5/141!1G(3:47PM)lRPT/4 3-12
1Zl.
prospects in the Lisbon Valley are small pits. As Summo develops its mine, it is
and differ from the Summo deposit in two possible that additional reserves at ~e
ways. First, these small prospects typically Lisbon Valley Project may be mined
have copper mineralization confined to (Thorson 1996a). The potential increase in
within a few feet of small faults (Thorson minable reserves would be based on the
1996b). In stark contrast, the Lisbon ore grade, the economic and technical
Valley Project deposits have dispersed success of mining and extraction
copper mineralization which extends out operations, and the market and price for
hundreds of feet, up to over one thousand copper.
feet, from major faults. Second, the
deposits to be mined in the proposed Finally, the potential for additional
action are located entirely within the Burro exploration and development· of copper
Canyon Formation and Dakota Sandstone deposits in the area does not appear likely
(Weir 1981). The smaller prospects may as reflected by the lack of Notice of
occur in these same formations, but also Intentions (NOls) to conduct exploration
occur in the Cutler, Kayenta, Navajo, or mining that the BLM has received· for
Entrada, and Morrison Formations, and are the Lisbon Valley area. NOIs generally are
controlled by the small faults rather than required before exploration or mining can
stratigral'hy. be conducted on BLM-administered lands.
Since approximately 1986, only 8 NOls
The resource potential and geology of the have been received: five have been for
area are generally well defined because of exploration and three for mining
the extensive drilling and other exploration operations, including Summo's Lisbon
activities that have occurred over Valley Project. The two most recent NOIs
numerous years in the Lisbon Valley area. were for the Summo operation and the Big
The deposit that would be developed by Indian Mine (BLM 1994, 1995a, 1995b).
Summo's Lisbon Valley Project has been
laiown for years. 1v.furing of this extensive The largest prior planned operation was
deposit is proposed at this time due to that of the Kelrnine Corporation of Utah.
favorable economic conditions (i.e., the The proposed operation involved open pit
value of copper) and improvements in the mining, heap leaching, and milling on
recovery processes. Sections 25, 26, and 36 ofT 30 S, R 25 E.
The BLM performed an evaluation of the
Moreover, it is unlikely that extensive project and issued a Decision Record and
exploration activities would occur in the Finding of No SigIiificant Impact
area as a result of the exploitation of the (DRIFONSI) on May 5, 1986 (BLM
f Lisbon Valley Project deposit. As noted 1986a). However, the project was never
above, extensive exploration activities have initiated. The project's proposed operation
been conducted in this area for over 100 and location are similar to that of Summo's
I years. The only exploration activities that proposed project.
appear likely to occur are drilling by
The other mining NOI involves small
I Summo to further define the ore body
surrounding its existing proposed mine mining operations in the area of the Big
239961&3.3 S/J4/96(3:47PM)lRPT/4 3-l3
Indian :Mine. The operator, William V. surface water sampling procedures, and
Harrison, proposed to expand his existing laboratory data sheets for baseline
surface mining operations for recovery of characterization are contained in the
mineral specimens (BLM 1994, 1995a). Hydrologic Environmental Baseline
Only minimal amounts of ore are to be Evaluation (Woodward-Clyde 1995a) and
developed at this site. The majority of in letter reports to Summo (Woodward-
copper ore at this location has been Clyde 1995b; 1995c; 1995d; 1996).
previously mined (Thorson 1996b).
3.2.2 Surface Water Resources
Exploration NOls were submitted for
limited drilling and were mostly in the area The Lisbon Valley Copper Project lies
of Summo's Lisbon VaIley Project (BLM within the Lisbon VaIley subarea of the
1993a, 1993b, unk.a, unk.b, unk.c). Dolores River Basin. Figure 3.2-2 shows
the main surface water features within the
In summary, because of the somewhat study area. This area is part of the
unique nature of the Summo deposit and Southeast Colorado River Basin, which is
the extensive exploration of the area for typicaIly hot and dry during the summer
over 100 years, it is unlikely that any months. Most of the precipitation that faIls
additional large copper deposits would be within the area occurs in the mountains
identified or mined in the foreseeable with a majority of the local streamflow
future. originating from snowmelt in the La Sal
and Abajo Mountains. Normal annual
3.2 HYDROLOGY precipitation in the basin ranges from about
6 inches in the plains to approximately
3.2.1 Study Area 30 inches in some ofthe mountain areas.
This section of the report discusses the The Southeast Colorado River Basin
existing sUrface water and groundwater includes the drainages of the Paria, San
resources for the study area and proposed Juan, and Dolores rivers. Lisbon VaIley is
project site. Surface water and included as part of the Utah portion of the
groundwater data were collected at the site Dolores River drainage basin. In Utah, the
in 1994 and 1995 to evaluate baseline entire eastern drainage of the La Sal
conditions. Water samples were collected Mountains plus a smaIl area north of the
from existing and recently installed Dolores River is included in the Southeast
monitoring wells, open boreholes, natural Colorado River Basin. It is estimated that
springs, and several cattle ponds to assess about 4 percent of the total Dolores River
existing water quality. Basin water yield occurs in the Utah
watershed.
Figure 3.2-1 shows the existing monitoring
and production wells, open boreholes, and
surface water features sampled during
baseline characterization. Well instaIlation,
well development, groundwater and
:23996IR3.3 5I14196(3:47PM)lRPT/4 3-14
o 2000 4000
- -
8000
- I
SCALE IN FEET
LEGEND
SENTINEL CATILE POND. SURFACE WATER SAMPLING LOCATION

SI.V-2 * EXISTING MONITORING OR PRODUCTION WELL
94WW2. 1994 MONITORING WELL
94WW4. OPEN BORING
. Job No. : 23996 MONITORING WELL, BORING, AND

1 - - - - - - - - - - 1 SURFACE WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS
Prepared by : D.K.N.
LISBON VAlLEY COPPER· PROJECT
Date: 1/23/95
FIG. 3.2-1
3-15
lUX ~.
T31S
NOTE: BASE MAP TAKEN FROM USGS 1· x 2"

MOAB. UTAH. COLORADO TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
SURFACE WATER FEATURES

.-," ,-----1
LISBON VALLEY AREA
,.
-"""-_'--'-----iR).i<.N.
63 30'
:25/95 SAN JUAN COUNTY. UTAH
FIG. 3.2-2
3.2.2.1 Surface Water Occurrence
In summary, surface water drainages in the
Surface water flow is ephemeral in the project area are characterized by dry
project area. Surface runoff from areas washes typical for this area of Utah.
beyond the rim of the valley generally Ephemeral flow occurs only after major
flows away fr9m the valley. Only the valley precipitation events such as thunderstonns..
floor acts as a catchment area for surface
water flow (Adrian Brown Consultants Surface water presently on the site is
1996). The flow system which exists in the limited to that flowing from Lisbon and
valley is poorly developed. A surface water Huntley Springs, water intermittently
drainage divide exists east of the ponded in the Centennial and GTO Pits,
Centennial Pit near dry boring 94MW1 and two cattle ponds (Figure 3.2-1).
(Figure 3.2-1). The area east of this divide Surface water samples have been collected
is drained predominantly by an ephemeral from the two springs, two cattle ponds,
stream that trends to the southeast along water ponded on a bench within the GTO
the axis of Lower Lisbon Valley. An Pit (twice), and water ponded in the
ephemeral branch tributary to this main Centennial Pit, and analyzed for baseline
stream drains the GTO Pit area and joins characterization. Flow measurements were
the main drainage near groundwater conducted at the two springs in April 1994.
monitoring well 94MW6. Near this Both had low flow rates, with Lisbon
confluence, the main drainage channel is Spring flowing at approximately 1.2
approximately 20 feet wide and 6 to 8 feet gallons per minute (gpm) and Huntley
deep. However, the streams at the project Springs flowing at approximately 0.1 gpm.
site, including this drainage, apparently
carry water only after major precipitation Available infonnation regarding
events (i.e., thunderstonns). precipitation and surface water flow in this
area is limited. The nearest climatological
The western portion of the project area is stations (i.e., temperature and
drained by a main ephemeral stream and precipitation) are located in the town of La
several tributaries occurring in the area of Sal and in Dry Valley. Recording stream
the proposed leach pad west of the gauging stations are not present in Lisbon
Centennial Pit. The main ephemeral stream Valley. However, a gauging station was
from Little Valley flows east then northeast identified in Hatch Wash which is
and joins an ephemeral stream from Upper approximately 18 miles northwest of the
Lisbon Valley. After the confluence, the project site (Figure 3.2-2). The gauging
drainage channel continues to the northeast station (Utah No. 09185500) on Hatch
through Lisbon Canyon. This main Wash was used for general infOImation to
drainage and associated tributaries were characterize the drainages in the vicinity of
dry when observed during a number of site the project site.
visits conducted in 1994 and 1995. The
nearest perennial stream is the Dolores Based on the infonnation obtained, the
River, located approximately 20 miles east nonnal annual precipitation for Lisbon.
of the project site. Valley is about 15 inches, with most of that
239961R3.3 5114196(3:47 PM)JRPT14 3-17
falling in the fall and Winter months. Peak standards in Lisbon Spring and gross beta
stonn events typical of the area range from was exceeded in all samples with the
about 1.2 inches for a 2-year, 24-hour exception of that from Huntley Spring. The
event to ~.O inches for a lOO-year, 24-hour quality of water captured in the cattle
event (NOAA 1973). Published peak flow ponds is generally good. Results for the
infonnation resulting from peak storm two samples collected from the water
events was available for the Hatch Wash ponded on the bench within the GTO Pit
drainage. This infonnation indicated flows suggest that this water has been impacted
in the Hatch Wash drainage ranging from from historic uranium mining operations
about 500 cubic feet per second (cfs) for a adjacent to the GTO Pit. The sample
2-year event to approximately 6,000 cfs for collected in November 1995 contained the
the 100-year event. However, no such highest gross alpha (5700 picoCuries per
published data are available for the project liter [pCiIl]), gross beta (3838 pCiIl), and
area located in Lisbon Valley. sulfate (3900 milligrams per liter [mgll]) of
any samples collected at the project site.
3.2.2.2 Surface Water Quality Water from the GTO bench also exceeded
the secondary standards for dissolved
Surface water samples were collected from aluminum and manganese and the primary
two cattle ponds, two springs, and water standard for total dissolved solids (IDS).
ponded on a bench within the GTO Pit in
April, 1994 as described in the Baseline 3.2.3 Groundwater'Resources
Evaluation (Woodward-Clyde 1995a);
from water ponded in the Centennial Pit in Groundwater occurrence and flow patterns
August 1995 (Woodward-Clyde 1995d); in the Paradox Basin area of Utah are
and from water ponded on the bench influenced by geologic structure. The
within the GTO Pit in November 1995 Paradox Basin is defined by the presence of
(Woodward-Clyde 1996). Table 3.2-1 a thick sequence of evaporite deposits
presents the analytical results for the. which are associated with the development
surface water samples; the sampling of salt anticlines bordered by extensive
locations are shown on Figure 3.2-1. faulting. Water-bearing units in the study
area are part of the Mesozoic Aquifer~ as
Comparison of the analytical results to the defined by Paiz and Thackston (1987a).
State of Utah drinking water standards Regional groundwater flow directions in
(Utah DEQ 1994) was perfonned to assess this aquifer unit are generally towards the
the existing water quality. PrimaIy drinking west, and it is recharged from the east
water standards are established to be (paiz and Thackston 1987b). Recharge to
protective of human health, and the the aquifers from' precipitation is very
secondary standards provide guidance in limited in extent (paiz and Thackston
evaluating the aesthetic qualities of 1987a). Additional discussions regarding
drinking water. Dissolved antimony slightly the regional hydrogeologic setting are
exceeded the primary standard in samples contained in Thackston et al. (1981),
from Huntley Spring and the cattle pond Hanshaw and Hill (1969), and Woodward- ,
near the Sentinel Pit. Gross alpha exceeded Clyde (1982).
23Sl96IR.33 SI14196(3:47PM)IRPT/4 3-18
/.31)
SUMMARY OF SURFACE WATER ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Lisbon VaHey Copper Pl'oject
April 1994 - November 1995
Locallon Hunlley Spring GTOBench I.Isbon Spring Pond, 1.It1le Valley Pond, Senllnel Centennial Pit Vlah Drinking Waler Standards (4)
Number of Samples 1 2 t t t 1 Primary Secondary
Parameler Units Melhod Detecllon limit Results Results Results Results Results m
Dissolved Aluminwn mg/l BPA200.7 0.05 NO NO 0.052 0.085 0.13 0.05 -0.2
Dissolved Antimony mg/l BPA200.9 0.001- 0.005 0.0062 NO NO 0.0062 NO 0.006
Dissolved Arsenic mg/l BPA200.7 0.005 - 0.04 ND NO NO . ND ND 0.05
Dissolved Bariwn mg/l BPA200.7 0.01 0.151 0.122 0.109 0.069 0.11 2
Dissolved Becilliwn m&!! BPA200.7 0.001.0.01 NO~Q NO~I~ NO~Q NO~Q NO 0.004
Dissolved Cadmiwn mg/l BPA200.7 0.001·0.01 NO (I) ND(l) NO(l) NO(l) NO 0.005
Dissolved Calcium mg/l BPA200.7 0.2 -47.9 80.6 37.4 24.6 323
Dissolved Chromiwn mgll BPA200.7 0.005 ·0.01 ND ND NO NO ND 0.10
Dissolved Copper mgll BPA200.7 0.01 NO NO NO 0.011 0.G2 1.0
Dissolved Iron m!!!1 BPA200.7 0.01 0.013 0.022 0.055 0.047 NO 0.3
Dissolved Lead mg/l EPA 200.9 0.003 .0.005 ND NO ND NO NO 0.015
Dissolved Magnesil\l11 mg/l EPA 200.7 0.1 24.6 12.6 4.3 5.9 26.7
Dissolved Manganese mg/l EPA 200.7 0.01 NO 0.012 NO NO NO 0.05
Dissolved MereuI)' mg/l EPA 200.7 0.0002 NO NO NO NO NO 0.002
Dissolved Mol~bdenwn m&!! BPA200.7 0.01-0.04 NO NO NO NO NO
Dissolved Nickel mgll EPA 200.7 0.01 ·0.G2 NO NO NO NO NO 0.\0
Dissolved Potassillln mg/l BPA200.7 0.1 4.2 2.8 18 11.9 15.7
Dissolved Selenium mg/l EPA 200.9 0.002 - 0.005 0.017 NO NO NO NO 0.05
Dissolved Silicon mg/l EPA 200.7 0.4 6.5 4.9 2.4 3 2.3
Dissolved Silver m!!!1 EPA 200.7 0.002-0.01 NO NO NO NO NO 0.10
Dissolved Sodiwn mgll EPA 200.7 0.2 41.8 21.7 0.68 1.4 40.~
Dissolved Thalliwn mgtl EPA 200.9 0.001 - 0.002 NO NO NO NO NO 0.002
Dissolved Vanadium mg/I .EPA200.1 0.01-0.04 NO NO NO ND ND
Dissolved Zinc mg/I BPA200.7 0.05 0.02 0.015 0.016 0.013 NO 5.0
,-....
\)J'
Ammonia as NH3-N
Nitrate as N03-N
Nitrit~ as N02-N
N03·N + NOl-N
m&!!
mgtl
mg/l
mgll
SM4500
EPA3S3.1
EPA3S4.1
BPA3S3.1
0.4·1.0
0.02·0.2
0.005
0.02 ·0.2
1.0.2.0
NO
NO
NA
NO
11.5
NO
0.047
NA
0.047
18
NO
NO
NA
NO
NO
NO
NA
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
3
10.0
10.0
Chloride mg/l BPA325.3 NO 250.0
-0 Fluoride ml EPA 340.2 0.3.0.5 0.28 0.36 NO NO 0.7 4.0 2.0
Sulfate mg/l 'BPA 375.4 5.0·6.0 26 54 NO NO 883 1000
pH
Conductivity
units EPA 150.1
umbos/em EPA 120.1
0.05
0.5
8.25
542
8.19
534
9.04
237
II 9.46
178
8.12
IS02 .
6.5·8.5
Hardness as CaCOl mg/l EPA 130.2 5 21~ 244 99 79 883

Total Sus ended Solids ml EPA 160.2 2.5 3 ND 15 19 194
Total Dissolved Solids mg/l EPA 160.1 5 309 305 150 104 1360 2000
Alkalinity as CaC03 mg/l SM2320B I 260 226 114 67 10
Bicarbonate, total mgll SM2320B I 316 276 139 82 86
Carbonate, total mgll SM2320B \ NO 4 8 NA
OrossAlpha pCiJI EPA 900.0 2' 6 49 3 8.2
Oross Beta Cill EPA 900.0 4 NO' 39 21 26
NO = Not detected mg/I = milligrams per liter umhoslcm=
NA = Not analyzed pCill = picocuries per liter
Dolded and boxed results indicate that one or more samples for the parameter exceeds State ofUt.h prhuruy or seeondal)' drinking water quality standards
(I) One or more samples had a detection limit above the State of Utah primal)' or secondoI)' drinking water standards.
(2) One or more samples had a detection Iimit.bove the highest detected v.lue shown.
(3) The standard is that activity which will cause a 4mrem/yr exposure. The standard WIIS converted to peill assuming that the beta activity is due to Strontium·90 and a 2·litcr per day intake of water
(4) Utah Administrative Code R309·\03, April 2, 1993.
Sheet I of f
The following sections describe the sampled nor tested for yield. This aquifer is
occurrence of groundwater beneath the of more regional extent and consists of the
project site, the estimated extent of aquifer Entrada and Navajo Sandstones. Water
systems, groundwater chemistty, and the quality in these units is likely better than
quality of groundwater samples collected that of the shallow aquifer; however, no
during the period October 1994 to site-specific data are available.
November 1995. Groundwater is also locally perched on
clay and shale layers at shallower depths
3.2.3.1 Aquifer Characteristics within the project area. Monitoring well
94MW6 penetrates one such perched
Groundwater is lmown to exist in three groundwater zone in the overlying Mancos
water-bearing units beneath the project Shale in Lower Lisbon Valley. "
site. The shallow aquifer extends to
approximately 400 feet below ground The distribution of groundwater at the
surface (bgs) and is comprised of the Burro project site· is erratic .and strongly
Canyon Formation and Brushy Basin controlled by geologic structure. The
Member of the Morrison Formation (see numerous faults present in the project area
Section 3.1 for a discussion of the geology act as barriers to groundwater flow in
of the project site). This zone of relatively some cases and effectively separate the
high hydraulic condUctivity rocks is dry in shallow aquifer into separate water-bearing
some portions of the valley. Groundwater units. The depth to groundwater in the
flow in this unit is highly segmented, with existing monitoring wells ranges from
faults appearing to act as barriers to approximately 60 feet bgs in the Mancos
groundwater flow across the faults (Adrian Formation in Lower Lisbon Valley (well
Brown Consultants 1996). Faults may act 94MW6) to approximately 300 feet bgs in
as conduits along the structqres in some the Burro Canyon Formation near the
cases, but observations at the project site, " Centennial Pit (wells SLVIA and SLV3)
including . water levels measured in (Table 3.2-2).
monitoring wells, exploration borings, and
areas of dry strata adjacent to saturated In order to evaluate hydraulic
strata, indicate that faults in the project characteristics of the shallow aquifer, two
area act as barriers to flow across" the single well pumping tests were conducted
:faults. The presence of fault gouge at the site (exploration boring 95Rl and
(altered to clay) along the :fault structures former production well SLV3) in May,
is one possible mechanism producing 1995 (Woodward-Clyde 1995e). Data
barriers to groundwater flow across the from a step-drawdown test conducted in
faults. 95Rl were used to select the maximum
pumping rate for the constant-rate tests
An alluvial aquifer of limited extent exists performed in 95Rl and SLV3. Boring
in the valley fill sediments near the Sentinel 95Rl was pumped at a constant rate of
Pits. A deeper aquifer at the site is located 155 gallons per minute (gpm) for
at depths of 900 feet bgs or greater in the approximately 15 hours with a draw~own
Centennial Pit area and has not been of 13.7 feet. Well SLV3 was pumped at a
23S96'R33 SlJ4I96(3:47PM)IRPT/4 3-20
TABLE 3.2-2
SUM:MARY OF WAlERLEVEL MEASUREMENTS FOR

MONITORlNG WELLS
Well Water Level(l)

Number (Feet bgsl
April October March May August Sept Nov
1994 1994 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995
SLV-IA 296.54 294.74 293.42 297.26 297.30 298.00 298.78
SLV-2 83.60 83.16 82.41 82.36 82.28 82.29 82.38
SLV-3 277.33 278.80 274.77 275.78 301.38 299.09 295.11
SLV-4 93.95 94.71 94.60 95.79 94.50 93.71 94.25
MW-2A 267.00 267.70 266.30 267.38 288.06 287.97 285.36
94MW2 NA 259.58 261.48 257.80 257.23 NM 257.09
94MW6 NA 60.03 60.08 60.18 60.03 NM 60.31
Well Elevation of PVC

Number Well Casing Water Level Elevation
{feet above msQ {feet above msl}
April October March May August Sept Nov
1994 1994 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995
SLV-IA 6483.36 6186.82 6188.62 6189.94 6186.10 6186.06 6185.36 6184.58
SLV-2 6382.50 6298.90 6299.34 6300.09 6300.14 6300.22 6300.21 6300.12
SLV-3 6469.05 6191.72 6190.25 6194.28 6193.27 6167.67 6169.96 6173.94
SLV-4 6396.70 6302.75 6301.99 6302.10 6300.91 6302.20 6302.99 6302.45
MW-2A 6454.49 (2)6~87.49 6186.79 6188.19 6187.11 6169.63 6169.72 6172.33
94MW2 6415.10 NA 6155.52 6153.62 6157.30 6157.87 NM 6158.01
94MW6 6287.5 NA 6227.47 6227.42 6227.32 6227.47 ,NM 6227.19
NA = not applicable
NM = not measured
(1) water levels measured to the top of the PVC casing on the north side of the well
(2) Elevation of ground surface; new surface casing installed prior to August 1995 is approximately at
, elevation 6457.69
23996/R3-T.322 05-15-96(S:42PM)/RPT13 Sheet 1 of!

constant rate of 140 gpm for 24 hours with exploration borings drilled by Summo in
a drawdown of 5.7 feet. Estimates of 1993 and 1994.
hydraulic conductivity of the Burro
Canyon Formation in the vicinity of the Three monitoring wells (94MW2, 94MW5,
Centennial Pit ranged from 2,300 to 7,500 and 94MW6) were installed in the shallow
feet/year from the results of these' tests. aquifer during ,October 1994 to supplement ,
The hydraulic conductivity of the Burro the existing wells SLVIA, SLV2, SLV3,
Canyon formation was also estimated from and MW2A (Figure 3.2-1). Monitoring
laboratory tests conducted by Exxon well 94MW5 was installed in Lisbon
Corporation at 3,000 feet/year (Adrian Canyon during October 1994 and initially
Brown Consultants 1996). These values had water at approximately 120 feet bgs.
are consistent with literature ranges for However, shortly after installation the well
sandstone aquifers (Woodward-Clyde was found to be dry and it has been dry
1995e). Recharge to the aquifer has been since. The remaining wells, have been
estimated at 1.0 inch/year and the specific sampled five times from October 1994 to
yield is assumed to be 0.05 (Woodward- November 1995. Additional sampling
Clyde 1995f). events are scheduled quarterly during
1996. Three other boreholes (94MW1,
The remainder of the discussion of 94MW3, and 94MW4) were drilled to a
groundwater resources in this EIS refers to depth of 500 feet in October 1994 without
the shallow aquifer system contained in the encountering water. These borings were
Burro Canyon Formation and valley fill left open and have been monitored
sediments beneath the project site. quarterly for the presence of water. Water
was first observed in open boring 94MW4
3.2.3.2 Groundwater Occurrence during the summer of 1995, and has since
been sampled twice. Boreholes 94MWI
Groundwater beneath the project site is and 94MW3 have been 'dry since
present as discontinuous, water-bearing installation.
units and appears to be structurally
controlled. .The following sections Table 3.2-2 provides a summary of water
summarize the occurrence of groundwater levei measurements from, April 1994 to
near each proposed facility including November 1995 for the existing monitoring
mining pits and the leach pad. The wells and piezometer SLV4, which is
information presented below is summarized located within the existing Centennial Pit.
from the Baseline Evaluation (Woodward- Water levels in wells SLV3 and MW2A fell
Clyde 1995a). Included in the Base1iIle by approximately 26 and 21 feet,
Evaluation are maps and cross-sections respectively, following drilling of a test
representing each of the areas discussed in hole (95Rl) to the lower aquifer unit
the following sections, and a during June 1995. This hole was plugged
potentiometric map for the entire project in September 1995 and water levels have
area. Data used in the following discussion since recovered by 4 feet for well SLV3
come from water levels measured in the and 2 feet for well MW2A.
existing monitoring wells and m
23996'R3.3 Sl14I96(3:47PM)lRPT/4 3-22

Sentinel Pit Area Apparent saturated thicknesses in the
exploration borings that encountered water
Water level measurements are available for at the Sentinel pit, as calculated from the
30 exploration borings in the Sentinel Pit total depth of the borings minus the depth
area. Fourteen of the borings were dry at to water, ranges from 4 to 353 feet, with
bottom hole elevations ranging from 6121- an average of 93.7 feet. It should be noted
6547 feet above msl. Water was observed that some of these borings may not have
in the remaining borings ·at depths of 67- penetrated the full thickness of the aquifer.
221 feet bgs, corresponding to elevations The wide range of apparent saturated
of 6191-6482 feet above ms!. In the thicknesses, presence of numerous dry
Sentinel Pit area, groundwater occurs in holes, and the various elevations at which
the Burro Canyon Formation, the water was encountered, suggest that the
underlying Brushy Basin Member of the Burro CanyonlBrushy Basin aquifer is not
Morrison Formation, and the valley fill continuous across this area and appears to
sediments. Water levels generally increase be fracture and fault controlled.
in elevation from around 6200 feet in
borings drilled on the valley floor to about Centennial Pit Area
6500 feet towards the northeast. Dry
borings are clustered in two areas to the Groundwater is present in the basal
east of the Sentinel Pit. With one sandstone unit of the Burro Canyon
exception, all of the dry borings penetrated F onnation and in sandstone facies of the
into the Brushy Basin Member. The Brushy Basin Member of the Morrison
distribution of water levels in the drill holes F onnation in the Centennial Pit area, based
that penetrate the Burro Canyon! Brushy on infonnation from existing monitoring
Basin aquifer in the vicinity of the Sentinel wells MW2A, SLV2, and SLVIA,
Pit suggest a general local flow gradient to production well SLV3, piezometer SLV4,
the west. The water table is generally flat and several exploration borings. Drilling
in the valley fill near well SLV2. logs from the exploration boreholes in the
vicinity .of the Centennial· Pit indicate that
Monitoring well 94MW5 was installed into groundwater is first encountered at depths
the Brushy Basin Member in Lisbon ranging from 151 to 325 feet bgs,
Canyon, near the Sentinel Pit. Water was corresponding to elevations ranging from
measured in the boring at 6202 feet 6160 to 6302 feet above msl. Twenty-four
elevation prior to installation of the well, of the mineral exploration borings were dry
and was produced from an apparent at bottom hole depths ranging from 6118
fracture zone; however, the well was dry to 6233 feet above msl.
three days after installation. It is unknown
why the well is currently dry. Several The apparent saturated thickness of the
splays of the Lisbon Fault are present in Burro CanyonlBrushy Basin aquifer in the
the immediate area and may control or Centennial Pit area, as seen in monitoring
influence the flow of groundwater. wells MW2A, SLVIA, and SLV3, ranges
from 18-60 feet. Apparent saturated
thicknesses in the exploration borings that
23995JR3.3 SIJ4I95(3:47PM)lRPTf4 3-23
\;S
encountered water ranges from 3 to 183 the Cutler Formation or Chinle Formation.
feet, with an average of 40 feet, as Groundwater was encountered at depths
compared to the average of the saturated ranging from 106 to 326 feet bgs in the
thicknesses measured in the monitoring remaining 17 exploration borings,
wells of 33 feet. Groundwater elevations corresponding to elevations of 6108 to
measured in the exploration borings and 6386 feet above msl. Groundwater was
monitoring wells suggest a probable .present in the Cutler Formation in one
groundwater gradient to the northwest. boring, the Burro Canyon Formation in
However, this gradient trend is intenupted one boring, the Dakota Formation in one
by several intervening dry exploration boring, and the Mancos Shale in "the
holes. remaining 14 borings. Groundwater is
present at an elevation of 6155 feet in well
Groundwater in the Centennial Pit area 94MW2. Groundwater level elevations
also appears to be fracture and fault generally increase from 6121 feet in the
controlled. The Lisbon Fault acts as a southwest to 6385 feet msl to the
barrier to groundwater flow across the northwest near the GTO Pit area,
fault to the southwest, as evidenced by a indicating a probable groundwater gradient
number of dry exploration holes and the to the southeast, however, the occurrence
generally higher elevations of groundwater of groundwater is erratic. The saturated
in the vicinity of the existing Centennial Pit thickness recorded in monitoring well
on the south and west sides of the various 94MW2 is approximately 18 feet.
fault splays. In addition, two borings Apparent saturated thicknesses calculated
(94MW3 and 94MW1) that were drilled to from - exploration borings which
a depth of 500 feet bgs as potential encountered water range from 10 to 358
monitoring wells have been dry since feet, with an average of 200 feet.
October 1994. Boring 94MW3 was drilled
west of the Lisbon Valley fault and to the Little VaDey
soUth of the Centennial Pit in the Cutler
One boring (94MW4) was drilled to a
Formation (Figure 3.2-1). Boring 94MWI
depth of 500 feet bgs in upper Little Valley
(Figure 3.2-1) was drilled to the southeast
near the upgradient end of the proposed
of the Centennial Pit on the hill separating
leach pad (Figure 3.2-1). The boring
the Centennial Pit area from Lower Lisbon
penetrated 120 feet of Cutler Formation
Valley.
.and 360 feet of the Pennsylvanian Hermosa
Formation. The boring was dry when
. GTO Pit Area
drilled but was .left open and periodically
Groundwater in the GTO Pit area occurs in checked for water. Water began to
several shallow geologic units and appears acgunulate in the boring during the
to be fracture and fault controlled, based summer of 1995 and was sampled in
on information from 21 exploration borings August and November 1995. The depth to
and monitoring well 94MW2. Four of the water is approximately 410 feet bgs
mineral exploration borings were dry at (elevation 6110 feet above msl). This water
elevations ranging from 6166 to 6297 feet may have been produced from a permeable
above msL These borings extended in~o unit that is locally perched on clay layers
239961R3.3 5IJ~:47PM)IRPT/4 3-24
within the Hermosa Formation. Little groundwater samples analyzed are .
Valley is structurally isolated from Lisbon representative of four water-bearing units
Valley by the Lisbon Fault. Monitoring beneath the project site: the valley fill near
well SLV2 is located on the east side of the the Sentinel Pit (SLV2); the Burro
fault and groundwater occurs in this well at CanyonIBrushy Basin aquifer in the
an elevation of 6299 feet above msl. Well Centennial Pit area (MW2A, SLVIA,
SLV2 is completed in the valley fill. SLV3, and 95Rl) and the GTO Pit area
(94MW2); and the Mancos Shale in Lower
Lower Lisbon Valley Lisbon Valley (94MW6). In addition, two
samples from boring 94MW4 are
One monitoring well (94MW6) was representative of water quality within the
installed in Lower Lisbon Valley (Figure Hermosa Formation beneath the western
3.2-1). This site was initially considered portion of the leach pad area
for leach pad construction. Perched
groundwater occurs in the Mancos Shale at The groundwater analytical results were
a depth of 60 feet (elevation 6227.feet) in compared to the State of Utah primary and
this well. Boring 94MWI was drilled to a secondary drinking water standards (Utah
depth of 500 feet at the head of the valley DEQ 1994). This comparison provides the
in· the drainage divide between Upper basis for the following discussion of
Lisbon and Lower Lisbon Valleys. This groundwater quality.
boring penetrated 340 feet of Dakota and
Burro Canyon formations and 160 feet of
Major Ion Chemistry
the Brushy Basin Member of the Morrison
Formation, and has been dry since it was Stiff diagrams are a useful tool for visually
drilled. describing differences in major-ion
chemistry in waters. These diagrams plot
3.2.3.3 Groundwater Quality the relative proportions of the major
cations (potassium, sodium, calcium, and .
Groundwater samples were collected from magnesium) and anions (chloride,
monitoring wells SLV1A, SLV2, SLV3, bicarbonate, and sulfate) on three
MW2A, 94MW2, and 94MW6, open horizontal axes. The resulting diagrams
boring 94MW4 (first sampled in August provide a graphical comparison of the
1995), and exploration boring 95R1 (first chemistry of the waters. This information is
sampled in May 1995) during October useful for classifYing water types according
1994 to November 1995. Table 3.2':'3 to the predominant ions present, and for
summarizes the analytical results for these evaluating whether waters from various
samples. The complete data are contained wells are in hydraulic communication with
in the Baseline Evaluation (Woodward- each other. Stiff diagrams for the Lisbon
Clyde 1994) and the letter reports Valley groundwater samples are shown in
(Woodward-Clyde 1995b; 1995c; 1995d; Figure 3.2-3. Averages of the analytical
and 1996). Table 3.2-3 also compares the results for the major cations and anions
analytical results to the State of Utah were used to construct the diagrams.
primary and secondary drinking water
standards (Utah DEQ 1993). The
23996JR3.3 5/14196(3:47 PM)/RPT/4 3-25
SUMMARVOFG:ROUNDWATERANALVTICALRRSULTS
Lillbolt VlIlJey Copp,er Project
Odmber 1!P'4 - Nov~m,bcr 1"5
WtHNunlbtr '~MW' MW1/\ SLVI/\ SLVl '~.AfW4 9~MWl SLVJ '15IH Villi Ddnki'.'1 Wale'r Slld.,rll. (4~
NUblberofSanlplu 6 S 6 5 2 6 (; 1 PrJ-III'.'1")' Sere'I1".,1")'
PlI'lI",elfr Ual'ls Method D"'ecllo" Lb.!! ft1
D;'solvcd Aluminlll1l n>&II EPA 200.1 0.01 ·0.2
DbI;olved Alltimony III!fI BPA 200.9 0.002.0.006 0.006
Dis'loiVtclllnl'fllo men BPA 200.7 0.005 • o.o~ 0.05
Dissolved Barilll1l mgIJ BPA 20'0.1 0.01 .0.2 2
Dissolved Be lIiWll m I EPA 200.7 Mal. 0.01 0.004
D;"'olvcd C.dmiwn m&,! EPA 200.1 0.001 ·O.OS 0.005
Dissolved Culolwn mt/I BPA 200.7 0.2
Dissolved C1l!omilll1l '"til BPA 200.1 O.OOS • 0.01 0.10
DbI;olved Copper. mell EPA 200.1 0.01 ·0.1 1.0
Dissolved Iron m I BPA 200.7 0.01 .0.4 0.3
Di..olved L•• d mgll BPA 200,9 0.003· O.OOS 0.015
Dis.olved MogncsilUll mg/I lJPA 21}0.1 0.1 ·0.2
Dissolved Mangano.o mg/I BPA 200.7 0.01 I LI","",~~;."...J 0.05
Dissolved Mel'tlU)' mg/I I!PA 200.7 0.0002 0.002
DilSolved Mol bdcnwn In I I!PA 200.1 0.01 ·0.1
Dissolved Nickel mell BPA 200.7 0.01 ·0.1 0.10
Dissolved Potassium mell EPA 200.1 0.1
Dissolved Selenium mell EPA 200.9 0.002· O.OOS O.OS
Di..olvcd Silicon mell EPA 200.1 0.4
Di..olved Slh..,r mFII EPA 200.7 0.002·0.05 0.10
Dissolved Sodiw11 mg/I BPA 200.7 0.2
Dissolved Thalliwn mell EPA 200.9 0.001·0.005 0.002
Dissolved Vanadiwn mg/I EPA 200.1. 0.01·0.1
Dissolved Zinc ' mg/I BPA 200.1 0.05 I LI~::;':~!....J 5.0
Ammonia as NH3·N mg/I 8M 4500 0.04 ·0.8
NilJ'ate as N03·N mg/I BPA 353.1 0.02 • 1.0 10.0
Nilrita IU N02·N mg/I EPA 354.1 0.005
N03·N +N02·N ' mtll EPA 353.1 0.02 • 0.4 10.0
C1llorido m&,! EPA 325.3 1.0 250.0
Fluoride m BPA 340.2 0.3 • 1.0 4.0 2.0
Sulfate mg/I BPA 375.4 5.0 1000
pll wlitJ EPA 150.1 0.05 II 6.5·8.S
Conductivity wnIloslcm EPA 120.1 0.5 '-:'=""f=-'
Hardnessa.CaC03 mgll BPA 130.2 S.O
Total Su.,nded Solid. m I BPA 160.2 2.5· S.O
Total Dillolved Solids mg/I EPA 160.1 S.O 2000
Alkalinity a. CaC03 mg/I SM 2320B 1.0
Bicarbonate, dis.. mg/I SM 2320B 1.0
Oro," Alpha pCiII EPA 900.0 2
Oro.. Beta CiII EPA 900.0 4
NO ~ Not Detected mg/I ~ milligranu pcr liter pCiII = picocmies per liter wnltoslcm A micromho. per centimeter
Bolded and boxed ro."lt. indicate Ulat on8 or more .amples for Ul0 parameter exceed. Stato ofUlah primouy or .econdouy drinking water quality .tandards
(I) One or moro .amples had 8 detection limit .bo,·. dl. State of Ulah primouy or secondouy drinking wator .tandards.
(2) Ono or moro .amp.les hsd " doteclionlimit abo•• dIe highe.t detected value shown.
(3) The standard is that activity which will cause a " mrem/)T exposure, Th•• tandard was cOllverted to pCillasswning that UIO beta activity i. due to Strontium·90 and 8 2·liter per <lay intake or-voter
(4) Utah Adminislrativo Code R309·1 03, April 2, 1993.
- -,
o 1500 3000 6000
- SCALE IN FEET
G4UW4
SODIUM -- SULFATE TYPE
~lFORNAnON
CAnm
so : .
No+K
Co -3996
GROUNDWATER STIFF DIAGRAMS
Mg --KN.
(23/96
140'1- FIG. 3.2-3
Groundwater samples from monitoring were below the State primary standards
wells SLV3 and MW2A are, in general, and at concentrations lower than samples
very hard, calcium-sulfate type waters. from other wells screened in the Burro
Samples from both wells exceeded the Canyon FOImation (Table 3.2-3). IDS
State of Utah primary drinking water and sulfate in samples from well 94MW2
standards for sulfate and total dissolved decreased over the time period sampled.
solids (IDS) (1,000 and 2,000 mg/l, The available data, as illustrated by the
respectively, Table 3.2-3). These wells are Stiff diagrams (Figure 3.2-3), suggest that
screened in relatively clean sandstones of groundwater in the GTO Pit area may be
the basal Burro Canyon Formation in the isolated from that in the Centennial Pit
Centennial Pit area. Water from the one area.
sample collected from exploration boring
95R1 was also a very hard, calcium-sulfate The water from well SLV2 is a hard to
type water but contained lower sulfate and . very hard, calcium-magnesium-sodium-
IDS than the waters from wells SLV3 and bicarbonate type. This well is screened in
MW2A. The similarity of the Stiff valley fill material near the Sentinel Pit.
diagrams (Figure 3.2-3) suggests that wells Sodium, sulfate, and IDS in samples from
SLV3 and MW2A and exploration boring this well were the lowest of any sampled at
95R1 are in hydraulic communication with the project site (Table 3.2-3). IDS
each other. The remaining well in the decreased in samples from this well during
Centennial Pit area (SLVIA) is located the sampling period. Comparison of the
across a major fault from wells SLV3 and major ion chemistry of the waters from this
MW2A, and is characterized by very hard, well with that for the Centennial Pit wells
calcium-magnesium-sulfate type water and (Figure 3.2-3) suggests that the valley fill
contained higher dissolved solids than aquifer may not be in hydraulic
water from wells SLV3 and MW2A (Table communication with the Burro Canyon
3.2-3). Sulfate and IDS also exceeded the aquifer. In addition, the elevation of the
Utah primary standards in samples from groundwater in well SLV2 is also over 100
this well (Table 3.2-3). Based on the Stiff feet higher than in nearby Burro Canyon
diagrams, at least two separate water- aquifer wells (Table 3.2-2).
bearing units may be present in the
Centennial Pit area. This conclusion is Open boring 94MW4, located upgradient
supported by the drop in water levels seen from the proposed leach pad in Little
from June to August of 1995 in wells Valley, has been sampled twice. This
SLV3 and MW2A without a boring penetrates the Hermosa Fonnation.
corresponding drop in water levels in well The major ion chemistry of samples from
SLVIA (Table 3.2-2). this well indicates a soft, sodium-sulfate
type water in this area, which contrasts
Well 94MW2 is also screened in the Burro with the waters sampled in the valley fill
Canyon FOImation, downgradient of the and Burro Canyon aquifers to the east,
GTO Pit. Water from this well is classified across the Lisbon Fault. Samples from this
as a very hard, calcium-magnesium- borehole . contained the lowest calcium,
sodium-sulfate type water. IDS and sulfate
239961R3.3 SI14195(3:47PM:)I.RPTJ4 3-28
magnesium, and potassium of any wells repeated sampling events which have
sampled (Table 3.2-3). cleaned the well of sediment, total
suspended solids (TSS) decreased
Well 94MW6 is screened in the Mancos dramatically during this time, whereas IDS
Shale in Lower Lisbon Valley. The remained fairly constant. Several
chemisny of well 94MW6 indicates a constituents showed either a high or low
moderately hard, sodium-bicarbonate type during the March 1995 sampling event in
water. IDS and sulfate exceeded the samples from well MW2A and the other
primary standards in samples from this well wells. Water levels were generally highest
(Table 3.2-3). The samples from this well during March 1995 (Table 3.2-3). Barium,
also contained the highest sodium and silicon, gross alpha, and gross beta were
chloride of any well sampled, likely due to highest during March 1995 in samples from
leaching of soluble salts from interbedded well MW2A. This may be related to the
evaporite beds (gypsum) within the very high TSS (17,960 mg/l) recorded at
Mancos Shale. The distinctive odor of this time, probably due to the well
hydrogen sulfide was observed during development activities conducted just prior
sampling of this well, which suggests that to this sampling event. Iron, manganese,
the waters in the Mancos Shale may be and sulfate wer~ lowest during March 1995
reducing sulfate to sulfide. in samples from well MW2A.
l\1inor and Trace Element Chemistry WellSLV3
WellMW2A Samples from well SLV3 contained the

highest iron (8.32 mg/l) and nitrate (1.54
Samples from well MW2A contained the mg/l) of any wells sampled (Table. 3.2-3).
highest copper and zinc of any wells Iron and manganese exceeded the Utah
sampled; however, copper was still below secondary standards (0.3 mg/l and 0.05
Utah secondary drinking water standard of mg/l, respectively) for samples from this
1 mg/l. Zinc ranged up to 8.01 mg/l, well well. The high iron may be due to the
above the Utah secondary standard of 5 rusted steel casing which lines the upper
mg/l (Table 3.2-3). Manganese was high part of this former production well. BariUm
(1.17 mgll) in this well compared to the increased slightly during the sampling
Utah secondary drinking water standard of period. Analytes highest during March
0.05 mg/l. A comparison of the analytical 1995 for samples from well SLV3 include
results from the five sampling events silicon and zinc, and pH was lowest during
(October 1994, March 1995, May 1995, this period.
August 1995, and November 1995) was
performed to evaluate significant trends in Boring 95Rl
the concentrations of minor and trace
elements in samples from the individual Iron and manganese concentrations in the
wells. In samples from well MW2A, iron sample from exploration boring 95Rl
increased slightly, and barium decreased exceeded the Utah secondary standards
slightly during this time. As the result· of (0.3 mg/l and 0.05 mg/l, respectively,
Table 3.2-3).
2399&'R3.3 SJl4l96(3:47PM)fRPT/4 3-29
Well SLVIA Aluminum and iron increased slightly, and
IDS and alkalinity decreased during the
Samples from well SLVIA contained the sampling period. Barium, lead, silicon,
highest cadmium (0.029 mg/l) and nitrate, fluoride, TSS, alkalinity, and gross
manganese (2.2 mg/l) for wells in the beta were highest during March 1995.
project area, both of which exceeded Utah These changes may have been related to
primary (0.005 mg/l) or secondary (0.05 the high TSS and low pH present during
mg/l) drinking water standards, that sampling event.
respectively, for one or more samples
(Table 3.2-3). In addition, aluminum, iron, Boring 94MW4
and zinc exceeded Utah secondary drinking
water standards. Aluminum, manganese, Samples from open boring 94MW4
and selenium increased, and TSS decreased contained the highest fluoride (exceeded
during the sampling period. Cadmium, the secondary standard) and also exceeded
silicon, nitrate, fluoride, and pH were standards for aluminum, antimony, and
highest, and manganese and sulfate were iron. Aluminum, arsenic, iron, silicon, zinc,
lowest during March, 1995 in samples nitrate, gross alpha, and gross beta
from well SLVIA. increased slightly between August and
November 1995, while fluoride, pH, and
Well 94MW2 TSS decreased.
Samples from well 94MW2 contained Well 94MW6

aluminum, lead, nickel, and thallium
concentrations that were higher than other For samples from well 94MW6, manganese
wells sampled (all exceeded Utah primary exceeded the secondary drinking water
or secondary standards), and also exceeded standard (0.05 mgll). Aluminum and zinc
Utah primary or secondary standards for showed slight increases, and TSS and
cadmium, antimony, iron, and manganese alkalinity decreased during the time period
(Table 3.2-3). Samples from this well also analyzed. Lead, molybdenum, selenium,
showed the most changes in water silicon, nitrate, nitrite, and pH were highest
chemistry during the period, with a slight during March 1995.
increase in cadmium, and decreases in
manganese, molybdenum, sulfate, and Radionuclides
IDS. Lead, molybdenum, silicon, thallium,
fluoride, gross alpha, and gross beta all The proposed Lisbon Valley Copper
were at their highest concentrations during Project is located in a historic copper!
March 1995, when TSS was lowest. uranium mining district.· Radionuclides
(uranium and radium) are present in the
Well SLV2 groundwater at the project site and are
naturally occurring. Analyses of uranium
In samples from well SLV2, aluminum, content in rocks near the project site
iron, and lead slightly exceeded Utah indicate that uranium concentration within
primary or secondary standards (0.2 mgll, the ore material is variable, ranging from
0.3 mgll, and 0.015 mg/l, respectively). 0.2 to 10.3 parts per million (ppm)
239961R33 S/14I%(3:47PM)lRPT/4 3-30
(Thorson 1996b). Rocks in the Cutler area appears to be non-potable when
Formation, located 2200 feet to the west of compared to State of Utah primary and
the Centennial Pit, contain higher secondary drinking water standards.
concentrations. Four samples of Cutler Groundwater in the valley fill exceeded
Formati()n sandstone exposed on the Utah primary or secondary standards for
surface ranged from 74 to 145 ppm aluminum, manganese, and lead.
uranium (Thorson 1996b). For Groundwater in the Burro Canyon
comparison, the average worldwide crustal Formation in the Centennial pit area
abundance of uranium is 1.8 ppm (Hurlbut exceeded Utah primary or secondary,
and Klein 1977). standards for aluminum, cadmium, iron,
manganese, zinc, sulfate, and IDS.
The groundwater analytical results for Groundwater in the Burro Canyon
radionuclides (Table 3.2-3) were compared Formation in the GTO Pit area exceeded
to the State of Utah primary and secondary .Utah primary or secondary standards for
drinking water standards. Concentrations aluminum, antimony, cadmium, iron, lead,
in samples from all wells exceeded the manganese, nickel, and thallium.
primary standards for gross alpha (15 Groundwater in the Mancos Shale
pCi/l) and gross beta (8 pCi/l). Analyses of exceeded Utah primary or secondary
total uranium, radium-226, and radium-228 standards for manganese, sulfate, and IDS.
were conducted for the October 1994 Groundwater in the Hermosa Formation
groundwater samples. Results ranged from exceeded Utah primary or secondary
1.0 to 7.1 pCi/l for radium-226; < 2 to 9 standards for aluminum, antimony, and
pCi/l for radium-228; and 0.037 to 0.978 fluorid.e. Samples from all of these units
mgll (25 to 662 pCi/l) for total uranium. exceeded the primary standards for gross
Several agencies were contacted (Spangler alpha and gross beta activities. The
1996; Moten 1996; Hunt 1996; elevated radionuclide activities are likely
Frederickson 1996) during preparation of naturally occurring.
this EIS ill an attempt to compare' these
concentr.nions to background 3.3 GEOCHEMISTRY
concentrations of radionuclides in'
groundwater in the Paradox Basin region; 3.3.1 Study Area
however, no data were available. Because
of the naturally elevated levels of uranium The primary issue associated with the
in rocks of the Colorado Plateau Region, it geochemistIy of the waste rock at the
is likely that these radionuclide proposed Lisbon Valley Project (i.e., study
concentrations are not unusual for area for geochemistIy purposes) pertains to
groundwaters in the region. potential impacts to surface and
groundwater resources from acid
Summary generation and mobilization of dissolved
constituents. The objective of the
Based on the groundwater samples geochemical characterization is to provide
collected and analyzed to date (Table' representative information on two matters:
3.2-3), shallow groundwater in the project
239961R3.3 S114196(3:41PM)lRPT/4 3-31
• To evaluate the potential for acid to generate or consume acid. Static tests
generation from the waste rock assess the potential for sample material to
• To evaluate the potential for the generate acid, based on sulfur analyses, or
mobilization of dissolved to consume acid by estimating the balance
constituents from the waste rqck between the acid-generating and the acid-
neutralizing .capacity of the sample.
. The waste rock would be composed of the material. Separate tests are used, to
non-ore-bearing lithologic. units determine the add generation potential and
encountered during the mining operation. acid neutralization potential of sample
The planned minirig of the Sentinel, material.
Centennial,. and GTO Pits would produce
approximately 96 million tons of waste The acid-generating potential (AGP) of the
rock composed of alluvium, sediments, and sample material involves determining the
coal from the geologic units described in total amount of sulfur and sulfur species
Section 3.1. Under the Proposed Action, present. The sulfur species are the various
the waste rock would be placed in four oxidation states in which sulfur may exist
waste dumps, as described in Section in the rock. The two most important sulfur
2.2.2.4. species are sulfide sulfur (S), the reduced
form of sulfur present in pyrite and other
The geochemical testing of the waste rock sulfide minerals, and sulfate sulfur (S04-2),
at the proposed mine site utilized two the oxidized form of sulfur produced, in
procedures to characterize potential part, from oxidation of sulfide minerals.
environmental impacts: The total sulfur is a determination of the
total concentration of all sulfur, both
• Static acidlbase accounting oxidized and reduced, in the sample
methods material. This value can be conservatively
• EP~Method 1312 (synthetic used to evaluate' the acid-generating
precipitation leach test) potential of the sample material by
assuming that all forms of sulfur are acid-
A total of 186 samples, representing the generating. In addition, pyritic sulfur is a
lithologic units of the waste rock that more realistic estimation of the quantity of
would be placed in the waste dumps; were sulfur material that is likely to form acid
analyzed. The testing procedures ·and the upon oxidation.
analytical results are presented in the
following sections. The acid neutralization potential (ANP) is
determined by treating the sample material
3.3.2 Static Test Analyses with a lmown excess of standardized
hydrochloric acid. The sample material
Static tests were conducted on 186 and acid are heated to ensure that all
samples (McClelland 1994). The static test reactions between the acid and any
is an acid-base accounting procedure used neutralizing components present in the
as a screening technique to determine sample material go to completion. The
whether sample material has the potential ANP is measured by quantifYing the
239961R3.3 S/14l96(3:47PM)lRPT/4 3-32
amount of unconsumed acid by titrating coal-bearing and the remaining 21 samples
with standardized sodium hydroxide. were collected from units adjacent to, or
closely associated with, coal beds. The net
Both the AGP and ANP are expressed as neutralizing potential of the acid-
tons of calcium carbonate (CaCOs) per generating samples ranged from -0.1 to -
thousand tons of material. For AGP, this 121.4 tons CaCOs per 1,000 tons material
value represents the amount of calcium and the ANP:AGP ratio ranged from
carbonate that would be needed to <0.004 to <2.00.
neutralize 1,000 tons of the sample
material. For ANP, this value represents 3.3.3 EPA Method 1312 - Synthetic
the excess tons of calcium carbonate Precipitation Leach Test
available to neutralize acid. The net
neutralization potential (NNP) of the The synthetic precipitation leach test (EPA
material is determined by subtracting the Method 1312) was conducted on four
AGP from the ANP, the result of which samples of waste rock material
may be reported as either positive or (McClelland 1996). The purpose of
negative. A negative result indicates ,a Method 1312 is to simulate conditions
sample which can be expected to generate under which precipitation might leach out
net acidity at some point in time; a positive constituents present in the waste rock
result indicates a sample which will not be deposited in waste dumps (EPA 1992a).
a net acid generator, but which may be an Method 1312 is used by the EPA and other
acid neutralizer. Samples may be Federal agencies to detennine the mobility
considered potentially acid-generating of constituents present in soils and mine .
when the ratio of the ANP to the AGP is materials. In the Method 1312 analysis, a
less than 3.00, (i.e., ANP:AGP < 3.00), sample is saturated with deionized water
even when the sample is determined to be buffered to pH 5.0 and bottle-rolled for 18
acid-neutralizing based on the difference hours. After 18 hours, the resulting
behveen tlie ANP and AGP. This approach leachate is filtered and analyzed for
is equivalent to a 300 percent excess dissolved constituents. The results of the
neutralization potentiaL This conservative leachate analyses are compared to
approach to the interpretation of static test appropriate water quality standards to
results is advantageous since ratios are determine what constituents in the sample
used instead of absolute values of the net material have the potential to, mobilize and
neutralization potential, thus providing a impact ground and surface water r~es.
constant factor of safety.
The Method 1312 procedure is limited in
The results of the static tests are presented scope since only those constituents that
in Appendix B. Thirty-nine samples out of can be mobilized in an acidic environment
the 186 samples analyzed by static test are affected by the analytical method.
methods (i.e., about 21 percent of the Those constituents that are mobilized in an
samples) were aci,d-generating based on alkaline, i.e., high pH, environment, such
the sulfide sulfur content and the NNP. as metal anionic complexes, are not
Eighteen of the 39 samples were coal or generally present in the lixiviant from the
23Sl961R33 SIl4S6(3:47PM)lRPT/4 3-33
Method 1312 analysis. Professional The following description of soil resources
experience (i.e., open pit gold sites in in the project area is based on the Soil
Nevada and Uranium Mill Tailings Survey of Canyonlands Area, Utah, Parts
Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) of Grand and San Juan Counties prepared
geochemistry) suggest that a reasonably by the USDA, SCS (1991). The detailed
foreseeable scenario would be a post- . soils mapping and descriptions were
mining pit lake that was alkaline (PH 8.0 or checked in the field during baseline studies
greater), with relatively. high IDS, and conducted by Woodward-Clyde in 1994, to
elevated concentrations of some metal verify their usability.
oxyanions (i.e., aluminum, arsenic,
selenium, molybdenum, manganese, iron, 3.4.1 Study Area
uranium, zinc) relative to baseline.
Therefore, the results of the Method 1312 The study area for the soils resource
analyses do not preclude the potential includes all soils within the project
capacity for the waste rock material to boundary as shown on Figure 2-1.
mobilize dissolved constituents under
alkaline conditions. 3.4.2 Soils Resources
3.4 SOILS AND RECLAMATION Twelve detailed soil mapping units have
been mapped and described within the
Soils in the project area have formed on study area (Figure 3.4-1), and a listing of
the alluvial valley floor of Lower Lisbon the physical and chemical characteristics of
Valley and on gently sloping cuestas and these soils is presented in Table 3.4-1
structural benches (trending northwest to (USDA, SCS 1991). The dominant soils
southeast) flanking the valley. Parent of the valley floor are deep to very deep
materials include alluvium and eolian loarns and fine sandy loarns. The shallow
deposits . derived dominantly from soils of the uplands are dominated by soil-
sandstone and shale, and colluvium derived rock outcrop complexes, with rock
from sandstone and shale on the steeper outcrops comprising. 30-70 percent of
slopes (U.S. Department of Agriculture, these mapping units. The rock outcrop
Soil Conservation Service [USDA, SCS] component is 90 percent barren rock
1991). All of the soils are in the Aridisol supporting little or no vegetation.
or Entisol order of classification.
Permeability of the soils in the project area
Escarpments of exposed sandstone line the ranges from slow to moderate in the loamy
northeast boundary, and several soil-rock and clay soils, and moderate to rapid in the
outcrop complexes are present within the sandy, gravelly, and cobbly soils. Runoff:
project area. Additionally, there are the precipitation discharged into strearn
approximately 85 acres of the Dumps-Pits channels from an area, is slow in the
Complex that consist ~f open pits and Ignacio-Leanto and Redbank soil series,
waste-rock piles from previous mining high for the Shalako soils, and moderate
activities on this site. for all other soils in the study area.
239961R3.3 5/15196(5:43 PM)lRPT/4 3-34

KEY FOR SOILS MAP
MAP MAP MAP
SYJ.4BOL SOIL 1YPE SYMBOL SOIL 1YPE SYMBOL SOIL" 1YPE
4- BARNUM LOAM 0-8% SLOPES 4-1 IGNACIO-LEANTO FINE SANDY 79 SHALAKO-ANASAZI-ROCK OUT-
LOAM 2-6% SLOPES CROP COMPLEX 3-1570 SLOPES
14- BOND-RIZNO FINE SANDY LOAM
3-15% SLOPES 67 REDBANK FINE SANDY LOAM 100. usnc TORRIORTHENTS-UsrOWC
3-8% SLOPES CACIORTHIDS COMPLEX 10-60r.
19 CAHONA FINE SANDY LOAM SLOPES
2-8% SLOPES 70 ~ZNO-ROCK OUTCROP COMPLEX
3-1570 SLOPES 101 usnc TORRIORTHENTS-UsrOWC
22 DUMPS-PITS COMPLEX HAPLARGIDS COMPLEX 1 O-SO~
72 ROCK OUTCROP SLOPES
74 ROCK OUTCROP-~O COMPLEX

3-1570 SLOPES SOURCE: USDA, SCS 1991
).
co
0 1500 3000
@ Job ~g. :
6000 Prepared by: C.R.P.

23996
SOILS MAP
~ P!!!~~~S~CALEiiii~I~N~F~EE~j~~~
N~____~__________________~~____________~________________________________~
Date :"".," 2/3/96
FIG. 3.4-
TABLE 3.4-1
PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR SOILS OF mE LISBON VALLEY PROJECT AREA
Available
Erosion Water
Map Potential L Salinity Retention Percent
Unit Percent Major Depth (nunhosl Capacity Penlleabilily Coarse Pcrccnt Covel50i!
Symbol Soil MapUllit Soil Series Slope Horizons (inches) Texture Water/Wind pH em) in/in in/ltr Fragment Organic Matter Suilability~
4 Bantum BantulII 3·8 A 0·3 Loam M/S 7.4·8.4 <2 0.15·0.17 0.6·2.0 NA 1·3 Good
C 3·60 Loamy fine s8nd 7.4·9.0 <2 0.10·0.16 0.2·0.6
to clay loam
14 Bond·Rizno Bond 3·15 A 0·2 Fine sandy loam MIH 7.4·8.4 <2 0.11·0.13 2.0·6.0 0 1·3 Good
B 2·19 Very fine sandy 7.4·8.4 <2 0.14·0.19 0.2·6.0
loalll, loan~
sandy clay oan
Rizno 3·15 A 0-2 Fine sandy 108m WH 7.4-8.4 <2 0.10·0.13 2.0·6.0 0-\0 0.5-1
C 2-8 Fine sandy loam 7.9·9.0 <2 0.10-0.13 2.0·6.0 Fair
19 Cahona Cahona 2-8 A 0-2 Fine sandy loam MlH 7.4·8.4 <2 0.11·0.13 2.0-6.0 NA 1-3 Good
\).\ 2-20 Sandy cla loalll, 6.6-8.4 <2 0.15·0.17 0.2-0.6
B
J
h
silty clay OHm,
clay loalll .
~
C 20-60 Very fine sandy 7.9-9.0 <2 0.13-0.16 0.6-2.0
~ 108m, loalll, fine
sandy loam
22 Dumps. Pits Dumps- Pits Wasle rock pnd Unsuitable
(sec text) complex pits
41 Ignacio< Ignacio 2-6 A 0-2 Fine sandy 108111 SIII 7.4-7.8 <2 0.11-0.13 2.0·6.0 0-15 1-3 Fair
Leanto
B 2-19 Fine sandy loam 7.4-7.8 <2 0.11-0.13 2.0·6.0
C 19-32 Fiue sandy loam 7.4-7.8 <2 0.11-0.13 2.0-6.0
Leauto 2-6 A 0-1 Fiue SAndy loam S/H 7.4-8.4 <2 0.11-0.13 2.0·6.0 0-5 1-3 Fair
239961R3·T.341 05.15·96(5:43PM)IRPT Sheet 1 of4

TABLEl.4Ml
PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR SOILS OF THE LISBON VALLEY PROJECT AREA
(Continued)
Available
Erosion Watcr
Map Po,tential L Salinity Retention Percent
Unit Percent Major Depth (mmhos! Capacity Penllcability Coarsc Percent Coversoil
Symbol Soil Map Unit Soil Series Slope Horizons (inches) Texture Water/Wind pH em) in/in in/hr Fragment Organic Matter Suitability2
B 1·15 Fine sandy 10D.m 7.4·8.4 <2 0.11·0.13 2.0·G.0

67 Redbank Redbank 3·8 A 0·2 Fine sandy loam MlH 7.4·9.0 <2 0.\1·0.13 2.0·6.0 0·10 1·3 Good
C 2·60 Fille sandy 10Rm 7.9·9.0 <2 0.1 1·0.17 2.0·6.0
70 Rizno·Rock Rlzno 3·15 A 0·2 Fine sandy loalll sm 7.4·8.4 <2 0.10·0.13 2.0·6.0 0·35 1·3 Fair
Outcrop
Complex C 2·8 Fine sandy loam 7.9·9.0 <2 0.10·0.13 2.0·6.0
~ Rock
Outcrop
3·[5 Exposures of
sandstonc
Unsuitable
0) 72 Rock Outcrop Rock 90 percent or Unsuitable

Outcrop more barren rock
~
74 Rock Outcrop' Rock 3·15 Exposures of Unsuitable
Rizno Outcrop sandstone
Complex
Rizno 3·15 A 0·2 Fine sandy [oRm 8m 7.4·8.4 <2 2.0·6.0 0.10·0.13 0·35 1·3 Fair
C 2·8 Fine sandy loam 7.9·9.0 <2 2.0·6.0 0.10·0.13
79 Shalnko· Sha[nko 3·15 A 0·2 Oravellyfinc MIN 7.4·9.0 <2 0.07·0.10 6.0·20.0 15·35 1·3 Fair
Anasnzi Rock sandy 108111
Outcrop
Complex B 2·6 Gravelly sandy >7.8 <2 0.12·0.14 2.0·6.0
10RIlI
C 6·13 Gravelly s8ndy >7.8 <2 0.12·0.14 2.0·6.0
loa III
Anasazi 3·[5 A 0·9 Gravelly IORIlI N 7.4·8.4 <2 0.08·0.[3 2.0-6.0 15·35 1-3 Fair
B 9·14 Gravelly IORIIl 7.9-9.0 <2 0.08·0.14 2.0-6.0
rei • 1"\ f' A

TABLE 3.4-1
PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR SOn,S OF THE LISBON VALLEY PROJECT AREA
(Continued)
Available
Erosion Water
Map Potential L Salinity Retcntion Percent
Unit Perccnt Major Depth (mmhos/ Capacity Peoneability Coarse Percent Coversoil
Symbol Soil Map Unit Soil Series Slope Horizons (inches) Texture Water/Wind pH cm) in/in in/llr Fragment Organic Matter Suitability4
C 14·26 Gravelly loam, 7.9·9.0 <2 0.08-0.14 2.0-6.0

grav~lIy fine
sandy loam
Rock 3·15 Exposures of
Outcrop sandstone
100 Ustic Ustic 10·60 0·3 Ve~cobbly MIN 7.9-9.0 <4 0.03-0.06 2.0·2.0 Variable 1·3 Fair
Toniorthcnts· Torriorthcnts san y loam
Ustollic Unsuitable
Calciorthids 3·11 Verycobbly 7.9·9.0 <4 0.10·0.12 0.6-2.0
loam
11·30 Very gravelly 7.9-9.0 <4 0.10·0.12 0.6-2.0
SAndy clay lOAm
30·45 Cobbly sandy 7.9·9.0 <4 0.13.0.15 0.6·2.0
clay loam
Ustic 10·60 0-1 Gravelly fine 7.4-8.4 <4 0.08·0.11 2.0-6.0 Variable 1·3 . Fair
Calciorthids sandy 10Rm
VJ 1·8 Fine sandy loam, 7.9-9.0 <4 0.11·0.15 0.6·2.0
1 loam
W 8·32 Gravelly loam 7.9·9.0 <4 0.12-0.14 0.6-2.0
~ 32·40 Clay loam, sandy 7.9·9.0 <4 0.15·0.18 0.2·0.6
clay loam
101 Ustic Ustic 10-60 0·3 Very cobbly MIN 7.9·9.0 <4 0.03·0.06 2.0·20 Variable 1·3 Pair
Torriorthcnts - Torriorthents sandy 108m
Ustollic
Haplargids
239961R3-T.341 05-15-96(5:43PM)1RP1I3 Sheet 3 of4
~
-
TABLE 3.4-1
PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR SOn.S OF THE LISBON VALLEY PROJECT AREA
(Continued)
Available
Erosion Water
Map PotentialL Salinity Retention Percellt
Unit Percent Major Depth (nunhoS/ Capacity Penneability Coallic Percent Covcrsoil
Symbol Soil MapUnil Soli Series Slope Horizons (Inches) Temure WaterlWind pH CIl1) irllin inlllt Fragment Organic Matter Suitability'
3·11 Verycobbly 7.9·9.0 <4 0.10·0.12 0.6·2.0

10llm
11·30 Ve:a, gravelly 7.9·9.0 <4 0.10·0.12 0.6·2.0
san y clay loam
,
oJ
Ustollic
Haplargids
10·60
30·45
0·8
Cobbly sandy
clay 108m
StollY salldy-
lonm
SIN
7.9·9.0
7.4·8.4
<4
<2
0.13·0.15
0.08·0.10
0.6·2.0
2.0·6.0 Variable 1·3 Fair

()l
8·24 StollY sandy clay 7.4·8.4 <2 0.13·0.16 0.2·2.0
~ loam, slolly clay
loam·
24·60 Stony silly clay 7.4·9.0 <2 0.12·0.15 0.06·2.0
loam
NA 1I0t applicable
1I0t detennined.
S Slight
M Moderate
N NOlie
Not Applicable
1111e potential for the loss of soil from water and wind erosion when the vegetation is removed.
2 Coversoilsuitability based 011 criteria in Table 3.4·2.
Source: USDA, SCS 1991
The potential for accelerated water erosion considered slightly saline (electrical
ranges from slight to moderate, and conductivity between 3-7 mrnhos/cm is
generally· increases with increasing slope considered slightly saline). However, these
steepness. The upland soils in the soils are not considered to be sensitive nor
northeastern one-third of the project area do they contain salts in quantities that
have a slight potential for water erosion; would impair plant growth of proposed
the erosion potential for the remainder of species to be used in reclamation (BLM
the soils moderate. Accelerated erosion is 1992). .
most likely to occur when protective plant
cover is removed and soils are disturbed. Soils of the project area represent a source
During occasional high intensity storm of material for reclamation of disturbed
events, rainfall can wash the topsoil away areas. The suitability of soils to be used as
which can result in severe erosion and coversoil material is based on physical and
development of rills and gullies in exposed, chemical characteristics (Table 3.4-1) and
unprotected soils. Examples of this can be the criteria presented in Table 3.4-2.
seen along dirt roads and in unvegetated Based on this information, soils in the
drainages in Lisbon Valley. project area are rated fair to good as a
source of reclamation material, with the
The hazard of wind erosion ranges from following exceptions:
none to high. The gravelly, cobbly and
stony soils found at the bottom of Three • Dumps and pits complex - This
Step Hill and around the Sentinel pits, are series includes open pits and waste
not susceptible to wind erosion. However, rock material disturbed during
the fine-textured sandy loams distributed previous mining activities and were
throughout the project area (Figure 3.4-1) never reclaimed.
are highly susceptible to wind erosion, • Rock outcrops - This includes
especially if the protective vegetation is complexes that are 30 to 70 percent
removed.. rock outcrops with little or no soil
material. The soils that occur as
Soils throughout the project area are part of these complexes are suitable
moderately to strongly alkaline (PH 7.9- for reclamation material, but are
9.0), and may require special consideration shallow and may be difficult to
during reclamation planning to ensure salvage if the soils are too
successful revegetation (USDA, SCS intricately mingled with large rocks.
1991). Plant species tolerant of alkaline
conditions on this site should be included There are no prime fannland soils present
in any seed mix selected for reclamation in the project area.
activities.
3.5 VEGETATION
None of the soils in the study area are
considered moderately or highly saline. The vegetation in the region in which
Only two series, the Ustic Torriorthents- project area is located may be categorized
Ustollic Calciorthids and Ustic into three primary vegetation zones (Figure
Torriorthents-Ustollic Haplargids, could be 3.5-1).
23996JR3.3 S/14/96(3:47PM)JRPT/4 3-40
TABLE 3.4-2
son.. MATERIAL SUlTABllITY CRITERIA FOR

SALVAGE AND REDISTRIBUTION AS COVERSOIT..*
Soil Property Good Fair Poor Unsuitable

Texture sandy loam sandy clay loam sand clay (>60%)
loam silty clay loam loamy sand
silt loam clay loam sandy clay
silty clay
clay «60%)
Coarse Fragment 0-10 10-20 20-35 >35
(% by volume)
Organic Matter (OA,) >1.5 0.5-1.5 <0.5
pH 6.1-7.8 5.1-6.1 4.5-5.0 <4.5
7.9-8.4 8.5-9.0 >9.1
Available Water-Retention >0.16 0.08-0.16 <0.08
Capacity (mfm)
Permeability (in/hr) 0.6-6.0 0.2-0.6 <0.2 or >6.0
Source: USDA Forest Service 1979
* Salinity and Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) criteria; common suitability criteria are not included., as
excessive salinity/alkalinity conditions are not characteristic of area soils; coversoil is soil material
that can support the establishment of vegetation.
2399&'R3-T.:>42 OS-lS-96(S:44PM)IRPT13 Sheet 1 of1
3-41
o 1000 2000 4000
I I
SCALE IN FEET
LEGEND
PJ PINYON-JUNIPER
SB SAGEBRUSH
XXX OLiFFS OONSIDERED POTENTIALLY

RAPTOR NESTING AREAS
GL GRASSLAND
RL RANCHLAND
D DISTURBED
SB-BB SAGEBRUSH-BLACK BRUSH
MM MOUNTAIN MAHOGANY
VEGETATION MAP
US80N VAUEY COPPER PROJECT
FIG. 3.5-1
• The pinyon-Jumper (PJ) zone is on These zones transition from one to the
mountain slopes and occurs at the other depending primarily on the elevation,
higher elevations, including the steeper soil condition, and precipitation CWest
cliff faces. Big sagebrush is the 1988). Additionally, previous mining
common undercover shrub, with other activity has' intruded into the PJ and SB
shrubs such as antelopebrush, Mormon zones, and vegetation community compo-
tea, rabbitbrush, mountain mahogany, sition reflects disturbance. Approximately
serviceberry, bitterbrush, and snake- 85 acres disturbed by previous miIllng
weed. Some of the common forbs are activity and never reclaimed now have only
cfypiantha, milk. vetch, desert paint- a very sparse cover of golden rabbitbrush.
brush, and bladder pod. The most Further detail of typical .vegetation
common grasses are wheat grass, composition within these zones may be
indian ricegrass, and bluegrass. Isolated found in the Baseline Flora and Fauna
cactus are also present .on the drier Report (Woodward-Clyde 1994).
slopes.
• The sagebrush (SB) zone occurs in 3.5.1 Study Area
valley bottoms and .low, gentle slopes.
Floristic composition varies slightly The project boundary encompasses
between the northern and the southern approximately 4,846 acres, of which
areas. Sagebrush is dominant and approximately 51 percent is in the PJ zone;
almost the exclusive species in the area, 27 percent in the SB zone; 14 percent in
with the exception of some golden the GR zone; and 8 percent disturbed by
rabbitbrush in areas that have been previous mining operations. Additionally,
disturbed. Some areas have an all of the grassland/rangeland acreage is
understory of cheat~ass and native located at the western extreme of the
grass. project area in two meadows referred to as
• The grassland/rangeland (GR) zone Wood's Meadows, which is. to some
occurs in open meadows, usually degree, a rec1aim.ed sagebrush community.
interspersed with. intermittent these meadows have historically been used
sagebrush. These areas were for agriculture. It is in these meadows that
predominantly sagebrush (or in some the leach pad is proposed to be established.
cases P-J) and were railed or chained As is typical of the region, the pinyon-
during the 1960s and early 1970s. The Jumper communities are at higher
areas were seeded with crested elevations (Figure 3.5-2), encompass the
wheatgrass during or after the railing! steep, rocky cliff outcrops, and integrate at
chaining. Sagebrush is growing back the lower elevations into the sagebrush
into some of these areas, and the communities. Also typical of the region,
density of the sagebrush in the crested
the SB zone within the project boundaries
wheatgrass seedings may be related to
is located in the remaining non-wooded
grazing or wildfires. Cheatgrass, blue
gentle slopes and meadows, as well as in
grama, needle-and-thread, and Indian
Lisbon Canyon.
ricegrass are also growing in some of
the crested wheatgrass seedings.
239961R3.3 S/I4I96(3:47PM)lRPT/4 3-43
,£'I
Figure 3.5-2. Existing conditions in Lisbon Canyon. Sagebrush and
rabbitbrush grow to the edges of the normally dry narrow ch~e1.
23996.'R3's SIl4l96(3:47 PM)lRPT/4 3-44

3.5.2 Special Status Species 3.6 WILDLIFE
According to the Flora and Fauna Baseline The study area is located in a cold desert
Data Draft Report (Woodward-Clyde region. This is typified by a low annual
1994), only one federal Category 2 precipitation and irregular (unpredictable)
Candidate Floral Species, Pediomelum distribution of rain. Most moisture comes
aromaticum var. tuhyi, has the potential to at times, or in ways, largely useless to
exist within the study area; however, this plants, and its potential to evaporate soil
species is tightly associated with the moisture exceeds precipitation (Trimble
Entrada Sandstone Formation, which is 1989). The vegetation that typifies this
restricted to small outcrops in the Lisbon region cannot support a high density of
Valley. Additionally, the following four ungulates. The baseline data report
plants listed as sensitive by the Utah (Woodward-Clyde 1994) indicates a low
Natural Heritage Program (UNHP) were number of herbivores, thus also a low
identified as potentially occurring in this number of carnivores use the area.
region. Characteristic of arid conununities, the
most conunon species observed in the area
• Depauperate daisy (Erigeron during the compilation of the baseline data
mancus) - found in alpine grass- were rodents. Gunnison's prairie dog
sedge and forb communities (Cynomys gunnisoni) is a common
• Alcove bog-orchid (Habenaria inhabitant of this habitat type, and
zothecina) - found in seeps, historically a. resident of the area
hanging gardens, and moist stream (Thompson 1995).
areas
• Broad-leaved biscuitroot or Raptors and potentially active raptor nests
Canyonland lomatium (Lomatium were observed during the baseline data
lati!obum) - found in pinyon- collection (Woodward-Clyde 1994) and
juniper and desert shrub during the winter biological resource
communities, mainly on level areas surveys (Woodward-Clyde 1996). The
of the Entrada Sandstone isolation of the area, the abundance of
Formation. . natural cliffs, and the availability of
• Alcove rock daisy (perityle Gunnison's prairie dogs provide habitat for
specuicola) - found in hanging a variety of raptors. Eagles (golden and
garden communities occasionally bald in the winter),
ferruginous hawks, prairie falcons, red-
However, suitable habitat conditions for tailed hawks, great homed owls, burrowing
! these four species do not exist in the study owls, and turkey vultures are the raptor
I area. No sensitive plants were encountered species most likely to occur in the project
during the field reconnaissance. area.
Discussions with the Utah Division of

WIldlife Resources (UDWR.) indicate a
year long mule deer herd, of an unknown
239961R3.3 5114196(3:47PM)IRl'T/4 3-45
size. using the general area Some predator Continued discussions with the agencies
species may be occasional visitors' to the and comments received' from public
area, following deer for prey (Bates 1995). scoping meetings provided additional
concerns. The Draft Interim Biological
3.6.1 Study Area Resources Report (Woodward-Clyde
1996) addresses the current status of the
.Surveys on the study site have confinned following species as:
Gunnison's prairie dog (Cynomys
gzmnisoni) in high density in the Wood's • Black-Footed Ferret (Mustela
Meadows area, and in lesser densities to nigripes) - Federal and State listed
the south of the project area. The prairie endangered species
dogs were mostly confined to grasslands.
Additionally, following the winter Black-footed ferret surveys were
biological resource surveys, a small mule conducted in December 1995
deer herd was .confirmed in the area. The according to USFWS survey
mule deer were primarily observed in the guidelines. Following surveys and
PJ/SB or PJ/GR interfaces (Woodward- subsequent discussion with the
Clyde 1996). agencies, it has been determined
that no black-footed ferrets are
Additional wildlife observations recorded present within the project area, or
during the surveys (see Appendix A, its area of influence. Therefore, no
Woodward-Clyde 1996) include a variety further surveys are needed, or
of rabbits, mice, and birds, as well as a expected:
badger and coyote. The majority of the
raptors observed during these periods were • Burrowing Owl (Speotyto
golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos). cunicularia) - Federal Category 2
Additionally, one prairie falcon (Falco candidate species; Utah sensitive
mexicanus) and one great homed owl species
(Bubo virginianus) were identified. These
observations indicate a healthy faunal No sign of burrowing owl was
community, typical of cold desert pinyon- identified during surveys; however,
juniper, sagebrush and grasslands in this during spring surveys in this area,
region. particular care would be made to
search for sign of presence of this
3.6.2 Special Status Species species.
Special status species for Lisbon Valley • Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius

were identified through discussions with ludovicianus) - Federal Category 2
agencies (U.S. Fish and Wtldlife Service candidate species.
[USFWS], and UDWR) and literature
Approximately 10 kilometers (lan),
reviews. A list of these species was
in a linear sense, of habitat was
provided in the Flora and Fauna Baseline
identified as potential loggerhead
Report (Woodward-Clyde 1994).
shrike habitat. No shrikes were
23996JR33 SIlSl96(S:4S PM)/RPT/4 3-46
1~6
identified during the winter surveys. • .Raptors (all with potential for; being
Spring surveys, concentrating on in area)
the the 10 kIn of identified habitat,
would be conducted for nests and During the winter surveys, two
mating pairs of birds. potentially active raptor nest sites
(one golden eagle [Aquila
Species of Interest to Utah Division chrysaetos] and one unidentified
of Wildlife hawk) were identified within the
project boundaries. Additionally,
• Great Basin Western Rattlesnake two potentially active golden eagle
(Crotalus viridus var. lutosus) nests and one prairie falcon (Falco
mericanus) eyrie were located
Spring surveys for presence. of within a 10-mile radius of the
rattlesnake dens would be project. Numerous raptor roosts
conducted in conjunction with the were also identified during the
Veteran's Administration Venom surveys. Incidental sightings during
Research Team. the winter surveys indicate that at
least one prairie falcon, two adult
Approximately 10 kilometers (kIn) and two juvenile golden eagles use
(in a linear sense) of habitat was Lisbon and the adjacent Big Indian
identified as potential loggerhead valleys. Spring surveys would
shrike habitat. No shrikes were center on identifying any additional
id;entified during the winter surveys. nest sites and confirming activity
Spring surveys, concentrating on status of each nest.
the 10 kIn of identified habitat,
would be conducted for nests and In summary, no threatened and endangered
mating pairs of birds. species have been identified in the project
area, and no critical habitat for threatened
• Mule Deer (Odocoileus hemionus) and endangered species has been identified
on the adjacent public lands. However, the
Dusk/dawn surveys were groundwater used during the project
conducted during the winter, operations would be from contributing
identifying a small herd of deer in fonnations to the Colorado River system.
the area. The greatest number of Depletions of water sources from
deer seen during anyone survey contributing fonnations to the Colorado
period was 30. It may be concluded River system potentially affect threatened
therefore, that a herd of at least 30 and endangered fish species in the
individual deer use the area during Colorado River.
the winter months. No further
surveys are planned.
23996JR3.3 5114196(3:47 PM)lRPT/4 3-47
I{pJ
3.7 GRAZING acres of Federal, State and fee lands (Table
3.7-2 and Figure 3.7-1).
3.7.1 Study Area
The western portion of the powerline route
The area that would be encompassed by would be within the Big Indian Allotment.
Summors proposed Lisbon Valley Project Other than the temporary impacts from the
is within two different grazing allotments. construction of the powerIine, the Surnmo
The first allotment is the Lower Lisbon project would not affect the Big Indian
Allotment, which consists of about 17,768 Allotment.
acres of Federal, State, and fee lands
(Table 3.7-1 and Figure 3.7-1). The
second allotment is the Lisbon Allotment,
which consists of approximately 120,818
TABLE 3.7-1
LOWER LISBON GRAZING ALLOTMENTS
Owner Acres
Public Domain (Federal Land) 13,057
State Land 2,111
Leased or deeded to permittee 2,280
Private (Redd Ranches) 320
Total 17,768
SQurce: BLM 1988a
TABLE 3.7-2
LISBON GRAZING·ALLOTMENTS
Owner Acres
Public Domain (Federal Land) 101,375
'State Land '14,490
Private 4,953
TOTAL 120,818
Source: BLM 1996b.
23996'R3.3 SIlSl96(S:4S PM)lRPT/4 3-48

159944
'1
~
,
~
~I G>5
(J)
0
c:
:D
~~
Nm "!11
III
2:0 r-
3:
G>C .....
...
»w <0
roo 0)
5~
0)
::-:'
(J)
-t c:
s:~ 3:
3:
mr 0
Zr .....
...
-tm
w-< <0
<0
~
."
P
~ I ;,. ...
-.J
I
..1
Lower Lisbon Allotment Disturbances that would occur in Pasture
No. 1 would be associated with
The grazing management plan for the development of the GTO Pit and Waste
Lower Lisbon Allotment between the BLM Dumps A and B. Moreover, as shown on
and Mr. :Mike Wilcox allows for the Figures 2-1 and 3.7-1, Summo would fence
grazing by 222 cattle from December 1 off the portions proposed to be disturbed .
through May 31 of each year with rotation by mining activities to minimize interaction
among Pasture Nos. 1, 2, and 3. The three between cattle and mining equipment. The
pastures are as follows: total disturbance associated with this pit,
two dumps, and associated haul road
• Pasture No.1 is located in the would be approximately 349 acres of
valley bottom of Lower Lisbon Federal, State, and fee lands (Table 3.7-4).
Valley. Approximately 24 of these acres were
• Pasture No. 3 is on the bench area disturbed by prior mining of the GTO Pit.
just above the valley floor In addition, Summo recently agreed to
encompassed by Three Step Hill. purchase the Patterson Ranch . of
• Pasture No.2 is on the bench just approximately 200 acres from Mr. Wilcox.
above Three Step Hill.
As shown on Figure 3.7-1, the Patterson
The grazing rotation for the three pastures Ranch is included in Pasture No.1. As
is summarized in Table 3.7-3. such, the 28 acres of fee land in Pasture
No.1 (Table 3.7-4) would be controlled by
The BLM has identified an active grazing Summo. Anticipated impacts to this
preference in the Lower Lisbon Allotment portion of Pasture No. 1 from Summo's
of 927 animal unit months (AUM), and an proposed operations are addressed in
exchange of use of 204 AUMs (BLM Section 4.7.
1988a). (An AUM is the amount offorage
consumed by one adult cow with calf over Lisbon Allotment
a one-month period.)
The Lisbon Allotment includes those areas
Portions of Pasture Nos. 1 and 3 are within immediately north of the Lower Lisbon
areas that would be included in Summo's Allotment. The Lisbon Allotment is under
Lisbon Valley Project. The areas on Three permit to Paul Redd d/b/a Redd Ranches.
Step Hill that encompass Pasture No.3 The allotment does not have a specific
would be included in Summo's boundary management plan; however, the area is
solely as a buffer zone and would not be grazed only from November 1 to June 10
impacted. ' each year (BLM 1995c). The BLM has
identified an active grazing preference of
The extreme northern portion of Pasture 11,399 AUMs, and an exchange of use of
No. 1 is within Summo's proposed project. 1,338 AUMs (BLM 1996c).
This area is in Sections 35 and 36, T 30 S,
R 25 E, and Section 1, T 31 S, R 25 E.
I 239951R3.3 5/15196(5:45 PM)lRPT/4 3-50

TABLE 3.7-3
LOWER LISBON GRAZING ALLOTMENT ROTATION
Pasture Year
11 2 3 4
1 Dec.I- Dec.I- Dec.I- Dec. 1 -
March 31 March 31 March 31 March 31
2 Mayl- April 1 - May 1- April 1 -
May 31 April 30 May 31 April 30
3 April 1 - May 1- April 1- Mayl-
April 30 May 31 April 30 May 31
1 Year 1 began on December 1, 1987.

Source: BLM 1988a.
TABLE 3.7-4
PROPOSED DISTURBANCE AND SURFACE LAND OWNERSHIP

LOWER LISBON ALLOTMENT
PASTURE NO.1 AREA
Facility Acreage
Total Federal Land State Land Fee Land
GTOPit 68 0 40 28
Waste Dump A 186 106 80 0
WasteDumpB 90 0 90 0
HauIRoads 5 0 5 0
Total 349 106 215 28
Source: Summo 1995.
23996/Rl.3 Sl14l96(3:47PM)lRPT/4 3-51

Portions of the Lisbon Allotment are pits, dumps, leach pad, and process
within areas that would be disturbed by facilities would be approximately 480
Summo's Lisbon Valley Project. The key acres, as shown on Table 3.7-5. About 85
Summo facilities that would be in this of the acres were disturbed by prior mining
allotment include the Sentinel Pits, and processing activities. In addition,
Centennial Pit, Waste Dumps C and D, Summo recently purchased the Wood's
Leach Pad Area, and Process Area and Ranch (Figure 3.7-1), which is within the
Facilities. In addition, Summo would fence Lisbon Allotment. Anticipated impacts to
off these areas to minimize potential the Lisbon Allotment from Summa's
problems between mining equipment and proposed operations are addressed in
grazing (Figures 2-1 and 3.7-1). The total Section 4.7.
proposed disturbance associated with these
TABLE 3.7-5
PROPOSED DISTURBANCE AND SURFACE LAND OWNERSIDP

LISBON ALLOTMENT
Acreage
Facility Total Federal Land State Land Fee Land
Sentinel # 1 Pit 38 38 0 0
Sentinel #2 Pit 9 9 0 0
Centennial Pit 116 89 27 0
WasteDumpC 118 118 0 0
WasteDumpD 55 55 0 0
Leach Pad Area 56 56 0 0
. Process Area and Facilities 21 19 0 2
Haul Roads 28 21 7 0
Plant Growth Medium Stockpiles 39 18 l3 8
TOTAL 480 423 47 10
Source: Summo 1995a
3.8 SOCIOECONOMICS 3.8.1 Study Area
Socioeconomic topics discussed in this This section descnoes existing conditions and
section are focused on the potentially affected recent trends in Grand and San Juan counties
communities or study area. The issues in Utah. The proposed Lisbon Valley Copper
addressed include economic and employment Project is located within San Juan County,
conditions, popul~on, housing, local and is in close proximity to Grand County.
facilities and services, local government fiscal The proposed mine bas the potential to affect
conditions, and social conditions. the residents and the existing infrastructure of
239951R3.3 5115196(5:46 PM)lRPT/4 3-52
Moab, La Sal and Monticello, the closest The study area's economy showed significant
population centers in Grand and San Juan signs of a slow down as the market in mining
counties (each located within ?O miles of the began to decline.' In 1982, mining jobs
proposed mine). Since the communities in dropped 30 percent to 563. Since 1982, the
southern San Juan County such as Bluff and mining industry in Grand County has seen a
Montezuma Creek are located at distances constant decline in employment
greater than 50 miles from the Project site, opportunities. By 1994, only 124 workers of
they are considered to be outside of the the total 3,490 employed were working in
reasonable commute distance from the mine mining. The wholesale and retail trade and
and are generally considered outside of the service sector experienced a similar decline
Study Area. throughout the mid 1980s. Without another
industry absorbing the high number of
3.8.2 Economic Conditions unemployed workers, the unemployment rate
reached over 13 percent by 1985.
The description of the economy of the study
area is based on economic data supplied by Interest In the county's natural wonders and
the Utah Department of Employment as well associated tourism has increased in the past
as interviews with key personnel in county ten years. Grand County is home to two of
and state departments and infonnation drawn the state's five National Parks and the
from economic studies conducted by the Manti-La Sal National Forest. Visitation to
counties. study area National Parks has doubled
since 1986. In 1994 alone, 1.2 million
3.8.2.1 Grand County tourists visited the two parks within Grand
County's borders. In addition to the
Grand County's local economy has National Parks and Forest, the 'county
undergone significant swings since the late offers other fDIms of outdoor activities,
1970s. Recent trends can be primarily such as camping, river running, and four-
attributed to the rise and subsequent decline wheeling. Moab, seen as a center for
ofthe mining industry. During the late 1970s mountain biking in the West, and
and early 1980s when that industry was surrounding towns have particularly
strong. the local economy of Grand County enjoyed the recent boom in the sport of
flowished. lvfining contributed 807 jobs, mountain biking.
employing 25.5 percent of the total
workforce in 1981 (Dunn 1995). To support the influx of tourists, Grand
County has seen an increase in employment
Throughout the same period, the trade and opportunities with local restaurants, hotels,
service industries offered a relatively large and other service related industries. A
number of employment opportunities. In simultaneous increase in the number of job
1981, trade employed 26 percent of the total opportunities has also been realized in the
3,139 employed, while the service industry early 19905. As a result, the study area's
employed 15.5 percent that same year. WIth local economy began to strengthen in
a number of sectors relatively thriving, Grand . particular sectors. By 1990, the trade and
County enjoyed a low unemployment rate. service sectors showed signs of positive
239961R33 SI14196(3:47PM)IRPT/4 3-53
growth. From 1992 to 1993, the trade (5.7%) (Figure 3.8-1). Although a higher
industry experienced an increase .in job number of jobs were available in the trade
opportunities of 15.3 percent.· By 1994, the and service sector, those positions provided
trade and service sector employed 37.6 average monthly incomes of only $1,095 and
percent and 28.1 percent of the total $1,004 compared to the higher paying mining
workforce in the county, respectively. In and energy positions of $2,320 and $2,731
. 1995, the unemployment rate dropped to 5.5 (Dunn 1995).
percent,. which is similar to the national rate
Figure 3.8-1
Unemployment Rate (%)
14.0..,-------------------------,
.' ....,.
12.0 ; _ - - - - - - - - - : " " " " . : . . - - . . . . . ; . . , . . . . - - - - - - - - - _ ;
- - + - 'Grand
C01Dlty
10.0 +--------.,,-------=----------1
, ---.---_....
"
8.0 +-------. ..:..-_.."......::::..----.,;;;..::....-.,,-,..,._...,__

~.".. =------~...., - .. - San
6.0 •• , __ ;,..__
~
..:'-- .. ;- Juan
C01Dlty
4.0 !F=--------------===*=----=:::;l
It---
• Sfateof
~O;_---------------------_; Utah
0.0 +-------i------+------+------I
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
A shift in market emphasis is obvious. Grand policy, as well as unfavorable market

County's economy had changed from one forces, the uranium mining industry
driven primarily by the energy and mining declined drastically in the 1980s, with
markets in the 1970s and early 1980s to one associated decreases . in employment a
that is currently supported by tourism. In result. In 1990, Utah's last uranium mill,
Grand County, the percentage of located near La Sal in the study area,
nonagricultural workers in· the trade and significantly curtailed its operations,
·service sector is 65.7 percent (Dunn 1995). resulting in the layoff of 13 0 workers.
Figure 3.8-2 illustrates the relatively rapid
changes to Grand County's economy from Recent data for San Juan County indicate a
1978-1994. recreational and service employment trend
similar to that of Grand County (Figure
3.8.2.2 San Juan County 3.8-3). San Juan County has also enjoyed the
opportunities which has presented themselves
The economy of San Juan County as a result of the county's natural wonders.
experienced many of the same trends An increased interest in the county's terrain
described for Grand County from 1970 to and in outdoor activities have resulted in an
1990. Uranium and vanadium mining and influx of tourists. As a result, these
milling comprised a significant portion of wholesale and retail trade and service
the employment and related earnings in the industries have seen the most significant
county in the 1970s through the early gains. In 1995, the two sectors employed the
1980s. With .changes in federal energy largest percentage (37.5 percent) of the
239961R3.3 SII4I96(3:47PM)lRPT/4 3-54
county's nonagricultural employment force, 1994. In San Juan County, the percentage of
(LMI Research 1995). Like Grand County, non-agricultural workers in the trade and
San Juan County's average monthly income services sectors is 37.5 percent. As of the
for the trade and service industry is lower second quarter of 1995, San Juan County's
than the average income provided by the unemployment rate was 7.7 percent, which is
mining and energy industry. Trade and higher than Grand County (5.5%), the State
service offered monthly average incomes of of Utah (3.6%), and the nation (5.7%).
$907 and $1,061 compared to those of (BTAC 1995).
mining and energy at $2,490 and $2,277 in
Figure 3.8-2
Industry Trends in Grand County: 1978-1994
~T-------------------~~--------------------~---- ____________
2ooo~--
8 Trade
BServices
II Mining
0
....
I:C
.... "" .... ... .., ....
C\ III \0 .... eo .... ... ....
--
CI\ Q
~
.... .... ... .... co
... co
ClIO ClIO ClIO ClIO ClIO 00 0:
.... .... ....
CI\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ CI\
~ ....
C\
~
ClIO
C\
....
C\
CI\
....
C\
CI\
....
C\
CI\
C\ C\
CI\
....
CI\
Year
1800
1600
.... 1400
~ 1200 8 Trade
1.,... 1000
800
DServices
1
2:
600
400
200
0
;0>
...
C\
C\
Year
23996'R3.3 SlJ4I96(3:47PM)IRPT/4 3-55
171>
Given the shift in the Study Area economy incomes in Grand and San Juan counties have
from higher paying mining and minerals been generally flat (Figure 3.8-4).
production toward tourism, average annual
incomes have not kept pace with the rest of
Utah. While average incomes in the state
have risen steadily over the past 20 years,
Figure 3.8-4
Average Annual Wages ($)
25,000
.--------
- - . - -Grand
20.000
.-
C01mty
15,000
---~
-. -..... --- ---. --- - .. - San
~
-- - -'- -:-- ..
10.000
.....- ..
Juan
C01mty
State of
5.000
Utah
o
1975 1980 1985 1990 1994 (est)
Figure 3.8-5
Population Trends in San .Tuan and Grand Counties: 1980-1994
14000
13000
12000
.sa= 11000
II Grand Co1mty
:c:
...
:; 10000
Q
9000
mSan Juan Co1mty
'"
I
8000
7000
6000
= ... 'T .... "to ..,
..."" ..."" ..."" ...""
Q>. Q>. Q>. Q>.
Year
3.8.3 Population reaching a total population of 8,400. Since

1981, however, Gnmd County saw a steady
Grand and San Juan Counties followed decline in population throughout the 1980s.
different population patterns (see Figure By 1990, the population had fallen 19.7
3.8-3). Since 1981, Gnmd County percent to 6,620. San Juan County, on the
experienced a constant decline in population. other hand, maintained a fairly even
Grand County's population peaked in 1981 population during that period. In 1981, San
23995JR3.3 5/14196(3:47 PM)lRPT/4 3-56
Juan County's population was 12,600 and average of $650. The average sales prices
had not fluctuated by any more than 300 for a home is $82,813 (SEUAOG 1996).
residents migrating in or out of the county These housing costs are quite high, and
throughout the 1980s. The population had difficult for many service and trade sector
settled back at 12,600 in San Juan County workers to afford.
from 1987 through 1990 (SEUAOG 1994).
In response to the lack of available
Since 1990, both counties have experienced affordable 'housing, new building
an increase in population. Data from 1994 ordinances for Grand County are allowing
indicate Grand County's population has risen certain businesses with availabie land space
to 7,940 (a 20.3 percent increase). Although to build dormitory style housing on open
not as pronounced, San Juan County's property. In addition to the ordinance, a
population also increased. San Juan County new thirty-six unit low-income housing
experienced growth of6.3 percent to 13,400. complex has been completed and
Rapid growth is forecasted for Grand County construction on a :five unit building just
over the next several years. Estimates recently begun. Approval for the building
indicate the population in Grand County Will of 40 three bedroom homes which would
increase 95.1 percent between 1994 and be available for approximately $50,000, is
2020, to 15,493 (Utah Economic and also pending (Curtis 1996).
Demographic Projections 1994). This
growth is projected due to iricreased Unlike the pennanent housing situation,
retirement activity in Grand County, as well , ~emporary housing is plentiful in Moab.
as tourism-related growth in employment and Among the hotels, motels, and bed and
associated increased demand for service and breakfast units in the city, 1,243 rooms are
trade sector workers. San Juan County is available. Moab also has a relatively large
also expected to experience an increase in number of RV hook up sites. Among
population through the early part of the next seven of the eight RV parkS within or just
ceirtury. Population is projeCted to increase outside of Moab, 393 sites are available.
by 15 percent to 15,415 by the year 2015. Many of these parks have vacant sites year
round with the exception of late March and
3.8.4 Housing over Memorial Day weekend (Snyder
1996).
Available housing is scarce in both study
area counties. Grand County and more San Juan County and the City of
specifically, Moab, have particularly low Monticello are not suffering as severely
vacancy rates. In the City of Moab, 1996 from a lack of housing, but do not have
data indicate only 18, or 0.9 percent of the particularly high availability rates. The
total 1,994 units are vacant. lack of available housing in Moab and
Unincorporated Grand County (regions Grand County has put additional pressure
outside the City of Moab) shows only 24, on housing in San Juan County. A recent
or 1.82 percent of the total 1,318 units study in the early part of 1996, indicates
available. Monthly rent in Grand County that in Monticello 4.51 percent, or 31 of
ranges from $350 to $1000 with an the total 387 housing units, are vacant.
2399&'R3.3 S/14/96(3:47PM)IRPT/4 3-57
/7~
Unlike Moab and Grand County, rent is new high school which is currently under
significantly lower at a monthly average of construction and scheduled to open by
$300, with a range of $150 to $700. In September 1997. By the end of 1997, the
addition, the average sales price for a unit Grand County School District would have
is also much lower, at $50,000 (SEUAOG the capacity to hold 2800 students (Averett
1996). 1995).
Temporary housing, however, is not as Medical Facilities

plentiful as in Moab. Monticello currently
has 142 units with another 80 units to Grand County is provided medical services
become available in early summer among by Allen Memorial Hospital locat~d in
the hotel, motel, and bed and breakfast Moab. The hospital employs licensed
establishments. The total number of physicians, physicians assistants, and
available full RV hook ups in Monticello is registered nurses and offers respite, acute,
64 (Walker 1996). and extended care. Emergency room
service and care is provided by Locum
3.8.5 Facilities and Services Tenens in Grand County (SEUAOG 1995).
This section descnbes the aVailability and Law Enforcement and Fire Protection
specific limitations of facilities and services
within the study area in Grand and San Juan Grand County is served by a police station
counties. The following was researched in Moab and a countywide sheriff. A fire
through numerous interviews with those in department covers all of Moab and Spanish
key positions within organizations that (Moab) Valley. The total number
provide community services, and through the. employed to provide police services in the
interpretation of data supplied by the State or county is 32 with 42 volunteer and paid
relevant cotinties. fire fighters (Twitchel 1996; Squire 1996;
Brewer 1996). The county's sheriff's
3.8.5.1 Grand County department noted 40 percent of their
activity was tourist-related and
Public Schools concentrated during the summer months.
According to interviews with key
Grand County School District currently has personnel in the city and countywide
an elementary, intermediate, middle, and offices, permanent residents are well
high school within the system. Currently, served and demands on each' department
all schools are operating under capacity at are below capacity.
a total enrollment of 1,579.
Utilities
By September 1997, the District would
have closed the existing middle school and Grand County receives electricity from
moved the 7th and 8th graders of the Utah Power and Light and gas service
current middle school to the current high from Utah Gas Service. These facilities are
school. Grades 9-12 would be moved to a modern and have the capacity to handle
23996/R3.3 5/14196(3:47 PM)I.RPT/4 3-58

future growth and demand (powell 1996; an increase in growth (San Juan County
Zufelt 1996). . Economic Development Plan 1993).
Water Supply and Wastewater Medical Facilities

Treatment
Within the study area, San Juan County
Grand County is supplied water and provides medical services througf.1 two
receives water treatment through the City different major hospitals and clinics. San
of Moab Water Department and the' Juan County Hospital in Monticello
Spanish Valley Water District. The City of employs licensed physicians, P A/NP' s,
Moab Water Department supplies water to LPN's, and registered nurses and offers
homes and businesses within city limits and acute and extended care. Emergency care
treats wastewater for all of Spanish Valley. service is provided by the Blanding
Spanish Valley Water District does not Birthing CenterlUrgent Care Center in
treat water) but does supply water to those Blanding, which is located less than 30
outside of the City of Moab and within miles from Monticello (BTAC Report
Spanish Valley. Residents outside of the 1996).
city and beyond Spanish Valley draw water
from wells. and have on-site septic tanks. Law Enforcement and Fire Protection
Demands on water supply within the The study area within San Juan County is
county is well under capacity. The City of served by the City of Monticello Police
Moab Water Department has plans to Department and the San Juan County
upgrade and expand the county's sewer Sheriff's Department. Fire protection is
treatment facility. Although the county's provided in part by the County Fire
treatment facility is nearing capacity, the Department and the City of Monticello Fire
upgrade and expansion, which is scheduled Department.
for completion by late 1997, would enable
the county to handle the treatment needs Between the two policing bodies, the City
for the population increase for the next 10 of Monticello and nearby towns are
years (Snyder 1996; Modine 1996). protected by a squad of 11 officers
. (Alverez 1996; Ewart 1996). Fire
3.8.5.2 San Juan County protection is served by a minimum of 20
paid and volunteer firefighters year round
Public Schools (Slade 1996). Law enforcement and fire
protection services are more than adequate
The study area has two elementary, one at present.
middle, and two high schools. As of 1993,
the County's School District was at 85.8 Utilities
percent capacity with a total of 2,240
students and the capacity to hold 2,610. San Juan County receives electrical service
Although the system is currently not at from Utah Power and Light and Empire
maximum, some concerns have been raised Electrical Associates. Natural gas is
over the District's ability to accommodate provided by Utah Gas Service. All facilities
239961R3.3 SfI4l96{3:47PM)lRPT/4 3-59
I?¥
are modern and have the capacity to handl~ and elected officials have revealed that many .
additional growth (Rodstrom 1996; Zufelt residents of the study area value having
1996). quality recreational opportunities in the areas
surrounding local towns, and would like to
Water Supply and Wastewater see them protected. While opportunities in
Treatment outdoor recreation and scenic beauty
greatly enhance quality of life in the study
Monticello and residents within 15 miles of area, various factors also exist that reduce
the city receive water and water treatment the quality of life for some residents.
from the City of Monticello itself. Those
businesses and residents outside of the Lower wages associated with service and
City's range rely upon individual wells and trade sector jobs, combined with relatively
septic facilities. The City's water supply is high housing costs and limited affordable
partially dependent on rain and snowfall, housing supply, have strained many
and rarely at capacity. Currently, the water families in the study area financially,
supply is more than sufficient. At the particularly in Moab. The average monthly
current rate of treating 350,000 gallons/day income in Grand County in 1995 was
and the ability to treat 1.5 million $1,349, whiCh is only 71 percent of the
gallons/day of sewage, the City is well average monthly income of $1,917 in the
below capacity. A modem wastewater State of Utah. Similarly, income levels in
treatment facility is scheduled for San Juan County are also relatively low at
completion by late 1997 (Schafer 1996). $1,498, or 79 percent of the state average.
It is important to note, however, that lower
3.8.6 Social Conditions and Quality of incomes and the incidence of poverty in
Life San Juan County are more heavily
concentrated in the southern part of the
Residents of the study area enjoy numerous county along the Navajo Strip, outside of
amenities associated with the abundance of the study area (BTAC 1995).
open space accessible to the public. Public
lands available for enjoyment include Arches In general, there is some speculation within
and Canyonlands National Parks, the Manti the community that lower wages and
La Sal National Forest, as well as higher living costs are at least partly
considerable areas administered by the BLM. responsible for high rates of high school
For many area residents, wildlife viewing and drop-outs (second highest in the State) and
hunting opportunities are available just teenage pregnancy (also second highest in
minutes from home. A considerable network the State). This may be due to a higher
of roads and trails is available on public lands rate of families with both parents working
which support recreational activities, such as and associated reduction in child
mountain biking, hiking, horse riding, and off supervision and discipline. Similarly, the
road vehicle use. In addition, the striking incidences of drug abuse and domestic
scenic beauty of the attractions previously violence in Grand County are also issues of
mentioned also enhances quality of life. social concern. Efforts on the part of the
Infonnal discussions with local area residents county governments to attract higher wage
239951R3.3 5/14196(3:47 P:M)IRPT/4 3-60
employment in the study area, as well as u.s. Highway 191 is the primary north-
efforts to increase the supply of affordable south highway serving southeastern Utah.
housing, could reduce. cost of living-related It connects the study area with Interstate
pressures and stress, and improve quality 70 to the north, which is the most
ofIife for many residents in the future. important transportation route in eastern
Utah. U.S. Highway 191 is a paved
3.9 TRANSPORTATION undivided two-lane highway serving the
communities of Moab and Monticello, as
3.9.1 Study Area well as Blanding and Bluff to the south.
Traffic volumes along this highway in the
For transportation, the study area includes northern portion of the study area have
all roads and other transportation modes grown considerably over the last ten years
that serve the communities of Moab, reflecting increased use of the region by
Monticello, Blanding and La Sal, as well as tourists. From 1985 to 1990, average daily
Lisbon Valley and the project site. This traffic increased by 94 percent between
transportation network would be used both Moab and the tum off for Canyonlands
by project workers commuting to the mine National Park. Similarly, from 1990 to
from study area communities, as
well as 1994, traffic increased by.an additional 32
trucks hauling various equipment and percent along that stretch. Traffic growth
supplies to the mine and finished copper on U.S. Highway 191 has been slower in
cathodes from the mine to their ultimate the vicinity of Monticello, however.
destination. Despite its regional significance, traffic
volumes along this highway are modest,
3.9.2 ffighways and Local Roads in relative to its capacity, averaging roughly
the Study Area 8,430 vehicles per day at the Grand-San
Juan County line in 1994. Due to the use
~ajor Hi~hways of the region by tourists, traffic volumes
are higher from May to September and
Federal and State highways provide the lower from October through March.
main transportation access to the study
area. The major transportation network in In terms of traffic hazards and accidents,
the study area consists of three highways: U.S. Highway 191 has experienced growth
U.S. Highway 191, State Route 46, and in the number of accidents, which is
U.S. Highway 666. Descriptions of each generally due to growth in the volume of
highway are presented below. These traffic on the highway.
highways are maintained by the Utah
Department of Transportation. Historic Fortunately, the growth in the accident rate
and current traffic counts for each of these has been considerably slower than the
highways are provided in Table 3.9-l. growth in traffic volumes. In 1994, U.S.
Similarly, the accident histories of these Highway 191 experienced 48 accidents
highways are provided in Table 3.9-2. between Moab and La Sal Junction and 55
accidents between Monticello and La Sal
Junction (UDOT 1995). Review of
239961R3.3 SI14196(3:47PM)lRPT/4 3-61
TABLE 3.9-1
AVERAGE DAll..Y TRAFFIC (ADT) IN THE STUDY AREA
ADT ADT, ADT % Change

Highway 1985 1990 1994 1985-1994
U.S. 191 San Juan/Grand County Line 3,310 6,410 8,430 155%
U.S. 191 North of Monticello 2,145 2,740 3,250 52%
State Route 46 east of U.S. 191 785 840 1,000 27%
U.S. 666 east of Monticello 1,270 1,585 ,1,865 47%
Source: Utah Department of Transportation 1983-1994.
l3996IR3n9-1.xLS SIlSl96(S:.f7 PM)lRPTI3 Sheet lofl
171
TABLE 3.9-2
ACCIDENT mSTORY - mGHWAYS IN THE STUDY AREA
Accidents Accidents Accidents

Highway 1986 1990 1994
U.S. 191 Moab to La Sal Junction 38 36 48
U.S. 191 Monticello to La Sal Junction 31 48 55
State Route 46 east of U.S. 191 2 6 5
U.S. 666 east of Monticello 7 21 17
Source: Utah Department ofTranspor.tation 1986-1994
Sheet 1 of1
/7?
accident data compiled by the Utah Lisbon Valley from Highway 191 and
Department of Transportation for U.S. Monticello. This two-lane paved highway
Highway 191 revealed that fatal accidents serves only a few small unincorporated
are very uncommon in the study area. For communities in Utah east of Monticello, as
the three years of data reviewed (1986, well as Dove Creek and Cortez, Colorado
1990, and 1994), there was only one fatal to the southeast. Traffic volumes along
accident on U.S. Highway 191 between this highway are also low due to the sparse
Moab and Monticello. Although there were population of the area it serves.
more accidents recorded in the towns of
Moab and Monticello than on the rural In terms of traffic hazards and accidents,
portions of US Highway 191, accident U.S. Highway 666 also has a low accident
records did not reveal any specific rate due to low traffic volumes. this
locations that had. a particularly high highway experienced 17 accidents in 1994
number of accidents. (UDOT 1995). Approximately 25 to 35
percent of accidents recorded in 1986 -
State Route 46 runs east-west and provides 1994 were reported to involve collisions
access to the northern end of Lisbon Valley with wild or domestic animals. There were
from U.S. Highway 191. This two-lane no recorded fatalities on U.S. Highway 666
paved highway serves the small community in the years reviewed. In addition, there
of La Sal, Utah and other small were no high accident locations identified
communities in southwestern Colorado, along U.S. 666 within the study area.
such as Nucla and Naturita (as Colorado
Highway 90). In general, traffic volumes Local Roads
along this highway are low due to the
sparse population of the area it serves. In In general, traffic volumes on local roads
1994, average daily traffic on this highway that serve the Lisbon Valley area are very
was ~pproximately 1,000 vehicles per day. low due to the fact that the area is very
sparsely inhabited. Traffic on these local
In terms of traffic hazards and accidents, roads is generally associated with other
State Route 46 has a very low accident mines, ranching activities, and recreation in
rate due to low traffic volumes. This the local area. Road maintenance on
highway experienced a mere five accidents county roads in the project area is the
in 1994 (UDOT 1995): Approximately responsibility of San Juan County, which
one-half of these accidents were reported handles grading, paving, and snowpiowing.
to involve collisions with wild animals. In Although roads that serve inhabited areas
I- addition, there were no recorded fatalities are plowed in the winter, wet weather can
on State Route 46 in the years reviewed render unpaved roads virtually impassable
(1986, 1990, and 1994). There were no for short periods of time. The following is
high accident locations identified along SR description ofloca1 roads that serve Lisbon
46. Valley and the proposed project site.
u.s. Highway 666 also runs east-west and Big Indian Road (County Road 106) is a
provides access to the southern end of paved two-lane road that runs south from
239961R3.3 S/14l95(3:47.P.M)IRPT/4 3-64

State Route 46 west of La Sal to the Big 3.10 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Indian Rock area and then curves west and
intersects with Highway 191 roughly ten Historic activities in Lisbon Valley that
miles south ofLa Sal junction. may have involved the use of hazardous
materials or generation of hazardous
Lisbon Valley Road (County Road 113) is wastes are limited to scattered mining
a gravel surfaced two-lane road that runs operations and an active natural gas field
south from Big Indian Road to the that has been developed in the northern
proposed project site. part of the valley. Given the remote
location of Lisbon Valley, other types of
Little Valley Road (County Road 109) is a industrial activities, such as oil refining,
dirt road that extends west from Lisbon chemical manufacturing, gas stations, and
Valley Road and the proposed project site other business activities that could generate
across Big Indian Wash to the southern hazardous wastes are not present.
portion of Big Indian Road. Although this
road is relatively rough and winding, it 3.10.1 Records Review and Agencies
provides the most direct access to the Contacted
project site from Monticello and could be
used by commuting mine workers when Various government agencies, including
weather and road conditions permit. the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), the Utah Department of
West Summit Road (County Road 313) is a Environmental Quality, and San Juan
gravel surfaced road that extends north County were contacted to identify known
from U.S. Highway 666 to Summit Point sites that either generate or are potentially
and the southern terminus of West Lisbon contaminated with hazardous wastes in the
Spur (CR 305). study area. Based on that records review
and agency consultation, only a limited
UCoio Roiui (County Road 315) is a paved number of sites were identified in the
two-lane road that parallels West Summit overall study area. In general, the vast
Road, originating at U.S. Highway 666 to majority of these sites are located within
the east. This road selVes the community the towns of the study area, such' as
of UColo and continues north, where it Monticello and La Sal. Within Lisbon
curves west and intersects with West Valley, only a limited number of sites were
Summit Road a few miles south of Summit identified during the records review. None
Point. This road is also a· potential of these sites are located within five miles
commuter route for mine workers residing of the proposed project site, and there is
in the Monticello area and communities to little or no potential that contamination
the east, since it is paved and relatively could migrate from these locations to the
straight. project site. With respect to the proposed
project site itseI:t: review of agency lists
and records and contacts with various
agencies revealed n~ documented
hazardous waste sites or contamination
2399&'RS3 SIl4l96(3:47PM)IRPT/4 3-65
present. Table 3.10-1 provides a list of all Section 4.10 describes hazardous materials
agencies and related data sources that would be used at the proposed Lisbon
consulted, and results of the survey. Valley Mine, how they would be stored,
and measures that would be taken to
3.10.2 Historic Mining Operations and minimize the risk of an accidental spill or
Oil and Gas Development in uncontrolled release in the future.
Lisbon Valley
3.11 CULTURAL AND PALEONTO-
Numerous active and inactive uranium, LOGICAL RESOURCES
vanadium, and copper mines, as well as
mineral prospects are present in Lisbon Cultural resource data for the study area,
Valley. these mines are located in the shown on Figure 3.11-1, were compiled
northern portion of the valley near the through a review of archaeological literature,
community of La Sal, also near Big Indian unpublished surveys, file searches at the Utah
Rock, to the south, as well as at the Department of Natural History and Utah
proposed project site. Many of the mine BLM offices, field investigations, and
sites include waste rock dumps, old mill, consultation with locally experienced
workings, and tailings impoundments and archaeologists (Louthan 1995, 1996; Graham
ponds. As described above, only a few of 1995b; Metcalf 1995; Black 1996; ONeil
these mines have been listed and/or 1996). Information on more recent Native
investigated by the EPA and the State for American use in the study area was collected
potential hazardous waste contamination. from the literature and knowledgeable
or have registered underground storage individuals.
tanks. None of those mines are located on
or even within five miles of the project site. Paleontological data for the project were
No other information is available· regarding compiled through a review of the literature,
mine and mill wastes and potential and consultation :with and site visits by the
haZardous' materials contamination at the Moab District BLM paleontologist.
.other mine sites in Lisbon Valley. .
3.11.1 Study Area
An oil and gas field has been developed by
UNOCAL in Lisbon Valley to the north of The archaeological literature and specific
the proposed project site. This field is survey findings indicate human activity in this
registered with the EPA as a generator of part of the Colorado Plateau, dating back
[ hazardous wastes, although no records of over at least the past eleven thousand years.
The cultura1!chronological framework
spills or contamination have been
documented. In addition, according to the applicable to the study area (Figure 3.11-1)
State of Utah's Registered Underground includes:
t Storage Tank Facility Database, there is at
least one underground storage tank
associated with this development, although
there was no indication that this tank(s) has
leaked.
239961R3.3 S114196(3:47PM)lRPT/4 3-66
",
TABLE 3.10-1
GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND DATA SOURCES CONSULTED REGARDING POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
DlstRnce
Agency Data Source Type of Sites Tracked Sites In Lisbon VRlley from Project Agency Comments
EPA Comprehensive Environmental Active waste sites being investigated by EPA Rio A!gom Mine 9 miles No further remedilll ac1ion pilltmed
Response, Compensation, lUld Keystone Pit 8 miles No further remedial action planned
Liability Infonnation System
(CERCLlS) Database
EPA Resource Conservation and Pennitted facilities that generate hazardous wastes Hecla Mine 8 miles None
Recovery Infonnation System Unoca! Lisbon Plant #28 6 miles None
(RCRIS) Database
EPA Toxic Release Inventory System - Data on reported releases of hazardous compounds None N/A None
(TRIS) Database
EPA Pennit Compliance System - . Facilities with NPDES wastewaste discharge pennits' None N/A None
,
G.\ PCS Database
~ EPA Facility Index System - Master list of all EPA regulated facilities Homestake Mines 7 miles None
-l (FINDS) Database Hecla Minc 8 miles None
Uno cal Storage Tanks 6 miles None
Unocal Lisbon Station 6 miles None
Keystone Pit 8 miles None
Rio Algom Mine 9 miles None
UDEQ UST Facilities Database Registered underground storage tanks Atlas - Pandora Mine 12 miles None
Rio Algom Mine 9 miles Nonc
UMETCO La Sal Mine 12 miles None
Unoeal Lisbon Plant #28 6 miles None
UDEQ LUST Facilities Database Leaking underground storage tank facilities Rio Algom Mine 9 miles None
UDEQ Closed Landfills List Closed Landfills in Utah San Juan Co., La Sal, UT 14 miles None
EPA - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

UDEQ - Utah Department ofEnvirorunental Quality
· .!
-SOURCE: GRAHAM, 1995
Job No. : 23996
Prepared by : CULTURAL RESOURCES

o 1750 3500
a
7000 STUDY AREA·
SCALE IN FEET Date: 2/15/96
FIG. 3.11-1
PalooindianlPre-Archaic Period were swveyed for this project (Graham
11,000 - 9,500 B.P. (BeforePresent) 1995a).
Archaic Period
9,500 - 2,000 B.P. Historic and Prehistoric Archaeological
Late Prehistoric Period Localities. At present, 364 archaeological
2,000 - ca. 700 B.P. and historical cultural resource localities are
Protohistoricl.Historic Period documented within the study area. This total
700 B.P. - present includes 186 isolated finds (IFs) and 178
sites.
Paleontological resources in the region
consist of vertebrate fossils that are found in Definition of IFs and sites varied in different
the Morrison and the Burro Canyon parts of the study area depending on artifact
fonnations. density. In areas where numerous chert
outcrops have left a continuous low-density
3.11.2 Cultural Resources lithic scatter over much of the terrain, sites
were defined as more than 10 artifacts in a 30
To ascertain the nature of the affected meter diameter area. IF fonns were
environment concerning cultural resources, completed for finds of 2 to 10 artifitcts or
specific data pertaining to all proposed locales representing a single activity event.
disturbance areas were obtained and Lone tools were recorded as IFs as well. 'In
analyzed. These records indicate that a total areas where a coirtinuous low to moderate
of 25 archaeological swveys have been density lithic scatter covered the entire
conducted within, and in the vicinity ot: the landfonn, sites were defined as areas where
Lisbon Valley area. It appears that all of the artifact density increased above a threshold of .
surveys were at a Class m level. A Class m more than two flakes in a 10 meter diameter
survey is defined as an intensive .pedestrian area. Also in this area, IF :(onns were
survey of the entire area indicated. A high completed for tools only. All other historic or
level of confidence is associated with this prehistoric localities are recorded as sites.
type of swvey. Most of the previous swveys Generally, archaeological and historic
were for seismic lines or for other linear localities less than 50 years old are not
projects and consequently, although recorded (Graham 1995a).
numerous, did not cover extensive portions
of the current study area. Summary data Of the 178 sites recorded in the study area,
concerning the archaeological swveys in the 159 are prehistoric, 14 are historic, 4 contain
affected sections can be found in Graham both prehistoric and historic materials, and 1
(1995a). is a pOSSIble traditional cultural property. The
prehistoric sites are represented by camps,
In anticipation of the Proposed Action, an quanies, lithic procurement localities, lithic
intensive cultural resource swvey (Class TIl) scatters, lithic and sherd scatters, pinyon
was conducted of the proposed mining and procurement localities, rockshelters, and a
processing area, and the transmission line wickiup. The historic sites include mining
corridor and associated new access roads locations, homesteads, brush pens, corrals,
(Figure 3.11-1). Approximately 3,640 acres and fences. The traditional cultural property
2399S1R3.3 SIl4l96(3:47PM)lRPT/4 3-69

is represented by a stone circle site that may significant and distinguishable entity
have been used for vision quest activities. whose components may lack
individual distinction; or
No sites in the study area are currently listed (d) Have yielded, or may be likely to
on the National Register of Historic Places yield, . infonnation important ill
(NRHP). Archaeologists have recommended prehistory or history.
24 sites as being potentially eligible to the
NRHP, and the remaining 154 sites as being Prehistoric and historic sites without standing
not eligible for listing. The 186 IFs are not architecture are usually eligible to the NRHP
eligible by definition. All of these 24 sites are under criterion (d). Examples of such sites
recommended eligible for listing in the are short and long-tenn camps, pinyon nut
NRHP, under criterion (d) of 36 CPR 60.4. procurement sites, prehistoric quarries,
The single traditional cultural property could rockshelters, and remains of homesteads.
be eligible for listing under criteria (a) and/or
(b), in addition to (d). The 24 potentially There are a variety of types of sites and
eligible sites are listed in Table 3.11-1. The locations that are considered eligible for the
BLM and the Utah State Historic NRHP based on significance to Native
Preservation Officer would consult to make American groups. The tenn ''traditional
final eligibility determinations. cultural properties" is used to refer to these
types of sites. Some Native Americans prefer
Evaluation of Significance. Prehistoric and to refer to them as sacred sites (Navajo
historic sites are considered significant if they Nation 1991). These properties, or sites,
are listed in or eligible for listing in the could include places to gather plants and
NRHP. When so· determined, they are minerals, places associated with tnbal or clan
tenned historic properties. By definition, IFs origins or customs, places identified as the
are usually not considered for listing. To be home of a Holy Being, locations of echoes,
considered .for listing, a site must possess places where an apparition or other
integrity of location, design, setting, supernatural event occurred, and others.
materials, workmanship, feeling, and
association and meet one or more of the These places may not be a marked or easily
following criteria, as found in 36 CPR § 60.4: discernIble sites as such, but include
mountains, rock outcrops, hills, springs, or
(a) Association with events that have individual trees. Locations may not be
made a significant contnbution to the "sacred" in the Euro-American sense of the
broad patterns of our history; or word. These locations are associated with
(b) Associated with the lives of persons stories and traditions, and may serve as
significant in our past; or mnemonic devices for individuals to recall
(c) Embodiment of the distinctive oral tradition. Thus, a site may be significant
characteristics of a type, period, or even when an individual is not there, as they
method of construction, or are still ''using'' the location. Guidelines for
representative of the work of a detennining significance and NRHP eligibility
master, or possession of high artistic of traditional cultural properties have been
values, or representative of a prepared by the National Park Service
23995JR3.3 5/14196(3:47PM)lRPT/4 3-70

TABLE 3.11-1
POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT CULTURAL RESOURCES IN THE STUDY AREA
CULTURAL INITIAL
SITE NUMBER DESCRIPTION PERIOD RECOMMENDATION
42SA10270 carnpllithic Archaic Avoidance
procurement
42SA16865 sherd & lithic scatter Archaic-Late Avoidance
Prehistoric
42SA22821 lithic scatter unknown Avoidance
42SA22828 lithic scatter unknown Avoi~ce
42SA22844 lithic scatter Late Prehistoric Avoidance
42SA22848 campllithic unknown Avoidance
procurement
42SA22863 camp Archaic-Late Avoidance
Prehistoric
42SA22864 pDnyonprocurement unknown Avoidance! Consultation
42SA22871 lithic scatter Archaic Avoidance
42SA22875 sherd & lithic scatter Late Prehistoric Avoidance
42SA22895 lithic scatter PaleoDndian-Archaic Avoidance
42SA22896 wickiupllithic scatter Late Prehistoric Avoidance! Consultation
42SA22904 rockshelter Late Prehistoric Avoidance
42SA22919 quarry Late Prehistoric Avoidance
42.SA22929 buried camp unknown Avoidance
42SA22935 quarry unknown Avoidance
42SA22945 rockshelterllithic scatter unknown Avoidance
42SA22947 stone circle unknown Avoidance!
ConsultationIData
Recovery
42SA22948 rocksheherllithicscatter unknown Avoidance
42SA22949 lithic scatter/pDnyon Archaic-Late Avoidance! Consultation
procurement Prehistoric
42SA22959 lithic scatter/ PaleoDndian-Archaic Avoidance
rocksheher
42SA23016 camp unknown Avoidance
SOURCE: Graham 1995a
239961R3.3 SI14J96(3:47PM)IR.PT/4 3-71
/36
(National Register Bulletin 38). These types Significance of paleontological resources is ,
of sites may be eligible to the NRHP under based on an estimation of scientific or
criteria (a), (b), (c), or (d) of36 CFR§ 60.4. educational importance ofthe fossils that may
occur in a given geologic fonnation.
Native American access to sacred sites for Significance criteria for vertebrate fossils
the purpose of worship or their ceremonial include such factors as completeness of the
use is protected by the AIRFA of 1978. If material, concentration of the' material, and
any such sites are identified, the BLM would unique or rare occurrences ofmaterial (Kuntz
comply with A1RFA and ensure continued et al. 1989). '
access by the individuals or groups.
Traditional Cultural Properties. Letters were
The Native American Graves Protection and sent to five tnbal organizations by the Utah
Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) of 1990 BLM, Moab District Office on January 18,
requires Federal agency consultation with 1996, seeking comment on the potential
Native American groups concerning activities effects the proposed project may have on
that may affect archaeological resources of cultural properties. Tnbal organizations
importance to the Native American groups. contacted include: the Ute Mountain Ute
This law especially pertains to the treatment Tnbe, the White Mesa. Ute Council
of human remains, but also relates to other (contacted through the Ute Mountain Ute
cultural items recovered during Tnbe), the Northern Ute Jndian Tnbe, the
archaeological investigations. Therefore, data Navajo Utah Commission, and the Hopi
recovery programs and other mitigative Tribe Cultural Preservation Office. There
actions must also meet the requirements of may be locations significant to individuals,
NAGPRA NAGPRA also requires Native clans, or extended fumily groups that are not
American groups be consulted before a general tnbal knOWledge. There may also be
permit for site excavation under locations generally known, but not previously
Archaeological Resources Protection Act identified.
(ARPA) is Issued.
To date, site visits have been conducted with
The land, in general, is also seen by Native the Ute Jndian Tnbe and their Native
American groups as a storehouse of American consultant.
resources such as vegetation, minerals, and
water, similar to the wilderness area concept. Follow up contacts with the other tnbal
Thus, the integrity of the cultural landscape groups has either been unsuccessful, or has
can be considered significant. Other sites that provided no commitments or positions from
could be significant are vision quest sites, the Tnbes. If at some point in the future,
sweat lodges, eagle traps, game corrals, trail these groups wish to participate, BLM will
shrines, rock art, and marked and unmarked work with them and attempt to address or
resolve any issues they may have.
graves. These locations could be significant
to a Tnbe as a whole, a clan or a family. In
Although all cultural resources recorded in
the study area, one site has been identified as
the ,study, area are available for Native
being a possible vision quest site.
American consuJ.tation, one may be of
particular interest, a stone circle that may
2399§/R3.3 S/14196{3:47 PM)JRPT/4 3-72
have been a vision quest site (42SA22947). 3.11.3 Paleontological Resources
Native American consultation could provide
information that would be valuable to the To gain an understanding of the nature of the
interpretation of these sites, and help define affected environment regarding
whether they are indeed traditional cultural paleontological resources, general data
properties. concerning the occurrence of likely
fossiliferous geological formations in the
Historic Period. An important historical study area were obtained through analysis of
resource of note that is located in the project geologic base maps. This resulted in the
vicinity is the Old Spanish Trail. This trail identification of two formations that are
served as a major trade route between Santa exposed in the study area and that could
Fe and Los Angeles and as a route for possibly contain significant fossils. The
fiunous explorers. In the project vicinity, a formations of concern are the Morrison and
segment of this trail ran from Piute Springs, Burro Canyon. Exposures of these
through Lisbon Valley, and on up to La Sal. fonnations were then inspected by the BLM
Portions of the trail are thought to date to Moab District paleontologist. Significant
prehistoric times and may have been used by fossils were not found in any of the areas
Archaic and Fremont peoples. The trail was investigated (Rasmussen 1996).
most intensively used from 1829 to 1848
3.12 VISUAL RESOURCES
when Santa Fe traders used the trail to
transport goods to and from California
3.12.1 Study Area
(Anonymous 1995; Roring 1996).
Located to the southeast of the proposed

The project area is located in the
project area is an old wagon road that goes Canyonlands section of the Colorado
down Three Step Hill from Summit Point Plateau physiographic province (Fenneman
into Lisbon Valley. This wagon road may 1931). The landscape is generally
have:first been used in the 1870s and by 1920 comprised of flat valley bottoms, low
it had been moved about 1-1/2 miles to the rolling hills, and some areas of steep and
east. The original road down Three Step Hill broken rock faces. These latter areas,
was very steep and included three distinct which are the sites of the two springs in the
steps. The new route follows a more gentle, immediate area (Lisbon Spring and Huntley
continuous slope down the hill. Portions of Spring) have the most visual interest. In
the old Three Step Hill road may coincide comparison to other outstanding scenic
with a segment of the Old Spanish Trail areas in southeastern Utah, however,
(Nebecker 1996; Roring 1996). No signs of Lisbon Valley lacks any distinctive visual
either this wagon road or the Old Spanish qualities and is not a local scenic attraction.
Trail were found during the cultural Figures 3.12 -1 through 3.12-4 are photos
resources inventory of the project area of the mine project area from various
(Metcalf 1996). viewpoints, and an area near a spring and
rock face.
2399&'R3.3 5Il4J96(3:47PM)lRPT/4 3-73

Figure 3.12-1
GTO Pit Area, looking east
Figure 3.12-2
Lisbon Spring area, with rock outcrops,
coniferous/deciduous trees, and rock pictographs
23996JR3.3.PHO SfI3196(3;37 PM)JRPT
Figure 3.12-3
Woods Ranch heap leach area, looking west
" ,.'
Figure 3.12-4
Typical Lisbon Valley scene, looking north towards the project area
A report was prepared for the BLM 16 from or add noticeably to the scenic
years ago (Meiiji Resource Consultants qUality. Much of Lisbon Valley was
1980) which assessed visual characteristics reportedly chained 40 or 50 years ago to
of the Dry Valley Planning Unit, which remove the trees and sagebrush areas
includes Lisbon Valley. Since little plowed to create the marginal grazing
development has occurred in the area since resource that exists today.
that time, the findings of that study appear
valid today and are summarized below. Visual Sensitivity and Distance Zones
Scenic Quality Lisbon Valley is rated medium to low

visual sensitivity. The estimated 50 to 150
Scenic quality is a measure of the visual vehicles that travel the gravel road each
appeal of the landscape. Lands are given day are delivery and some mining service
an A, B, or C rating based on the apparent vehicles traveling through the property to
scenic quality. the mines being decommissioned and oil
and gas and telecommunications facilities
The Dry Valley Planning Unit only has a to the north, and to southeastern Utah and
small area of Class "A" scenery. Lisbon the far southwest corner of Colorado to
Valley is classified as "C," generally devoid the south. Other minor traffic is associated
of interesting land form. Drainages are with agricultural activity in the area and
trips to local commercial centers.
noted as having pockets of visual interest
on the north and south slopes of Lisbon
Distance zones are foreground to
Valley along the outcrops and ledges.
middleground in most of the Planning Unit,
Otherwise, the area is characterized as
and in Lisbon Valley. Travel corridors are
lacking visual interest.
usually between one-quarter to two miles
wide throughout the Valley.
Vegetation is comprised of pinyon-juniper
along the benches and slopes, and, sage-
Land ownership is mostly private, with a
grassland and forb types on the lowlands.
few parcels of State and Federal controlled
No flowing surface water of any
lands as noted in Figure 1-2. Intrusions on
consequences exists in the area. The
visual quality in the immediate project area,
scenery is quite void of color, with light
which constitutes this visuals study area,
tans and pinks, and little contrast except
are few, as noted above.
for the coniferous trees. Few cultural
modifications exist except for widely
Visual Resource Oassification
scattered residences and stock watering
facilities such as the Woods Ranch. Past Visual resources here are classified at the
mining operations have left open pits lowest level, Class IV, with "C" scenic
(some with infrequent ponded water), quality as noted above. Under the BLM
small adits or underground openings, and Visual Resources Management (VRM)
waste piles. These existing developments system (BLM 1980), objectives for Class
do not dominate the surrounding IV landscapes are to provide for activities
characteristic landscape and do not detract which may require major modifications of
23996JR3.3 SnS/96{5:48 PM)IRPT/4 3-76
I'll
the exIstIng landscape character. BLM lands are administered by the Moab
However, every attempt should be made to Field Office and the western two-thirds of
minimize impacts through careful location the powerline would be within the San
of facilities, minimal disturbance, and Juan Resource Area. State lands are
repetition of the basic line from color and managed by the School and Institutional
texture elements found in the surrounding Trust Lands Administration. Land
landscape. development activities are under the
jurisdiction of San Juan County.
3.13 LAND USE
The proposed Lisbon Valley Copper
The Lisbon Valley Area is located in Project includes approximately 258
northeastern San Juan County, Utah unpatented lode mining claims, state leases,
(Figure 1-1) and covers roughly 720 and private land. The unpatented claims are
square miles. The primary land uses of the administered by the BLM. Summo
study area include mining, wildlife habitat, presently holds, or would obtain, all
livestock grazing, and limited recreation. necessary rights to surface use and access
WIldlife, grazing, and recreational of lands potentially affected by the
resources are discussed in Sections 3.6, Proposed Project. Specific claim names
3.7, and 3.16. and corresponding UMC numbers are
provided in the Proposed Plan of
3.13.1 Study Area Operations (Summ~ 1995a).
The study area for land use resources Other land authorizations and designations
includes the proposed Lisbon Valley within the Project Area are presented in
Copper Project Area (Figure 2-1) and Table 3.13-1. These include powerline and
surrounding lands in the Lower Lisbon pipeline right of ways and public water
Valley vicinity. Regional land uses that reserves where there are known water
may be indirectly impacted by the proposed sources which are preserved in 40-acre
project are also discussed in this section. parcels and, therefore, not available for
private purchase.
3.13.2 Land Use Resources
Land Use Plans
Land Jurisdictions
The management of Federal public lands
San Juan County is comprised of and resources within the Project Area is
approximately 61 percent federal lands, 9 directed and guided by the BLM's
percent state lands, 23 percent Navajo Resource Management Plan (RMP) (ELM
Nation lands, and 8 percent private lands. 1985a). Objectives of the RMP include
Most of the Lisbon Valley consists of keeping public lands open for exploration
public land, with relatively smaIl areas of and development of mineral resources
private (fee) lands occurring in scattered
while protecting areas with sensitive
areas along the valley floor (Figure 1-2). resource values. To achieve this goal, the
Public lands within the study area are BLM recommends leaving "the entire'
administered by the BLM and UDOGM. Resource Management Area (1.8 million
23996lR3.3 SIl4l96(3:47PM)IRPT/4 3-77
19,1;
TABLE 3.13-1
LAND AUTHORIZATIONS AND DESIGNATIONS WITHIN

LANDS ENCOMPASSED BY THE PROPOSED SUMl\iO PROJECT BOUNDARY
T. 30 S., R. 25 E.
Sections 22, 23, 25,26 pipeline RIW UTIJ-42733 12' total width
Sections 25-28 powerline RIW UTIJO-9481 0 100' total width
Sections 26 and 35 powerline RIW UTU-4844~ 25' 'total width
Section 24 Public Water Reserve NE~NW~ 40 acres
Public Water Reserve SY.2NW~, 160 acres
NYzSW~
Section 35 RIW for dam and reservoir site 2.24 acres
T. 30 S., R. 26 E.
Section 31 pipeline RIW UTU-42733 12' total width
Source: BLM 1996.
acres) open to mining claims for locatable (formerly the Division of State Lands and
minerals under the general Mining Laws, Forestry). The state does not have a
with the exception of 1,850 acres of widely general management plan, but management
scattered campgrounds and scenic sites in the state is directed toward obtaining the
under existing mineral withdrawals." (BLM greatest possible monetary return for the
1985a). trust consistent with sound management
practices (Stokes 1996).
As with the Grand Resource Area,
resources in the San Juan Resource Area Land management decisions on private
are directed by the San Juan RMP (BLM land in San Juan County are guided by
1989). Objectives of the RMP relative to county land use plans and zoning
the proposed utility ROW corridor, is to ordinances and regulations. San Juan
allow discretionary ROWs so long as RMP County is in the process of updating its
goals are met and after completion of site- County Master Plan, originally adopted in
specific NEPA documentation (BLM 1968. A Preliminary Draft Master Plan has
1989). been drafted and is under revision. It is
anticipated that the County Commissioners
The management of State of Utah lands is would make decisions regarding the
the responsibility of the School and adoption of the new master plan by the
Institutional Trust Lands Administration
23996/R3.3 5115196(5:49 PM)lRPT/4 3-78
113
summer of 1996. In the inte~ the Residential Use
existing master plan and zoniIig regulations
remain in effect. The current master plan One resident lives near the Woods' Ranch
supports economic development activities. (owned by Summo) near the Project Area
The Lisbon Valley is currently zoned for and may relocate upon review of the
industrial use. project (Gochnour 1996b). The
construction of three residences is planned
Transportation and Utility Corridors near Summit Point, located approximately
6 miles to the south of the Project Area.
Transportation and utility corridors in the No other residences are known to occur in
Project Area include several flowlines, the Project Area and vicinity.
access roads, and powerlines (Table
3.13-1). Access to the Project Area is by 3.14 CLIMATE AND AIR
an unpaved San Juan County-maintained QUAUTY
road, which runs from Utah Highway 46,
west of La Sal and east of U.S. Highway 3.14.1 Study Area
191, to U.S. Highway 666 east of
Monticello. Issues concerning traffic and The Lisbon- Valley Project is located at
road use are addressed in Sections 2.2.10, approximately 6,500 feet above MSL on
3.9, and 4.9. the southeast plateau of Utah in
canyonland terrain about 20 miles south of
Minerals Development the La Sal Mountains. The site is in the
semi-arid, continental climate regime, that
The Lisbon Valley Area has a. long history is characterized by dry air, sunny days,
of mining activity. Copper was discovered clear nights, low precipitation; high
in the area in the late 1800s. Intermittent evaporation, and large diurnal temperature
exploration and small-scale mmmg changes.
activities from open pit and underground
operations occurred until the mid-1900s, as 3.14.2 Climate
evidenced by remaining abandoned pits,
stockpiles, and overburden. Incomplete Site temperatures are e{'.pected to be
records for this period indicate that similar to the long-term record (which has
approximately 2.5 million pounds of the longest, most complete records in the
copper have been produced from at least immediate region) collected at Monticello,
five oxide deposits in the Lisbon Valley Utah (Air Sciences 1995). The monthly
(Surnrno Corporation 1995a). Details means at Monticello from 1951 to 1980
concerning historical mining, current are presented in Table 3.14-1 and show an
minerals development, and planned mining average temperature of 46'1". The warmest
development in the area are provided in months are from June to August with an
Section 3.1.5. average temperature of over 65'1". The
coolest months are December to February.
2399&10.3 snSI96(S:49 PM)/RPT/4 3-79
/9'/
TABLE 3.14-1
MONTHLY TEMPERATURE MEANS

MONTICELLO, UTAH!
Month Average Temperature (OP)
January 25.0
February 29.0
March 34.9
April 43.6
May 52.7
June 62.0
July 68.6
August 66.1
September 58.9
October 48.6
November 35.6
December 27.2
Annual Mean 46.0
Data are from 1951-1980 per NOAA 1992.
SOURCE: Air Sciences 1995.
239961R3.3 SIl4l96(3:47PM)/RPT/4 3-80

Site precipitation also is expected to be percent calms (no wind) and an average
similar to the record collected at speed of 7.3 knots (8.2 miles per hour
Monticello (Air Sciences 1995). (mph)). About 30 percent of all winds are
Precipitation data from 1951 to 1980 are from the predominate directions of east-
presented in Table 3.14-2 and show an southeast and· southeast with an average .
"average annual precipitation of 14.41 -. -"speed of 9.0 mph. The least frequent wind
inches. Months of maximum precipitation directions are from the south-southwest
are July and August; rnmunum and southwest, totaling less than 5 percent
precipitation occurs in June. -Snowfall
at of all winds with an average speed of about
Monticello is over 54 inches and occurs in 10.9 mph.
the months of December through March
(Table 3.14-2). 3.14.3 Air Quality
Site evaporation is represented by regional Baseline air quality represents the ambient
infonnation available in the National conditions before the project is
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration constructed. In an area such as the Lower
(NOAA) Evaporation Atlas, based on the Lisbon Valley, there is neither industrial
IS-year period of 1956-1971. Pan activity nor urbanization that could affect
evaporation at the Lisbon Valley Project is the natural, rural air quality conditions. The
estimated to be 50 inches/year (Air nearest industrial project is the Rio Algom
Sciences 1995). uranium mine, about 12 miles to the west.
This project is currently inactive but could
Wmd speed and direction data are restart. Regardless, emissions from this
expected to be similar to those data mine would not reach the Lisbon Valley
collected at the airport in Grand Junction, site in sufficient concentrations to be
Colorado. and used in the permit considered more than negligible. Active
application' submitted on behalf of Summo projects in the region also are small and
to the Utah Division of Air Quality (DAQ) more distant, and emissions from these
(Air ScienceS 1996). The DAQ has projects would not impact the project site
approved the use of those data for (Air Sciences 1996).
permitting purposes and considers the data
to be generally representative of the project Baseline air pollutant concentrations at the
area. Five years of wind data are Lisbon Valley Project location were
summarized as frequency distributions in estimated ,based on regional infonnation
FIgure 3.14-1 by direction. The data show (Air Sciences 1996). Baseline
a high frequency of winds from the east- concentrations of combustion gases are
southeast and southeast with a much lower assumed to be at natural background
secondary peak from the northwest. These levels, or negligible. Particulate data have
winds are along the axis of the Colorado been collected by the DAQ in the town of
River Valley in Grand Junction - the same Moab, located roughly 40 miles northwest
axis as the valley of the Lisbon Valley of the Lisbon Valley Project. Moab is in a
Project. The data record shows 2.8 similarly semi-arid region, is lower in
23996/R3.3 SIl4l!l6(3:47PM)lRPT/4 3-81
TABLE 3.14-2
MONTHLY PRECIPITATION AND SNOWFALL

MONTICELLO, UTAH!
Month Precipitation Average (in.) Snowfall Average (in.)
January 1.34 15.1
February 0.97 10.1
March 0.96 7.8
April 0.86 2.2
May 1.00 0.4
June 0.48 0.0
July 1.67 0.0
August 1.89 0.0
September 1.16 0.0
October 1.62 0.6
November 1.08 5.4
December 1.38 12.7
Total 14:41 54.3
Data are from 1951-1980 per NOAA 1992.
239961R.3.3 Sf14196(3:47PM)lRPT/4 3-82
1ft
N
20%
w E
ssw
s
AVERAGE WIND' SPEED = 7.3 KNOTS
LEGEND
< 6 !<NOTS
~ 6 KNOTS
CALMS ARE WINDS WITH

SPEEDS LESS 1HAN 1 KNOT
SHOWN AS DIRECTION WIND IS FROM
SOURCE: AIR SCIENCE INC. 1996.
Job No. : 23996

Prepared by : ORP WIND FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION
Dote : 2/13/96
FIG. 3.14-1
111
elevation and wanner than the project site, 3.16 RECREATIONAL
and is therefore expected to be drier and RESOURCES
dustier than the project site. Furthermore,
concentrations of particulate at the project In the project area, recreation use or
site are expected to be lower than in Moab demand is low compared to other areas in
due to the lack of industrial activity nearby. the region. Recreation is generally
The annual average PMlO concentration in dispersed, and there are no developed
Moab for 1994, 26 mg/m3, was used as the recreation sites in Lisbon Valley. Major
upper limit for the 24-hr and annual activities include big and small game
baseline concentrations for the Lisbon hunting with some associated camping and
Valley Project. (PMlO is the particulate All Terrain Vehicle (ATV) use.
matter with an aerodynamic diameter that
is equal to or smaller than 10 micrometers Infonnation was compiled .from maps and
in size). literature supplied by public and private
agencies and telephone communications
3.15 NOISE with Federal and State agencies.
3.15.1 Study Area 3.16.1 Study'Area
Existing noise levels in the Lower Lisbon The study area for recreational resources
Valley are expected to be representative of includes public lands in the vicinity of the
rural conditions and are expected to vary proposed Lisbon Valley Copper Project
between 35 and 45 decibels (dB) (BLM boundary (Figure 1-2) and regional
1985b). Noise sources are expected to be recreation sites that may be indirectly
primarily natural, such as wind, but impacted by the proposed project.
additional noise comes from aircraft and
from traffic on nearby roads (e.g., Lower 3.16.2 Recreational Resources
Lisbon Valley Road). Noise from aircraft
could average 50 dB, and from traffic on Dispersed Recreation
paved roads could be expected to be 66 dB
(BLM 1985b). An average level of 55 dB Dispersed recreation represents the most
is . considered by the Environmental common fonn of recreational activity in the
Protection Agency (EPA 1974) to be the study area. The primary recreational use of
level above which annoyance occurs in a the Lisbon Valley is seasonal deer and
residential neighborhood. A similar cottontail rabbit hunting ~d year-round
threshold has not been established for rural jack-rabbit hunting, with niinor camping
areas (BLM 1985b). The EPA further and ATV use associated with the hunting
considers that maintaining noise below an activities (Van Hemert 1996, McClure
average level of 70 dB would adequately 1996a). Minimal use of the Three Step
protect public health and welfare. Hill area for Christt:nas tree harvesting and
firewood gathering also occurs. An
estimated· maximum of 100-200 visitor
239961R3.3 SIl4I96(3:47PM)lRJ?T/4 3-84

days of use per year occurs in the study developed recreational opportunities for
area (Van Hemert 1996). local residents and nonresidents. The
nearest developed recreation is the Wind
Within the study area, there are no Whistle Campground located approxi-
mountain biking or hiking trails, nor scenic mately 20 miles west of Lower Lisbon
areas that would typically attract tourists Valley. This campground is used regularly
or provide scenic opportunities. Fishing from spring through fall. The Needles
and other water-related recreation is Overlook is the next closest developed
nonexistent due to the lack of surface recreational area. It is approximately 35
water. There are no wilderness areas in the miles northwest of the project area and is
vicinity of Lisbon Valley, however, the heavily used (Van Hemert 1996>.
Dolores River Canyon Wilderness Study
Area is approximately 7 miles northeast of The Manti La Sal National Forest (which is
the Project Area. divided between an area north of La Sal
and an area west of Monticello), the
The RMP (BLM 1985a) contams no plans Arches National Park north of Moab, and
for recreation development in the vicinity the Canyonlands National Park southwest
of the proposed project. Additionally, of Moab offer an abundance of recreational
neither the BLM nor the State Lands opportunities and tourist attractions that
Administration currently have any plans for do not exist in the Lisbon Valley area.
recreational development of public lands in Recreation activities include biking, biking,
this area; this is the only area in the region camping, picnicking, horseback riding,
where recreational activities are not rock climbing, fishing, boating, sightseeing,
increasing. (Van Hemert 1996, Stokes and a variety of others. In the winter, these
1996). areas are used for cross-country skiing and
snowmobiling (Multi-Agency Visitors
Regional
. Recreation
. Center 1995).
Public lands north and west of the project

area offer a wide variety of dispersed and
23Sl9&'R33 S11419G(3:47 PM)/RPT/4 3-85

4.0
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
The baseline conditions discussed in of mineral resources from pit backfilling

Section 3.0 would receive impacts from the (i.e., if Alternative 2 is implemented). This
Proposed Action, or the alternatives, as section addresses the potential impacts
. described in Section 2.0, if such are from a geologic standpoint from
approved for implementation. This section implementing the Proposed Action or an
on Environmental Consequences discusses alternative.
these predicted impacts for each of the
resource issues. No specific impact This section also discusses geotechnical
assessment methodology applies to all aspects of potential consequence to the
resources but in general the context, environment that could result from
magnitude, and intensity of the impact is implementing the Proposed Action and
discussed, in quantitative fashion if each of the alternatives, as described in
possible, in accord with NEPA, CEQ and Section 2.3.
BLM guidelines. The analysis therefore
compares and contrasts the impacts among 4.1.2 Proposed Action
alternatives. This section further provides
detail for the impact summary comments 4.1.2.1 Impacts
presented in Table 2-11. Section 4.17
addresses the cumulative impacts of Impacts associated with the
projects in the regional study area by issue. implementation of the Proposed Action
would include the mining of approximately
In many cases, potential impacts are 135,900,000 tons of material: 42,600,000
assessed in two or more resource sections tons of ore and 93,300,000 tons of waste
because they are interrelated; direct rock. Approximately 170,000 tons of
impacts to· one resource result in indirect copper cathode would be produced over
impacts to another resource; e.g., impacts the life-of-mine from the ore. The waste
to soils also affect vegetation and wildlife. rock would be deposited into four waste
rock dumps.
: 4.1 GEOLOGY AND
GEOTECHNICAL ISSUES The mining of this rock and placement of
waste rock and leached ore on the surface
4.1.1 Methodology of the site represent a topographic impact
to the site. The pit areas and waste
Geologic impacts associated with the rocklleach pad areas would encompass
implementation of the Proposed Action or approximately 231 and 706 acres,
alternatives, as noted in Sections 2.2 and respectively.
2.3, respectively, include those related to
the removal of mineral resources; changes Three geotechnical impacts are possible
in topography of the pit, heap leach, and under the Proposed Action: slope failure .
waste rock dump areas; and the covering due to seismic events, exceedance of the
239961R3.4 5/15196(9:12 PM)lRPTI2 4-1
solution pond volume, and leach pad liner Summo considered slope stability during
breach. Each of these matters is discussed the design of the Lisbon Valley Project
in tum below. leach pad. Computer modeling was used
to design slopes that would remain stable
Slope Failure under both static loading conditions and
seismic loading conditions for the area
The failure of a constructed slope can be (Welsh 1996). These measures reduce the
caused by a seismic event occurring in the probability of leach pad failure and
vicinity of the slope. A seismic event could contaminant release.
modify the load structure on the leach pad
beyond the loads carried in a static, or non- Solution Pond Volume Exceedance
seismic, Condition. The factor of safety for
slopes that are stable is at or above 1, During a large precipitation event, solution
which is a ratio of forces that are tending pond volumes would increase over normal
to stabilize the slope to forces that are operating levels. Most of the precipitation
tending to cause movement. A seismic must percolate through the heap ore to
event adds forces to the slope that upsets discharge to ¢e ponds. This percolation
the equilibrium and drives the factor of may attenuate peak flows several days after
safety downward. A slope will fail when a the event has· ended. If the pond system
factor of safety below 1 is reached. does not have the capacity to hold extra
volume such as that produced by a large
A slope failure could have several potential precipitation event, diluted solution may
impacts. Failure of the heap leach pad overtop the ponds and discharge into the
slopes in large magnitude onto surrounding environment. Large spills would discharge
land has the potential to make impacts leach solution into the environment
outside the limits of the leach pad. Impacts contaminating soils, groundwater, flora,
would include possible contamination of and fauna.
soil, flora and fauna by ore that is saturated
with leaching solutions. Small scale slope To avoid damage through solution
failures would likely r~ within the discharge to the environment and loss of
limits of the leach pad and not pose recoverable copper, all solution ponds
environmental impacts. would be sized to accommodate
precipitation volumes that should not be
The potential also exists that the pad lining exceeded in 100 years (Welsh 1996). The
system could fail during earthquakes probability of pond overtopping is then
resulting in a compromise of the lining substantially reduced.
system integrity and opening the possibility
of solution release. Impacts would include Leach Pad Liner Breach
soil contamination from leach solution and
a potential for groundwater contamination. Breaches in the geomembrane liner below
Since the liner is below the heap ore, flora the leach pad could occur in many ways.
and fauna would not be directly impacted. Some of the more common forms are
puncture due to angular rocks against the
liner, machinery above the liner causing
239961R3.4 5115196(9:12 PM)IR.PI'12 4-2

rips or punctures, and incorrectly welded 4.1.2.2 Recommended Mitigation
seams. These forms of liner breach would
have the potential to release leaching The proposed mine plan is premised upon
solution into the environment. This would economic and safety considerations to
contaminate soil and groundwater. Summo allow for a viable mine. The pits must be
has designed the lining system to minimize developed with stable walls to comply with
to the extent feasible puncture of the MSHA requirements and minimize
geomembrane liner from above or below potential risks to mine workers. The
by large, angular rocks. To protect the deposition of waste rock in the four
liner from below, a one-foot layer of designated dumps was designed to allow
natural fine-grained clay material underlain for the efficient mining of ore and,
by an eight-ounce geofabric above a one- secondarily, to mmuruze topographic
foot layer of compacted silt is proposed to impacts. As such, there is no
be installed. To prohibit liner punctures recommended mitigation of geologic
from above, a thin, protective layer of ore impacts.
would be placed over the pad enabling
machinery to move about for ore The geotechnical design proposed for the
placement. Lisbon Valley Project incorporates
appropriate engineering considerations to
Large sheets of geomembrane liner are the maximum extent possible. To ensure
welded together to produce a continuous liner integrity, Summo should commit to a
impermeable lining system. If the welding CQAlQC program during construction
is not performed correctly, leach solutions activities.
could enter the environment. To prevent
this, a construction quality assurance! 4.1.3 No Action Alternative
quality control (CQAlQC) program is
typically implemented to ensure welding Under this alternative, there would be no
integrity during construction and a development of the mineral resources at
continuous lining system. the Lisbon Valley Project and no change in
the topography. (Project development on
Foundation Settling private, or fee, lands only is infeasible.)
Moreover, this alternative would leave
Foundation material in a loose historic mining disturbances unrec1aimed.
(i.e., uncompacted) state would settle The impact under the No Action
under a heap leach pad during and after Alternative is that the opportunity to
loading of the heap with ore. Settlement develop mineral resources, as authorized
below the pad would potentially influence by law, would be foregone on Federal
the drainage of solution ponds, predicted lands. There would be no irreversible or
settlement must be taken into account irretrievable resource commitments under
when performing initial site grading. No this alternative.
environmental impacts would be created by
foundation settling. There would be no impacts from a
geotechnical standpoint under the No
Action Alternative since the facilities (e.g.,
239961R3.4S/15/96(9:12PM)lRPTI2 4-3
heap leach pad) would not be developed. under such a scenario, the copper
In addition, existing waste rock dumps resources that would not be mined during
from previous mining activities would Summo's proposed operations would be
remain on site in a fairly stable, angle-of- covered rendering future development
repose configuration. improbable. Partial backfilling of the pits
would minimize the copper resources to be
4.1.4 Open Pit Backiilling buried but still potentially impact the
Alternative viability of future mineral activity.
4.1.4.1 Impacts 4.1.5 Facility Layout Alternative
The impacts under this alternative would Under this alternative, the geologic impacts
be comparable to the impacts identified or consequences would be the same as the
under the Proposed Action. However, impacts or consequences associated with
under this alternative, the partial or the Proposed Action, except for minor
complete filling of the pits would have topographic variations.
topographic and future development
impacts. The topographic impact would be For geotechnical issues, implementation of
the reduction in the height and areal extent this alternative would result in the
of the waste rock dumps and either the relocation of the waste rock from Waste
partial or complete filling of the pits. The Dump D to Waste Dump C. Waste Dump
future development impact would be that C would be constructed in the manner
development of the currently identified comparable to that under the Proposed
uneconomical copper resources would be Action. The only difference between the
economically prohibitive. Proposed Action and this alternative is that
the areal size of Waste Dump D would be
The geotechnical impacts associated with expanded by approximately 50 acres. As
implementing the Open Pit Backfilling such, the impacts and environmental
Alternative are comparable to the impacts consequences from implementing this
associated with the Proposed Action with alternative from a geotechnical standpoint
one exception. Material from the waste are no different than those under the
dumps would be used to backfill the pits, Proposed Action.
either partially or completely. This would
result in a reduction in the size of the waste 4.1.6 Waste Rock Selective Handling
dumps (i.e., reduction in total height and Alternative
slope length). The reduction in waste
dump size would further reduce any From a geologic and non-geochemistry
impacts that may result from a. seismic standpoint, there would be no change in
event (e.g., further reduce slope failure). the impacts or consequences from the
discussion provided under the Proposed
4.1.4.2 Recommended Mitigation Action. Please refer to Section 4.3
concerning geochemistry impacts
Complete back::filling of the four pits would associated with this alternative.
maximize usable topography. However,
23996'R3.4 SIlSl96(9:12PM)lRPTI2 4-4

Under this alternative, there would also be • The quality of water potentially
no change of the impacts or environmental ponded in the pits following
consequences from a geotechnical operations
standpoint that is different from the • Cumulative impacts of the project
impacts or environmental consequences on future uses of surface water and
under the Proposed Action. groundwater
4.2 HYDROLOGY 4.2.1 Methodology
The primary goals of the water resources Potential impacts to water resources have
impact analysis are to estimate the been estimated using the existing
potential effects of the proposed action on information discussed in Sections 3.1 -
surface water and groundwater quality and Geology, 3.2 - Water Resources, and 3.3 -
quantity. Important water resource issues Geochemistry; and additional information
considered, including those issues from the sources referenced. Existing
identified during the public scoping water quality information, depth to and
meetings and comments submitted are amount of groundwater available, details of
presented below: the Proposed Action and Alternatives,
results of acid-base accounting and
• Depletion of groundwater Method 1312 results, and groundwater
resources due to pit dewatering and modeling studies were used to predict
process water use project impacts.
• Discharge of process waters to the
environment Examples of potential impacts that may be
• Degradation of surface water and detrimental to the environment or: human
groundwater use of water resources include the
• Potential land subsidence from reduction or loss of an existing beneficial
groundwater extraction use of surface water or groundwater
". Potential for spills of process resources; contamination of water
solutions, fuels, antifreeze, and resources to preclude existing or
similar substances reasonable future beneficial uses;
• Potential loss of current uses of degradation of water quality parameters to
surface water and groundwater levels above drinking water standards
• Degradation of ephemeral stream (other than those parameters which
drainages from contaminated currently exceed standards); or loss of
surface water runoff wildlife habitat due to contamination or
• Potential impact to off-site, private loss of resources.
water sources from blasting
operations, groundwater Potential impacts may also be beneficial to
withdrawal, or contamination the environment. An example of a
• Potential water quality impacts beneficial impact would be the "creation of
from the proposed 69 kV additional surface water resources which
transmission line to the project are of sufficient quality and accessibility
239961R3.45/IS/96(9:12PM)lRPTI2 4-5
such that they may potentially be used for Lisbon Valley at year 11 (the conclusion of
irrigation and livest~ck wat~g. mining activities). The model predicts that
drawdown effects would be centered
4.2.2 Proposed Action around the mining pits and decrease away
from the pits.
This section discusses potential direct and
indirect impacts to water resources from Figure 4.2-2 shows the long-term (250
the Proposed Action (Section 2.0), years) steady-state drawdowns in water
highlights committed mitigation, and levels following mining. Water levels are
recommends additional mitigation expected to be approximately 50 feet
measures. higher in the vicinity of the Sentinel Pit and
zero to 25 feet lower in the remainder of
4.2.2.1 Direct and Indirect Impacts the project area (Adrian Brown
Consultants 1996). Most of the
Potential Impacts from Dewatering equilibration of the groundwater system
would occur within the first 50 years after
Under the Proposed Action, the shallow mining (Adrian Brown Consultants 1996).
aquifer would be dewatered in the vicinity
of the mine pits. This dewatering would be The consolidated nature of the aquifer
necessary to allow access to the ore. materials indicates that significant land
Groundwater extracted would be used for subsidence due to groundwater extraction .
process requirements and dust control on would not occur.
project roads. Dewatering would increase
the depth to water in the area, increase the Effects of dewatering would reduce the
costs to extract the remaining groundwater quantity of groundwater available from the
from the aquifer and reduce availability of shallow aquifer in the mine vicinity· during
groundwater in the immediate project area the mining operation and for a period of
(Adrian Brown Consultants 1996). years after mining ceases (Adrian Brown
Consultants 1996). However, the potential
Results by groundwater modeling (Adrian impacts are tempered by the following: 1)
Brown Consultants 1996) indicate that the after mining ceases, the groundwater
net effect of the dewatering operations and recharge rate is expected to increase in the
ponding of water in the pits after mining vicinity of Sentinel Pit No. 1 due to inflow
ceases would be to increase water levels in of ephemeral sUrface water into the pit
the groundwater system near the Sentinel (Adrian Brown Consultants 1996), 2) the
Pit (due to discharge of ephemeral surface shallow aquifer is currently not used for
water flow to the pit, and subsequent any beneficial purposes, and 3) the water
groundwater recharge) and to decrease naturally exceeds the State of Utah
post-mining groundwater levels near the drinking water standards for sulfate, TDS,
Centennial and GTO pits (due to manganese, radionuclides, and other
evaporation of surface water from the pit parameters. Therefore, potential uses of
lakes and subsequent groundwater the water are limited at present and would
discharge to the pits). Figure 4.2-1 shows be similarly limited in the future.
the predicted water level drawdowns in
2399&Rl.4 5115196(9:12 PM)IRPT12 4-6
ELEVATIONS FEU AIlDVE SEA LEVEL
CIlNTlIUR lHTERVAL eo FEET
o 1000 em,
FlIT Job No. : 23996 PREDICTED GROUNDWATER
Prepared by : C.H.P D'RAWDOWN, YEAR II
c!;
m SOURCE: ADRIAN BROWN CONSULTANTS" INC. 1996 Date : 4/1/96 LISBON VALLEY COPPER PROJECT
FIG. '4.2-1
Job No. : 23996 PREDICTED POST MINING
STEADY-STATE GROUNDWATER
~ Prepared by: C.H.P DRAWDOWN
mL-__________________________________
co SOURCE: ADRIAN BROWN CONSULTANTS, INC. 1996 Date:
------~~------~~
4/1/96 __ __________________________
~
LISBON VALLEY COPPER PROJECT ~

Dewatering of the shallow aquifer would Dolores River itself Information obtained
likely not impact the flow of the two from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS
known springs sampled in the area. Lisbon 1992) suggests that the average annual
Spring is fed from shallow waters in the discharge in the Dolores River in the
Burro Canyon Formation north of the vicinity of the confluence with McIntyre
Sentinel Pit at a topographically higher Canyon for the periods of 1985-1992 is
elevation than the shallow aquifer. Huntley about 115,835 acre-ftlyear. As a
Spring is fed from water which emerges percentage of this river discharge, the
from the Cutler Formation on the slopes of discharge potentially lost due to
Three Step Hill at an elevation much higher dewatering during mining is about 1
than the top of the Burro Canyon aquifer percent, and the discharge potentially lost
near the pits. The source of recharge to following mining due to pit water
these two springs is likely not connected to evaporation is about 0.02 percent. These
the shallow Burro Canyon Formation potential reductions would not result in
aquifer in the project area. Therefore, there adverse impacts to flows in the Dolores
would be no impacts to the water quality River.
or quantity of springs that are located
topographically higher than the proposed Potential Impacts from Leaching and
pits (e.g., Lisbon and Huntley Springs). Processing Operations
Dewatering during mining, and loss of Groundwater extracted from the shallow
shallow aquifer groundwater following aquifer would be used for leaching and
mining, are not expected to result in processing copper-bearing fluids in the
adverse impacts to flows in the Dolores SXlEW facility. The leaching and
River. The maximum groundwater processing operations are proposed as
extraction rate predicted to occur during continuous-recycle systems; therefore,
the mining activities is about 1,450 acre- minimal discharge of process waters to the
ft/year (Table 2-6), which occurs during environment would occur. Although there
start-up of GTO Pit activities in Year 5 would be some losses of process water to
(Adrian Brown Consultants 1996). The the atmosphere -due to evaporation of the
results of groundwater modeling indicate water sprayed on the leach pad ore, loss of
the long-term net loss of shallow process water to the subsurface
groundwater associated with evaporation environment is not expected because the
of pit lake water from the Centennial and leach pad would be lined and monitored for
leaks as described in Section 2.2.4.2. After
GTO Pits following completion of mining
mining and leaching operations cease, the
would be about 24 acre-feet/year (Adrian
leach piles would be reclaimed by covering
Brown Consultants 1996). Although them with a low permeability soil cover, as.
groundwater extraction during mining and described in Section 2.2.11.2. During
long-term losses of shallow groundwater leaching operations, surface drainage
following mining could potentially result in within the footprint area of the leach pad
decreased discharges of" groundwater to would be contained and routed to the PLS
the Dolores River, the quantity of such pond. A system of surface water diversion
decreases is insignificant when compared structures would route natural stormwaters
to the quantity of discharge within the around the leach pad and into the existing
239961R3.4 S/ISI96(9:12PM)lRPTI2 4-9
· drainage channel that flows into Lisbon currently exceeds drinking water standards
Canyon. This diversion system would for sulfate and several metals, and is
maintain the natural flows in the canyon currently not used for any purpose.
during mining activities and would likely
not result in notable increases or decreases Potential Impacts from the Use of
in ephemeral surface water flows in Lisbon Groundwater for Dust Control
Canyon (see panoramic view of mouth of
Lisbon Canyon, Figure 4.2-3). Stormwater The groundwater extracted from the'
, retention ponds would also receive sh~ow aquifer :would be used for d~st
overflow from the raffinate and PLS suppression on the haul roads and could
ponds. This water would be pumped back contain low levels of radionuclides, based
into the raffinate pond and used as makeup on existing analyses (Section 3.2.3.3).
water for .the system. The ditches and Radiological analyses of the groundwater
ponds would be designed to contain runoff samples collected in October 1994 reveal
from a 100-year, 24-hour storm event. that the elevated gross alpha and gross beta
radiation is likely due to radium and
Accidental spills of leaching solutions from uranium isotopes. Since the groundwater
the leach pad, SXlEW facility, or for dust control would likely come from
conveyance structures could potentiaIly new production wells and possibly from
migrate to surface water drainages or the existing monitoring wells, water quality
groundwater. If such a spill were to occur, analyses from wells SLV3, MW2A,
the low pH and high sulfate and metal SLVIA, and test hole 95Rl are
contents of the leaching solutions could representative of the quality of water which
potentially contaminate the drainages or would be used for dust control. The gross
groundwater. The impacts to surface water alpha and gross beta results for samples
resources would be a lowering of pH and from these wells are quite variable (Table
transport of additional sulfate and metals in 3.2-3). Average values for the combined
the stormwaters leaving the site through sample results for these parameters for the
Lisbon Canyon. The potential for such wells listed ~bove (excluding one
spills is diminished by the operational! anomalously high sample for well MW2A,
mitigation measures committed to by the which is associated with very high total
applicant. suspended solids) are 154 pCiIl for gross
alpha and 189 pCiIl for gross beta. These
The potential for adverse impacts to values are above the primary drinking
groundwater would depend on the release water standards of 15 pCiIl for gross alpha
of a sufficient quantity of leaching solution and 8 pCiIl for gross beta (Utah DEQ
to reach groundwater. Potential impacts 1994). An EPA standard for total uranium
could include lowering of pH, and in uranium mill waters is 0.044 mgll
transport of sulfate and dissolved metals to (Moten 1996). However, according to the
and within groundwater. In the case of a staff contacted in the agencies listed in
small release (either a small spill or a small Section 3.2.3.3, and a communication from
quantity leak), the potential for adverse the Department of Energy to BLM
impacts would be mitigated by the natural (Cornish 1996), no standards exist for road
buffering and adsorptive potential of the watering or other industrial uses of water
native soils underlying the facilities. It is containing elevated levels of radionuclides.
also noted that natural groundwater
239961R3.4 SIlSl96(9:12PM)IRPT12 4-10
Figure 4.2-3. Panoramic view of mouth of Lisbon Canyon, looking west, showing proposed sites of
Sentinel No. 1 Pit (left foreground) and temporary
diversion structure (along canyon wall in middleground).
239961R3.4 5113/96(4:08 PM)IRI'T/2 4-11
-
\.>
For comparison with other area projects, environments. In summary, such
groundwater used for processing at the Rio radionuclide effects are expected to be
Algom Lisbon Mine to the north of the minimal on surface soils, sediments, and
project site contains radionuclide groundwater downstream of the haul roads
concentrations up to 40,000 pCiII in Lisbon Canyon, and to therefore have
(Gochnour 1996b). Use of the shallow little or no effect on vegetation and wildlife
aquifer groundwater for dust suppression in that vicinity.
could potentially lead to temporary
exposures to natuJ:ally occurring Potential. Impacts to Surface Water and
radionuclides such as radon. However, Groundwater Quality
modeling of the potential radon exposure
(Cornish 1996) shows that exposure to Existing water quality in the shallow
workers from the application of aquifer is generally poor, with elevated
groundwater to roads for dust control concentrations of certain metals, sulfate,
would be on the order of 20 times less than and IDS. Potential adverse impacts to
the occupational dose limit of 5 REM. groundwater quality would be expected to
Exposure to the general public using the be limited because of the closed water-
roads in the project area would be processing systems proposed, spill
substantially less. Therefore, it is expected mitigation measures committed to by the
that no health hazard would occur to applicant, and the low acid:'generating
workers or the general public from the use potential of the rock materials.
of groundwater for dust control.
No potential impacts to groundwater
Potential impacts to surface water quality or quantity would be expected in
drainages and groundwater from use of the deeper aquifer in the Navajo
groundwater for dust control are also Formation. The ore to be mined for this
related to naturally elevated concentrations project is contained within the Dakota and
of radionuclides in the groundwater. Burro Canyon Formations. Mining in the
Stormwater runoff of sediment-laden water proposed pits would extend only to the
could transport the radionuclides (bound to base of the Burro Canyon Formation,
the sediments) to surface water drainages which is several hundred feet above the top
and then down those drainages. Infiltration of the deeper aquifer.
of radionuclide contaminated dust control
water into surficial soil could result in Surface water flow is ephemeral, occurring
transport of radionuclides to groundwater. in on-site drainages only during and
However, transport of radionuclides immediately after storm events. There is
through the vadose zone to groundwater is limited use of surface water in the project
unlikely to occur due to the low mobility of area, and aquatic organisms are lacking in
radionuclides in soll. Radionuclides have a the drainages. Potential impacts to surface
high affinity for adsorption to soil particles water quality can occur as a result of leach
and generally can only move in the pad liner or containment failure, or runoff
subsurface via colloidal processes, which of water from waste rock piles. The
are not generally effective in transporting potential for these impacts to surface water
contaminants in most subsurface quality to occur is low because the leach
~'R3.4 5I15196(9:12PM)/RPTJ2 4-12
pad liner and containment systems are The ultimate diversion of Lisbon Valley
designed to minimize the potential for surface water flows into the Sentinel No.1
failure, and waste rock piles' will be Pit following mining activities would result
designed to minimize the potential for in the elimination of ephemeral surface.
surface water run-on to or runoff from the water flow from Lisbon Valley into Lisbon
waste piles. Canyon (again, see Figure 4.2-3). The
quantity of natural ephemeral surface water
Results of acid-base accounting tests reveal flows down Mcintyre Canyon would not
that 21 percent of the samples tested be affected, and would continue
(which represent about 10 percent of the throughout and following mining activities.
total volume of waste rock to be placed in
the dumps) were potentially acid- The diversion of ephemeral surface water
generating (see Section 4.3.2). Generation flow from Lisbon Valley into the Sentinel
of acid could mobilize certain metals from Pit following mining activities would not
the dumps. However, results of Method result in a significant reduction in flows
1312 Synthetic Precipitation Leaching within the Dolores River because the
Procedure tests (McClelland Laboratories, quantity of diverted surface flow is
Inc. 1996), which used sulfuric acid to insignificant compared to the quantity of
simulate geochemical conditions that can flow in the Dolores River. Based on
develop in mine wastes exposed to the infonnation • obtained from the U.S.
environment, indicate that only aluminum Geological Survey (USGS 1992), the
and iron would be leachable from the mine average annual discharge in the Dolores
wastes. Accordingly, the runoff could RiveI' at the point where it intersects
potentially stain drainages with iron Coyote Wash (where the Lisbon Valley
compounds, and perhaps have impacts on surface flow would have entered the
vegetation, but would not cause any Dolores River in the absence of mining) is
substantial impact. about 209,950 acre-ftlyear. The quantity
of ephemeral surface water flow from
Potential Impacts to Water Uses Lisbon Valley that would be diverted into
the Sentinel Pit at the conclusion of mining
Currently, limited beneficial uses exist for is 177 acre-ftlyear. An annual probability-
water resources in the project area. Surface weighted runoff approach was used which
waters in the Lower Lisbon Valley area are established the annual runoff volume of
occasionally impounded and used for 0.35 inches applied to a drainage basin·area
livestock watering by several ranchers of 9.5 square miles resulting in 177 acre-
(Section 4.8). Because of restricted feet (Adrian Brown Consultants 1996).
access, the Proposed Action would This annual volume of 177 acre/ftlyear
temporarily reduce the availability of water represents about 0.08 percent of the
for grazing purposes in the immediate area discharge in the Dolores River.
of the mining operations, but ephemeral
su:rface water could be impounded
elsewhere in the valley.
23996JR3.4 S/ISI96(9;12PM)lRPTI2 4-13

A district-wide riparian inventory including Potential Impacts to Water Supply Near
the Lisbon Canyon and East Coyote Wash Summit Point
stream cbannels, was conducted in 1990
(Younker et al.). No riparian areas or Several people are interested in building
aquatic organisms that would be dependent homes approximately six miles south of the
on the ephemeral flows through Lisbon project site, in Section 20, T 31 S, R 26 E,
Canyon were found, therefore there would near Summit Point. These people attended
be no substantial impacts to those the public meeting in Moab and expressed
resources as a result of a reduction of concern about project impacts to water
flows following mine closure. supplies, as the homes would draw water:
for domestic use from groundwater
:Mining would create three surface water sources. The proposed location of these
bodies as the pits fill with water following homes is to the west of the Lisbon Fault,
mining activities (Figure 4.2-4). The water which appears to act as a barrier to
quality in these pit lakes is expected to be groundwater flow (Adrian Brown
potentially alkaline (PH probably 8.0 or Consultants 1996) and would thus separate
greater), with elevated sulfate and the area of the proposed homes from
dissolved solids concentrations (Adrian potential water quality impacts in the mine
Brown Consultants 1996). Analyses of area. The area near the proposed homes is
other natural lakes and pits from the underlain by the Dakota Formation, which
Colorado Plateau region and the Great overlies the ore-bearing Burro Canyon
Basin suggest that the post-mining pit lake Formation. The base of the underlying
waters will undergo evapoconcentration, Burro Canyon Formation in the area of the
causing concentrations of some metal proposed homes is at approximately 6,900
oxyanions to increase (BLM 1996d, Miller feet elevation. The elevation of the base of
et al. 1996; Hamp et al. 1995). Such the Burro Canyon Formation in the
increases may degrade existing shallow Centennial and GTO Pit areas ranges from
groundwater quality. However, these approximately 6,000 to 6,200 feet.
waters presently have no beneficial uses. Therefore, if the source of the well water
These lakes could constitute a useful for these homes is the Burro Canyon
addition to the water resources of the Formation, then the water, would come
valley, as they could potentially provide from a higher elevation and would likely
water for irrigation and livestock watering have no connection with that at the project
depending upon future quality. No site. It is also possible that the domestic
beneficial use is currently planned, wells would need to be drilled to the
however. Groundwater from the shallow Entrada or Navajo Formations in this area.
aquifer system within the project site Neither of these formations would be
vicinity is currently not used for any impacted by project operations. In
purpose. addition, data presented in Section 3.2
demonstrate that the rocks on the west side
of the Lisbon Fault are hydraulically
isolated from the 'shallow aquifer in the
Centennial and GTO Pit areas. Since the
home sites are approximately six miles
23996JR3.4 SIlSJSl6(9:12PM)lRPTI2 4-14

DEWATERING CASE- 0.35- RUNOFF TO SENTINEL PIT, DYNAMIC STORAGE
WATER AND PIT ELEVATIONS OVER TIME
~v
I II I I
I
l\
\ i"..
I
I
1\\ 1\ II i
I
•
.I I
i I1
.vv
63vv
\'"
+-.. ~ •
\~ I
I I! 1
1
I !
I
!
I,, I. ··
!
!
!
,! I
i> i I ! I
I I 1\\ 1\ I I
i
I \ i!.
! j
z
o i i
!
i 1
i
i i
i
I, !
I i
I \,
I
i
I
~
it
....
w 61vv
~
t
j
;.~
'"~
+,
I
tt; I
\
''\.\1'
!"
-',
,I
I
!
i
i
1n i
!
•
i
i
~
!~ i
I ·1
!
! !
·
I
!
·i
i
..::i-
,
i
.:.
i '.J .
~j
! , ,
~~~ I
i !
1
, i ~i I• ~
6000
~ ,.
!~
i !\~.
, ·
I I
I
I tl1 iA\i i
......-7 I I I
! ~ ill
5900
i ~
i i
! , i
j
I I xJ ! I il
lE
.~
i
i
i, i
I
I
!
i
1 .
i f'-..: .: ? :
~ 1-f
I i
,I i
I I ~ :
~.
~v I
o
!
,I
1
1
i
i
i
!
:
2
,
i
i
I
3
I
I
4
! i I
5
'
I
6'
I
7
!
i
8
'--...
i
.!
9 10
il
I. - - .!
•
11
i
i
12
!!
I
13 14
i!
I
I
I
15 16
I
T
17
i
i
T
18
i
,,
i
·
19 ·20
~
I
YEARS SINCE MINING STARTED '
---GTOPIT *" CENTENNIAL PIT -2r- SENTINEL PIT

- - - GTO WATER *- CENTENNIAL WATER -2r- SENTINEL WATER
PIT NAME: GTO CENTENNIAL SENTINEL

Pre-mining Ground Elevation (ft) 6480 6440 6460 '
Original water table elevation (ft) 6150 6188 6200
Final pit floor elevation (ft) 5880 6060 5960
Predicted final water level elevation (ft) 6127 6166 6249
Depth of floor below predicted pool surfaC:,e.itt) 247 ,~O6 289
. ,
NOTE: FINAL WATER lEVEl ELEVATIONS IN TABLE ARE HIGHER THAN THOSE SHOWN ON CHART
SINCE CHART ONlY PROJECTS TO YEAR 20; WATER lEVaS WIlL CONTINUE TO RISE
SLOWlY OVER TIME.
SOURCE: ADAPTED FROM ADRIAN BROWN CONSULTANTS, INC. 1996

Job No. ': ,23996 HEAD AND SURFACE ELEVATIONS
AT EACH PIT OVER TIME
Prepared by : G.J. W.
LISBON VAllEY COPPER PROJECT
Dote: 4/1/96
FIG. 4.2-4
4-/5
south of the project area, blasting With respect to the Dolores River, the
operations in the GTO Pit would be impacts of increased sedimentation from
unlikely to cause any disturbance to the the Lower Lisbon Valley following mining
groundwater regime in the area of the are not expected to result in adverse
proposed home building. Therefore, no impacts to the Dolores River. This is
impacts are expected to the quantity or because the area of land to be disturbed
quality of water available for domestic uses during mining is insignificant when
in the area of the proposed homes. compared to the area of the entire drainage
basin that provides sediment to the Dolores
Potential Increases in Erosion and River. Based on infonnation obtained
Sedimentation from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS
1992), the drainage basin area that
The mining operations would result in provides sediment to the Dolores River
disturbance to 1,103 acres. Disturbed areas upstream of the river's intersection with
would consist of bare soil and rock, haul McIntyre Canyon (where the Lower
roads, waste rock dumps, topsoil Lisbon Valley sediment enters the Dolores
stockpiles, spent leach pad materials, and River) is estimated to be about 1,134
process area facilities. Stonnwater runoff square miles (725,760 acres). The total
from the disturbed areas could potentially area to be disturbed as a result of mining
result in an increase in sedimentation to the (including the area within the Lisbon
ephemeral drainages in Lisbon Valley, Valley, which would not introduce
Lisbon Canyon, Lower Lisbon Valley, sediment to the Dolores River following
McIntyre Canyon, and Coyote Wash. mining) is 1,103 acres, which is about 0.2
Stonnwater and sediment control measures percent of the total Dolores River drainage
would be implemented during mining by basin area. Thus, the amount of sediment
the applicant to mitigate this effect, as introduced from the mining area, although
discussed in Section 4.2.2.2. Following increased from pre-mining levels, is likely
completion of mining and discontinuance to be very small when compared to the
of mitig~on measures, an increase in amount of sediment produced from the
sedimentation is likely in the lower Lisbon remainder of the Dolores River drainage
Valley, McIntyre Canyon, and portions of basin.
the Lisbon Valley in the disturbed area
upstream of the Sentinel Pit. In the case of Because ephemeral surface water flows
Lisbon Canyon and Coyote Wash, which from the Lisbon Valley would be diverted
are downstream of the Sentinel Pit, less into the Sentinel Pit at the conclusion of
sediment would reach those drainages mining, creating a waterfall into the pit
following mining because of the diversion during and immediately following stonn
of upstream ephemeral surface water flows events, the profile of drainages upstream of
(and associated sediment) into the- Sentinel the pit would be affected. It is expected
Pit. Because the aforementioned drainages that increased erosion and downcutting
do not support aquatic organisms, the would occur in the area upstream of the pit
increase in sedimentation in the ephemeral as the ephemeral streams attempt to
drainages is not expected to result in an reestablish the original stream profile
adverse impact to those drainages. (Figure 4.2-5).
239961R3.4 SIlSl96(9:33 PM)lRPTI2 4-16

. ,~"
,- >' " > ~. ;., ,
. Figure 4.2-5 Existing erosion and downcutting in vicinity of the proposed leach pad and
facility area, just upstr~ from the mouth of Lisbon Canyon.
239961R3.4 5/13/95(4:08 Plv:I)I.RPTl2 4-17

While the increased sedimentation this waste rock and bench from the GTQ
produced by this erosion and downcutting Pit, eliminating this source of sulfate and
would not affect Lisbon Canyon, Coyote radionuclides to the pit water (Figure
Wash, or the Dolores River because all of 4.2-6).
the sediment would be transported into the
pit, the erosion process would result in the Each of the proposed pits would intercept
loss of sediment and the formation of groundwater in the shallow aquifer during
gullies and/or canyons upstream of the pit. mining, and hence, would contain lakes
It is possible that this erosion could result following the conclusion of mining
in the destabilization of the reclaimed heap activities. Although the Centennial and
leach pad, waste dumps, and roads in GTO Pit lakes would undergo a net loss of
Lisbon Valley. water to evaporation, resulting in a net
inflow of groundwater to the pits, pit water
Post-Mining Pit Water Quality outflow to the shallow aquifer could still
occur, leading to potential downgradient
Under current conditions, water is migration of contaminants. Therefore,
intennittently ponded in the Centennial and impacts to groundwater surrounding and
GTQ Pits as a result of precipitation into downgradient of the pits could be
those pits. The quality of this expected. The Sentinel Pit No.1 would
intermittently ponded water is represented receive ephemeral surface water inflow
by analyses given in Table 3.2-1. The from the Lisbon Valley, which is predicted
quality of water ponded in the Centennial to result in a net groundwater recharge
Pit in August 1995 met Utah drinking condition, with pit lake water moving into
water standards for all parameters the surrounding shallow aquifer. The
measured except gross beta, and was of quality of surface water which would enter
better quality than groundwater in the area. the pit is expected to be good based on
chemical analyses of water in stock ponds
Water intennittently ponded in the GTO which collect surface flows in Lisbon
Pit has not been sampled, but may be of Valley. Therefore, the water quality in the
poorer quality than that in the Centennial Sentinel Pit is expected to be relatively
Pit. This is expected because historic good because of the influence of surface
uranium mining operations exist on the water runoff into the pit, and the acid-
flanks of Three Step Hill, adjacent to the neutralizing potential of the pit wall rocks
GTO Pit. Water ponded on uranium waste (Adrian Brown Consultants 1996). As a
rock from the Continentallvfine located on result; adverse impacts to groundwater
a bench on the south side of the GTQ Pit surrounding the Sentinel Pit are not
has been sampled twice (Table 3.2-3) and expected.
contains the highest concentrations of
radionuclides and sulfate of any water Some acid-generating lithologies may be
sampled on site. Storm events could exposed in the Centennial and GTQ Pit
potentially lead to runoff from this area walls by mining (Section 4.3). However,
into the GTQ Pit, impacting water in the overall the pit wall rocks would have a net
pit. The Proposed Action would remove acid-neutra1izing capability; therefore, it is
4-18
Figure 4.2-6 Current condition of GTO Pit (the deepest historic pit in the area) with
evaporites from flow off bench area shown as lighter-colored material in pit
bottom.
239961.R.3.4 S/13/96(4:08PM)lRPTI2 4-19

expected that pit lake water would be of references in discussion of Potential
neutral to basic pH (Adrian Brown Impacts to Water Uses).
Consultants 1996). Based on a review of
the groundwater quality and the nature of Proposed Action - Case 2 - No Post-
the materials exposed in the pit walls, it is Mining Recbarge of Surface Water to
expected that the principal dissolved Groundwater at the Sentinel Pit
constituents in the pit lake water would be
"sulfate, chloride, sodium, and calcium. Under this scenario, the estimated 177
The GTO Pit, in particular, may contain acre-feet of surface water discharge to the
high sulfate levels. Sentinel Pit, and subsequent recharge to
the shallow aquifer, would not occur (i.e.,
Following completion of mining, salinity in there would be maintenance of a
the Centennial Pit and GTO Pit lake water pennanent stormwater diversion around
is expected to slowly increase over time the Sentinel Pit - see Recommended
due to evaporation of pit water and Mitigation below). This alternative was
concentration of dissolved constituents. essentially modeled as Case 2 in the Lisbon
The rate of salinity increase in the Valley Project Hydrogeologic Evaluation
Centennial Pit is estimated to be 59 Report, Appendix 2 (Adrian Brown
mglL/year, the rate of salinity increase in Consultants 1996). It was modeled to
the GTO Pit is estimated to be 31 allow Summo the best estimate of mine
mglL/year (Adrian Brown Consultants). water supply for process and mining needs,
Also, the use of ANFO for blasting in the and further assumed the water levels
pits could produce elevated nitrates, around the pits would be drawn down by
ammonia, and dissolved or total organic wells prior to mining, to supply water for
carbon as a result of residues from blasting project needs. From that modeling effort,
operations. depths of water in the pits during the post-
mining period would be 182 feet in the
Inosummary, post-mining water quality for GTO Pit; 110 feet in the Sentinel and no
the Sentinel Pit is expected to be suitable lake development at the Centennial Pit.
for livestock and wildlife use, because of The pit lakes essentially reach equilibrium
the dilution from surface water runoff. within 10 years after cessation of mining
The post-mining water quality for the other although complete eqWhorium is not
two pits is likely to gradually degrad~ due reached for many years.
to evapoconcentration processes,
becoming progressively more alkaline (PH The resulting depths in modeled Case 2,
greater than 8.0). As a result, the assuming no recharge at the Sentinel Pit,
concentrations of TDS and component compare to 247 feet in the GTO pit; 289
constituents, sulfate, and some metal feet in the Sentinel pit and 106 feet in the
oxyaruons would likely increase, possibly Centennial pit assuming 177 acre-feet of
degrading existing shallow groundwater surface water go to groundwater recharge
quality surrounding and downgradient of through the Sentinel Pit, as presented
the Centennial and GTO pit lakes (see previously for the Proposed Action.
2J996,'R3.4 snSJ96(9:12PM)lRPTI2 4-20

Impacts to groundwater quality would be area. Spills of vehicle fuels or kerosene
similar to that discussed for Post-Mining could also potentially lead to petroleum
Pit Water Quality (Section 4.2.2.1) with contamination of surface water drainages,
the exception that there would be no water which might then be transported off site
in the Centennial Pit and water quality in during runoff events. However, the
the Sentinel Pit would probably be poorer committed mitigation measures, described
than predicted for the 177 acre-feet of later, make the spills of significant
recharge case. The water quality would quantities of petroleum products unlikely.
likely be poorer because there would be no
introduction of expected good quality Potential Impacts from Power Line
surface water into the Sentinel Pit to dilute Construction
evapo-concentrated constituents.
A 69 kV power line would be constructed
Post-mining groundwater levels in the to the site as discussed in Section 2.2.7.
shallow aquifer within the project area Potential impacts to water resources from
would also be lower than post-mining power line construction include increased
levels with 177-acre-feet of annual runoff from disturbed areas and increased
recharge to the groundwater system. For sedimentation of surface water courses.
example, groundwater levels in the vicinity However, there are no pereimial streams
of the GTO Pit would be approximately 70 along the proposed power line corridor. A
feet lower than with the 177 acre-feet of study by Permits West (1995) identified no
recharge case (Adrian Brown Consultants impacts from the proposed transmission
1996; Figures A-16 and A-29; Appendix line with the employment of the committed
2). mitigation measures proposed for the
power line construction.
Potential Impacts from Accidental Spills
4.2.2.2 Committed and Recommended
Accidental spills of diesel and unleaded fuel Mitigation Measures
from haul trucks and other mine vehicles,
kerosene and reagents from the SXlEW Recall that the 'following are committed
facility, and leaching solutions from the mitigation measures described in Section
leach pad, PLS pond, and raffinate pond 2.0. All leaching facilities (pad, conveyance
could result in adverse impacts to . corridors, diversion ditches, and solution
groundwater. The great depth to storage ponds) would be lined to minimize
groundwater (i.e., typically 200 to 300 the potential for leakage to groundwater.
feet) would make contamination of The details of the lining system are
groundwater resources by spills of these contained in Section 2.2.4.2. The leach pad
materials unlikely, except in the area of system would contain all fluids, including
monitoring well SLV2, where the depth to stonnwater which falls on the pad area,
groundwater is' approximately 83 feet and and route them to the storage ponds.
infiltration to the aquifer through the valley Solution would be applied to the heap by
:fill sediments is possible. Groundwater drip methods during most times, reducing
from the valley :fill sediments, although not the amount of spray from the facility.
potable, is the highest quality of any in the Solution collection pipes would reduce 'the
239961R3.4511SI96(9:12PM)JRPT12 4-21
head of the percolating leach pad solutions, Canyon would be unaffected by the
further minimizing the potential for diversion structure at the Sentinel Pit.
seepage through the liner system. The
diversion ditches and pond system would To reduce the potential for increased
be engineered to contain the design storm sedimentation to surface water courses
of 3.4 inches of precipitation in 24 hours. along the proposed power line, installation
The leak detection system would be would be performed from existing
monitored to detect leakage from the roadways, trails, seismic tracks, and the '
, storage ponds. Reclamation of waste piles right-of way. Neither the access nor right-
and other exposed surfaces would proceed of-way would be bladed.' Trucks would be
throughout the project as feasible and at towed to the pole positions by backhoe if
the end of mining. Waste rock dumps they could not be driven there.
would be contoured to prevent water from
ponding on them, thus reducing the To address the potential for spills of fuels
infiltration of water into the dumps. This and hazardous materials, a spill prevention
would reduce the potential production of plan would be prepared in conjunction with
acid drainage from them. Reclamation federal, state, and local officials. This 'plan
procedures are descnbed in Sections would detail the procedures for storage
2.2.11.1 and 2.2.1 1.2. These measures and use of hazardous materials, fuels, and
would reduce potential impacts to surface process solutions. The vehicle maintenance
water and groundwater resources resulting shop would be constructed with a waste
from release ofleaching fluids or migration sump to contain spills of fuels and solvents
of acid runoff to the environment. used.
Committed mitigation measures that would In addition to the committed mitigation

be employed during mining to prevent measures discussed above, the following
accelerated erosion of surface water mitigation measures are recommended.
drainages and increased sedimentation are One or more test boreholes are
discussed' in Section· 2.2.11.1. A recommended to' evaluate the lithology and
stormwater management plan would also depth to groundwater in the area
be prepared to address .drainage problems downgradient of the proposed leach pad.
in disturbed areas. This plan includes the Downgradient monitoring wells could also
design for a flood diversion structure be installed in the test boreholes (if
around the Sentinel No.1 Pit and Waste necessary) to monitor potential impacts to
Dump D during mining operations. This groundwater from the leach pad during
diversion structure would maintain natural mining operations, if groundwater is
storm flows into Lisbon c.anyon from encountered at a reasonably shallow depth.
Lisbon valley during the mining activities If water wells are developed on public
(Figure 4.2-3). Following mining, water land, and need to be 3:bandoned, then BLM
would be allowed to discharge into the should be contacted to ensure that the
Sentinel }>it, which would eliminate flows appropriate plugging, procedures are
into Lisbon Canyon from the Lisbon followed that are protective of the natural
Valley. Surface water inflows m the environment. Testing of sludges from the
Lower Lisbon Valley and McIntyre solution storage ponds should be
239961R3.4 SIlSl96(9:12PM)lRPTI2 4-22
performed prior to final reclamation to • Partial backfilling of the Sentinel pit
evaluate disposal methods. The above- to reduce the magnitude of long-
ground storage tanks at the fuel storage term down cutting and erosion.
facility should be surrounded by a berm • Maintaining the stormwater
capable of containing 110% of the volume diversion permanently around the
of the largest tank. Sentinel Pit is another option that
could be considered. Constructing
The proposed plan of operations calls for and maintaining a permanent
construction and maintenance of a diversion would minimize the
stormwater diversion ditch around the potential erosion problems
northern edge of the Sentinel Pit to route discussed above and would provide
stormwater down Lisbon Canyon during ephemeral surface water flow down
mining operations. During the post-mining Lisbon Canyon as it was during
period, the diversion would be re-routed to pre-mmmg. Maintaining a
allow stormwater runoff to enter the permanent diversion in perpetuity
Sentinel Pit precluding ephemeral surface could be problematic.
water flow down Lisbon Canyon (i.e., from • A :fifth option would entail
the area(s) upstream of the Sentinel Pit). complete back:fi11ing of the Sentinel
Pit with waste rock and r~
Potential impacts from the above scenario establishment of the surface water
could include extensive erosion in the drainage across the backfilled pit
drainages upstream of the Sentinel Pit as and down Lisbon Canyon.
these streams seek re-establishment of
streambed gradients into the pit. Potential impacts from this option include
Topographic relief of several hundred feet potential leaching of certain metals and
from the valley floor to the bottom of the sulfate from waste rock into groundwater
pit would exist initially and severe further degrading water quality of the
downcutting into the pit wall and upstream shallow aquifer. The loss of the Sentinel
would occur as the pit fills unless Pit Lake would occur, thus eliminating this
engineered structures are put in place to surface water body for possible future
IIllIllIIllZe erosion. Potential mitigation beneficial uses.
measures for the above scenario include:
4.2.3 No Action Alternative
• A lined concrete stream channel
near the pit and concrete apron or Under the No Action Alternative, mining
spillway constructed down the pit would not take place on the property. The
wall to prevent downcutting from extraction of copper for beneficial uses
stormwater cascading to the would not occur, and the resource would
bottom of the pit. remain undeveloped. Existing groundwater
• Installation of a pipe from the quality would remain as described in
drainage at the valley floor to the Section 3.2.2. Groundwater would
bottom of the pit to route continue to be available for industrial
stormwater into the pit without purposes in its current volume and quality.
downcutting effects. Erosion of surface water drainages from
23996IR.3.4 SllSI95(9:12PM)lRPTI2 4-23
intense thunderstorm events would vicinity of the backfilled pits as compared
continue. A number of waste rock piles to the proposed action, in which the pits
currently exist on site from previous are left open, pit water evaporates, and
mining operations. These piles currently water levels are low. Evapo-concentration
oontain some acid-generating materials, but resulting in elevated concentrations of
do not appear to be releasing acid mine IDS, sulfate and other potential metal
drainage to the environment in a notable oxyanions would not occur.
way (e.g., no iron staining is noted in
ephemeral stream courses, and no toxic Potential impacts to surface water from
effects to wildlife have been observed). acid drainage from the pit walls would also
Under the No Action Alternative, these be reduced or eliminated However, the
piles would not be reclaimed. In addition, unconsolidated waste rock material used to
the pit lakes would not be created and backfill the pits would be more susceptible
would not enhance surface water resources to leaching of metals than undisturbed rock
in the valley. because of the increase in surface area
exposed to infiltrating precipitation. This
4.2.4 Open Pit Backidling could, under certain conditions, result in
Alternative migration of metals from the waste rock
into groundwater within and downgradient
Two scenarios for this alternative have of the pits. Results of Method 1312
been developed: partial backfilling and leaching tests performed on samples ..
complete backfilling of the pits. Waste representative of waste rock indicate that
rock would be used to backfill the pits. the waste rock could potentially-:' leaql.L. . :
Partial backfilling would fill the pits to aluminum and iron under acidic leaching
above the level of ponded water, if any. conditions. This could lead to increases in
Complete backfilling would fill the pits to concentrations of these metals in
the surrounding ground level. groundwater within and downgradient of
the pits. Secondary drinking water
4.2.4.1 Direct and Indirect Impacts standards have been promulgated for both
metals_ These metals are not toxic but can
The impacts to surface water and cause taste problems and staining of
groundwater resources from both scenarios plumbing fixtures. Hoy/ever, results of
of Alternative 2 would be nearly the same static testing of waste rock samples
as for the proposed action. Backfilling of indicate that only approximately 10 percent
the pits, either partially or fully, would of the waste rock volume would be capable
result in a reduced quantity of waste rock of producing acidic solutions, and thus
remaining in the piles following mining. creating the conditions necessary to leach
Backfilling would also cover the potentially aluminum and iron from the waste rock as
acid-generating materials exposed in the pit predicted by the 1312 analyses. Because
walls (Scenario 2), and cover any water the remainder of the waste rock volume
ponded in the pits. Covering of the water has a net acid-neutralizing capacity, it is
in the pits will reduce or eliminate expected that no acid solutions will be
evaporation of the pit water; therefore, produced in the backfilled pits, and hence,
groundwater levels will be higher in the
239961R3.4 SIlS/Sl6(9:12PM)IR.PT12 4-24
leaching of aluminum and Iron will be therefore, no degradation of Lisbon
minimal. Canyon from acid drainage from waste
dump D would occur. Waste dump D·
On the other hand, as discussed in Section (Figure 2-1) would not block the
3.3.3, Method 1312 testing is performed ephemeral drainage. Therefore, a
using slightly acid pH waters (about pH permanent diversion around the dump
5.0), which may not be realistic for would not be needed, and the potential for
predicting the constituents or the head cutting, slope failure, or undermining
concentrations of constituents leachable of the dump by flowing water would be
from alkaline geologic materials. In the eliminated.
post-mining setting, therefore, precipitation
infiltrating downward through the 4.2.5.2 Recommended Mitigation
backfilled material could result in alkaline Measures
conditions with a pH probably 8.0 or
greater with the potential for sulfate and Mitigation measures for this alternative
some oxyanions to leach and migrate into would be the same as for the Proposed
the shallow aquifer. Action.
4.2.4.2 Recommended Mitigation 4.2.6 Waste Rock Selective Handling

Measures Alternative
Mitigation measures for this alternative This alternative would selectively handle
would be similar to those for the Proposed waste rock so as to minimize the potential
Action. Backfilling of the pits could itself for acid production and leaching of metals
be considered a mitigation measure as the from the waste dumps. Acid-generating
quantity of materials in the waste dumps lithologies would be identified and handled
would be reduced and acid generation from in the ways described in Section 2.3.4.
the materials exposed in the pit walls may
be· reduced. ' 4.2.6.1 Direct and Indirect Impacts
4.2.5 Facility Layout Alternative Selective waste handling would lessen or

eliminate the potential impacts to surface
This alternative would eliminate waste water drainages and groundwater
dump D and place these materials in an resources in the project area from acid
expanded waste dump C. drainage conditions. Alkaline water quality
effects are ubiquitous in the project area,
4.2.5.1 Direct and Indirect Impacts and the waste rock piles are expected to
have no substantial impact on nearby sites,
Elimination of waste dump D would lessen vegetation, and ephemeral surface water
the impact on surface water drainages in flows.
the vicinity of Lisbon Canyon and lessen
overall hydrologic impacts compared to the
Proposed Action. No potential source of
acid generation would exist in this area;
239!161R3.4 5/15/96(9:34 PM)lRPTI2 4-25
4.2.6.2 Recommended Mitigation The results of static tests on the material
Measures that would comprise the waste rock show
that about 21 percent of the total samples
This alternative itself comprises a (comprising about 10 percent by mass of
mitigation action for the protection of the waste rock) were acid-generating with
water resources in the project area Other net neutralization potentials less than zero
committed mitigation measures for this (i.e., NNP < 0), based on the sulfide sulfur
alternative would be the same as ,for the concentrations. All of the ac~d-generating
Proposed Action. There are no additional samples were coal, coal-bearing, or
mitigation measures proposed. associated with or adjacent to coal units.
4.3 GEOCHEMISTRY Waste rock placed in the waste dumps may

produce local areas of acid...generating
4.3.1 Methodology material, i.e., "hot spots", which could
impact both surface water runoff and
The potential for waste rock deposited in leachate to groundwater resources. In
the waste dumps to generate acid addition, under the Proposed Action, acid-
conditions or mobilize dissolved generating material may be exposed at the
constituents is the primary issue associated surface of the waste dumps, for some
with the geochemistry at the Lisbon Valley unknown length oftirne and.thus have the
Project. A secondaxy potential impact is potential to impact surface water runoff.
from acid-generating material left exposed
in the pit walls. Environmental The results of the EPA Method 1312
consequences with respect to geochemistry analyses (Synthetic Precipitation Leach
of the Proposed Action and alternatives Procedure) show that iron and aluminum
thereto, as described in Section 2.3, are have the potential to leach from the waste
addressed below. rock at concentrations exceeding Utah
secondaxy drinking water standards. The
4.3.2 Proposed Action dissolved iron concentrations in three out
of four composite waste rock samples
4.3.2.1 Impacts ranged from 0.39 mgll to 0.72 mgII
compared to the Utah secondary drinking
:Mining to access the ore from the four pits water standard of 0.3-0.6 mgll. The
would produce approximately 96,000,000 dissolved aluminum concentrations in three
tons of waste rock. These materials would out of four composite waste rock samples
be disposed in four waste dumps. Potential ranged from 0.21 to 1.5 mgll compared to
impacts associated with the Proposed the Utah secondary' drinking water
Action are as discussed below based on the standard of 0.05 to 0.2 mgll. All other
results of static tests and EPA Method dissolved constituents were below
1312 analyses, as presented in Section 3.3. applicable drinking water standards or
Also, comments on potential alkaline were not detected. The drinking water
geochemistry issues are given. standards for iron and aluminum are not a
health-based standard; they are based on
aesthetic qualities such as color and taste.
23m'R3.4 SIISJ!16(9:12 PM)IRPT12 4-26
Therefore, based on the results of the EPA 4.3.2.2 Recommended Mitigation
Method 1312 analyses, impacts to
groundwater resources may occur due to Recommended mitigation is addressed by
leaching of dissolved iron and aluminum the Waste Rock Selective Handling
from the waste rock in the backfilled pits. Alternative.
It should be noted that neither iron nor
aluminum are recognized as being toxic to 4.3.3 No Action Alternative
wildlife or domestic animals at these levels
(National Academy of Sciences 1980). No additional geochemistry concerns
would arise with the selection of the No
It should also be noted that groundwater in Action Alternative. That is, mining of ore
the project vicinity is not yet classified, but from the Sentinel, Centennial, and GTO
would be when environmental permits are Pits would not occur and the
applied for at the beginning of project corresponding four waste rock dumps
construction and operations. Groundwater would not be developed. No impacts to
in Utah is currently designated in three surface or groundwater resources would
classes; .Class I - Pristine, Irreplaceable, or occur from any newly developed mine
Ecologically Important; Class n - Drinking facilities.
Water Quality; or Class TIl, Limited Use
(Utah Department of Environmental 4.3.4 Open Pit Backfilling
Quality, Division of Water Quality 1995: Alternative •
R317-6-3). Classification of pit water, for
example, could be subject to legal and 4.3.4.1 Impacts
regulatory interpretation at a later date.
Partial or complete backfilling of the
Regarding other geochemistry/water Sentinel, Centennial, and GTO Pits would
quality issues (see Section 4.2), the cover some or all of the potentially acid-
majority of pit wall rock arid waste rock is generating lithologies in the pit walls (e.g.,
likely to yield alkaline leachate, based on the coal and coal-bearing units). This
the static test results. (The 1312 tests are would reduce or eliminate the potential
performed with slightly acid water, about impacts to groundwater resources from
pH 5.5: results therefore will not be this source.
representative of potential mobile
constituents under. alkaline conditions.) Backfilling the pits also would decrease the
Leachates from the pit wall rocks and amount of waste rock in the waste dumps.
. waste rock (limited as they may be under Thus, the potential impacts to surface and
infrequent precipitation) are likely to be groundwater resources would be decreased
alkaline, high TDS, elevated in sulfates, from these mine facilities.
and with elevated concentrations of some
metal oxyanions. In pit water, evaporation Both partial and complete backfilling
over post-closure years could produce scenarios have the potential to further
similar conditions as pH rises from about degrade existing groundwater quality in the
7.5 to the 9.0-9.5 range. vicinity of the proposed pits. The
. backfilled waste rock, whatever its
239%1R3.4 5/15196(9:12 PM)/RPT12 4-27

geochemical characteristics (i.e., constituents. Waste rock with NNP < 0,
potentially acid generating or alkaline) or with the potential to mobilize dissolved
would have increased surface area; hence it constituents based on the Method 1312
would be easier to leach soluble analyses, would be selectively placed in the
constituents from these materials. waste dumps by one, or a combination, of
the following methods:
4.3.4.2 Recommended Mitigation
• Encapsulation
No mitigation is recommended. • Layering
• Blending
4.3.5 Facility Layout Alternative
Encapsulation is a method of entombing
4.3.5.1 Impacts potentially environmentally-impacting
waste material within other waste materials
The number of waste dumps would be that are acid-neutralizing and would not
decreased from four to three under this mobilize dissolved constituents. Covering
alternative. Waste Dump D would be waste material by this method would
eliminated and the approximate 2,100,000 inhibit water and oxygen from reacting
tons of waste rock planned for this facility with the waste rock that is acid-generating
would be placed in Waste Dump C. This or capable of mobilizing dissolved
alternative would decrease the total area of constituents. However, "hot spots" could
waste m~erial exposed at the mine facility. occur locally if the encapsulating material
This could decrease potential impacts to has limited acid-buffering capacity.
surface and ground water resources from
the waste rock, particularly from silrface Layering isa method of encapsulation on a
water runoff produced on the waste rock, small scale, whereby potentially acid-
and slightly decrease both acid and alkaline generating material is placed in the waste
geochemical effects from waste rock dump in thin lifts on top of acid-
weathering. neutralizing waste rock. The potentially
acid-generating waste rock is then itself
4.3.5.2 Recommended Mitigation covered with a layer of acid-neutralizing
waste rock. Placement of potentially acid-
No miti,gation is recommended for generating waste rock in this manner
geochemical issues. provides a larger relative amount of acid-
buffering capacity per unit mass of "acid-
4.3.6 Waste Rock Selective Handling generating waste rock than the larger scale
Alternative encapsulation method of placement.
4.3.6.1 Impacts Blending is the thorough mixing of acid-

generating and acid-neutralizing materials.
This alternative would provide for waste Blending would provide the largest relative
rock to be selectively placed in waste amount of acid-buffering capacity to the
dumps to inhibit and mitigate acid acid-neutralizing waste material.
generation or mobilization of dissolved
23mr.R3.4 5115196(9:12 PM)'RPT12 4-28

Based on the results of static testing, the ' 4.3.6.2 Recommended Mitigation
coal and coal-bearing units as well as those
units adjacent to or spatially closely No additional mitigation is recommended.
associated with coal units, are potentially
acid-generating. The potentially acid- 4.4 son.s AND RECLAMATION
generating material accounts for
approximately 10 percent, by mass, of the 4.4.1 Methodology
total amount of waste material (Thorson
1996b). Selective handling of the Issues and concerns raised for the soils
potentially acid-generating material would resource during the public scoping process
require correlation of the mine plan, i.e., focus on the following:
mining sequence, with placement of waste
rock in the dumps to be certain that • Adequate quantity of topsoil
material necessary for encapsulation, material for reclamation - volume
layering, or blending is available when of suitable cover soil for salvage
acid-generating waste is removed: from the and redistribution to an adequate
pits. This may require the stockpiling of thickness which would sustain a
non-acid-generating waste for use as protective vegetative cover and
needed during the mine operation. desired post mining land uses
~ Application of erosion control
As described in Section 2.3.4, it is pianned methods - stability of disturbed and
that selective placement of the coaI/coal- reclaimed soils as measured in
bearing waste rock would occur in the terms of erosion potential and
waste dumps, in the more central part of adequacy of erosion control
the dump and away from the top and sides methods
of the dump. Such placement will inhibit • Restoration of the area to
the oxidation reactions that produce acid productive use after the extraction
drainage. The selective placement would phase of mining - returning the site
also isolate the potentially acid-generating to wildlife habitat, livestock
waste rock in a manner that precludes any grazing, and mineral development
effect on reclamation such as revegetating
the waste dumps. In response to these concerns, the
following criteria have been developed to
Also, there is some low potential for waste focus the impact analyses on the key issues
rock leachates to develop that are aIkatme and provide a point of reference about
and exhibit elevated IDS, and elevated which the analysis of impacts will be
concentrations of metal oxyanions. Thus, completed:
there is some potential for degradation of
shallow aquifer water quality. However, • Restoration of at least 12 inches of
since these waters are not planned for suitable coversoil material (topsoil
beneficial use in the foreseeable future, no and/or suitable subsoil) on final
notable impact is expected. reclamation grades and surfaces to
serve as an effective long-term
plant growth medium as
239%1R3.4 5115/96(9:12 PM)IR.PT/2 4-29
recommended by the BLM (1992), preparation needed prior to final
McClure (1996b) and NRCS reclamation activities
(Anders 1996) • Regrade the waste dumps, rip
• Reduce soil erosion or excessive rill compacted material, apply
and gully development by 50 coversoil, reseed the disturbed area,
percent within one year and by 75 and fertilize, as necessary
percent within five years of soil • Decontaminate the leach pad,
disturbance recontour the surface, and cover
• Develop a comprehensive with compacted soils or treat with
reclamation plan to ensure lime or other similar products. A
successful establishment of layer of waste rock would be
revegetation within 3 to 5 years placed on top to provide a rooting
post-closure so the site can again zone of vegetation. . Coversoil
be used for wildlife habitat and would then be placed qver the
grazing. waste rock and the area
revegetated.
Summo's adherence to these criteria would • For all other facilities, all
reduce impacts to the soils resource and equipment would be removed,
increase the likelihood for successful disturbed areas regraded,
reclamation of the site and restoration to compacted soils ripped, coversoil
current land uses of wildlife habitat, applied, and disturbed areas
grazing, and mineral development. reseeded, and fertilized, as
necessary.
Summo's Plan of Operations (1995) • Monitor and maintain/repair the site
contains mitigation measures and, both for at least two years following
interim and :final reclamation plans, as final reclamation activities
described in Section 2.2.11, that address
the issues discussed above. Summo's 4.4.2 Proposed Action
committed' mitigation measures, as noted
below, are taken into consideration in 4.4.2.1 Impacts
determining the :final impacts to the soils
resource. The construction and operation of the
proposed copper mine and associated
• Install erosion control structures facilities including four waste rock dumps,
during site preparation a leach pad and processing facilities, and
• Salvage and stockpile .cover soil the installation of a powerline would
material for reclamation purposes disturb approximately 1,103 acres in the
• Reclaim disturbed areas not needed project area. Direct impacts from
for the life of the mine as soon as disturbance to soils could include:
feasible
• D~velop and implement field trials • Loss of soil profile development
to detennine the preferred species due to mixing of soil horizons and
composition, fertilizer breakdown of soil structure
requi,rements, and seedbed
23m'R3.4 SllSl96(9:J2PM)IRPTI2 4-30
-
• Increased exposure of surface soil Rock Outcrop-Rizno complex soil series
materials to accelerated erosion and (Figure 3.4-1). Most of the Centennial pit
loss of soil material lays within the Dumps-Pits complex which
• Increased volumes of surface runoff was disturbed during previous mining
resulting in rill and gully activities and never reclaimed. The
development Barnum and Cabona soils, in particular,
• Soil compaction and rutting from would provide .good cover soil material for
heavy equipment traffic reclamation activities.
• Reduced soil productivity as a
result of decreased biological Soil Quantity
activity and reduced organic matter
Salvage of the A and B horizons of soils
Such adverse impacts would likely result (not including rock outcrop complexes) in
from the clearing of vegetation, and' the areas of the proposed leach pad, pits,
excavation, salvage, stockpiling, .and waste rock dumps, and process facilities
redistribution of soils during construction would provide approximately 1,462,216
and reclamation activities. Blading or cubic yards of soil material that would be
excavation of areas to achieve desired stockpiled and later used for reclamation
grades can also result in slope steepening activities. This· volume of material is
of exposed soils in cuts and fills, mixing of enough to cover all disturbed areas (except
topsoil and subsoil materials, and the the open pits) with approximately 12.6
breakdown of soil aggregates into loose inches of fair to good cover soil. (Cover
particles. Soil structural aggregates can soil is a combination of topsoil and subsoil
also be broken down by compaction from material capable of supporting vegetation.)
vehicular traffic.
Redistribution of approximately 12 inches
The absence of vegetative cover, of cover soil would provide an adequate
steepening of slopes, and the breakdown of growth medium. for. plants' on disturbed
aggregates' would result in an increased areas at closure. The material that would
potential for both sheet and channelized be salvaged contains adequate organic
runoff and accelerated soil erosion, rill and matter and has suitable physical
gully formation, and increased characteristics such as sufficient soil fines
sedimentation. The combined effect of to hold moisture and nutrients.
these impacts would be the increased
difficulty in achieving successful The proposed reclamation plan does not
reclamation or the failure of reclamation include details for the salvage of cover soil
efforts. material (e~g. quantity to be salvaged) nor
specific measures to maintain the
Implementation of the Proposed Action productivity of the soils (e.g. revegetation
would result in the disturbance and of the stockpiled material) to be used for
alteration of .1,103 acres of native soils reclamation,. however, a sufficient quantity
during construction and development of good quality material is available.
activities. The majority of disturbance
would occur in the Barnum, Cabona, and
239951R3.4 SIISI96(9:12PM)lRPTI2 4-31
Erosion Control reestablish the original stream profile.
Sedimentation produced by this process
Most of the soils that would be disturbed would not affect Lisbon Canyon because
under the Proposed Action are moderately all of the sediment would be transported
susceptible to water erosion and highly into the pit.
susceptible to wind erosion when the
vegetative cover is removed. Construction Under the Proposed Action, final
of the leach pad, process facilities, waste reclamation includes grading slopes of the
rock dumps, access roads, and the open waste rock piles and the heap leach to a
pits would include the removal of 2.5: 1 slope. These relatively steep slopes
vegetation and excavation and stockpiling also increase the potential for soil erosion
of soil material. These activities would on approximately 772 acres (acreage
result in increased soil exposure, adjusted to include slopes).
sedimentation mixing of soil horizons, soil
compaction, loss of topsoil productivity, Summo's committed mitigation measures
and increased suscepnoility of the soil to include installation of erosion control
wind and ,~er erosion. Soil compaction structures during site preparation and
caused by equipment traffic may decrease prompt reclamation of disturbed areas not
infiltration and water storage capacity, needed for the life of the mine.
increase runo:f:l; and reduce soil Additionally, disturbed sites would be
productivity. Rill and gully development contoured to minimize erosion and provide
could be also expected where surface adequate drainage. Again, the proposed
water runoff is channelized such as in reclamation.. plan lacks specific details for
ditches along roads or in surface water installation of erosion control structures,
diversion ditches around the facilities. An however, the rigorous application of
example of this type of erosion is shown in erosion control measures including the use
Figure 4.2-5. of rock check dams, silt fences, and bales
of straw for temporary erosion control
Additionally, during operations, surface would reduce the potential for soil erosion
water flows from three drainages upstream and sedimentation in Lisbon Valley and
of Sentinel Pit 1 would be routed around Lisbon Canyon. Erosion from newly
the pit to maintain natural storm flows into disturbed areas may not be reduced by 50
Lisbon Canyon (Figure 3.5-2) from Lisbon percent after one year and by 75 percent
Valley. However, as discussed in Section after five years without additional
4.2.2.1, ephemeral surface flows from the mitigation measures.
three drainages would be diverted into the
Sentinel Pit at the conclusion of mining Reclamation Effectiveness
operations rather than maintaining the
diversion ditch around the pit. As a result, Final reclamation activities would include
during and following storm events, it is regrading surfaces to minimize erosion and
expected that accelerated erosion and provide adequate drainage, ripping
downcutting would occur upstream in all compacted soils, and application of
three drainages forming gullies andlor fertilizer, if necessary, prior to reseeding
canyons as the stream attempts to disturbed sites. These measures would
2399&'R3.4 Sl15196(9:12PM)IRPT12 4-32
provide a more hospitable seedbed and vegetation due to the reduced potential
enhance revegetation efforts. Incorporation for capturing runoff than the relatively
of information developed from the field level valley floor existing at present.
studies (e.g., optimal species mix, and This could result in reduced vegetative
fertilizer and mulching requirements) cover with lower productivity than the
would also contribute to successful predisturbance conditions of the native
revegetation efforts. Reclaimed areas plant communities. Soil erosion rates
would be monitored and retreated, if would be higher on these areas, with
necessary, for at least two·years. lower densities of plants, and the
potential for establishing vegetation
Under the Proposed Action, factors that would be progressively reduced as
hinder the potential for successful erosion increases.
reclamation and a return of the site to
predisturbance conditions include the Thus, even though there is an adequate
following: quantity of good quality cover soil material
available, with the potential for increased
• About 9 million tons (or approximately erosion and an anticipated modest success
10 percent of all of the waste material) of revegetation efforts, successful
of potentially acid generating material reclamation within 3 to 5 years of closure
would be placed indiscriminately in the may not be possible.
waste rock dumps. Though most of
the material in the waste rock dumps Under the Proposed Action, 85 acres of
would be acid neutralizing, as noted in existing disturbance would either be
Section 4.3.1 localized areas of acid incorporated into the new pits .or
generating material distributed reclaimed. The 231 acres of open pits
throughout the dumps could result in would be left unreclaimed except for the
acidic conditions in the coversoil haul roads that would access the pit
material placed over the dumps for bottom would be scarified, covered with
. reclamation. Due to plant intolerance soil, seeded, and fertilized~ if necessary.
for acidic soil conditions, phytotoxic
impacts to vegetation could occur, and 4.4.2.2 Recommended Mitigation
the susceptibility of the cover soil to
accelerated erosion would increase as . The following erosion control,
the vegetative cover died back. revegetation, and mitigation measures are
recommended to increase the potential for
Alternatively, a high pH of the waste successful reclamation of sites that would
rock piles would not be expected to be disturbed through implementation of the
affect the cover soil material or Proposed Action. Additionally, the
reclamation efforts because soils in the following mitigation measures would
area naturally have a pH of7.9 to 9. o. minimize impacts to the soils resource.
• The 2.5: 1 slopes of the waste rock • All potentially acid generating
dumps and the leach pad would have waste material should be placed in
less potential for successful re- the center of the waste piles to
239961R3.4 snS196(9:12 PM)lRPTI2 4-33
","
prevent acidification of the cover maintained in functional condition
soil and potential phytotoxic throughout the duration of the
impacts to vegetation. project
• Mitigation measures that are • The excavation of cover soil
recommended in Section 4.2.2.2 to material should be limited to the A
prevent accelerated erosion in the and B horizons; substrate material
three drainages upstream· from is not, likely to provide suitable
Sentinel Pit 1 are re-emphasized reclamation material and cover soil '
and also recommended here. material' should be handled
• Erosion and sedimentation control separately from substrate materials
measures and structures should be to preclude mixing of the materials
installed on all disturbed areas. • Reclamation of the four waste rock
Soil erosion control should be piles should include covering them
accomplished on sites in highly with 3-4 feet of compacted subsoils
erosive soils, sites where surface or overburden material containing
runoff would be channelized, and at least 65 percent fines, prior to
steep areas with mulching, netting, the replacement of 12 inches of
tackifiers, hydromulch, or matting. covers oil. This would provide an
The type of control measure should adequate rooting depth and
depend on slope gradients and the enhance the potential for successful
susceptibility of soil to wind and reclamation.
water erosion (Table 3.4-1). • Stockpiled soil salvaged for
• Runoff discharged from water bars reclamation purposes should be
or diversion ditches should be seeded with a prescribed seed
directed into undisturbed mixture (Section 4.5.2.2), and
vegetation away from natural covered with mulch for protection
drainages to minimize rill and gully from wind and water erosion and to
development discourage the invasion of weeds
• Install water bars' on all slopes • Redistribution of a minimum of
exceeding 25 feet long and 12 inches of cover soil would
10 perCent gradient provide an adequate plant growth
• Minimize, where feasible, slope medium and enhance the potential
angles to enhance retention of for reclamation success
topsoil and reduce erosion • Keep project area fenced until
• On slopes with angles of 2.5:1, 10 reclamation is complete
to IS foot wide benches should be
constructed at least every 30 to 40 4.4.3 No Action Alternative
feet with adequate erosion control
structures constructed along slopes 4.4.3.1 Impacts
in between the benches to intercept
runoff Under this alternative, there would be no
• All runoff and erosion control new disturbance and, therefore, no impacts
structures should be inspected to soils resources. Existing conditions, as
periodically, cleaned out, and discussed in 3.4 would remain the same,
4-34
including 85 acres of existing disturbance Implementation of this alternative would
that would not be reclaimed. . shift impacts from the Barnum soil series to
the Rock Outcrop-Rizno series (Figure
4.4.4 Open Pit Backiilling 3.4-1). This would result in a loss of
Alternative approximately 18,800 cubic yards of
suitable coversoil material that would not
4.4.4.1 Impacts be salvaged in the vicinity of Waste Dump
D. Material in the vicinity of the
Impacts to soils would. be as described alternative waste dump location is rated
under the Proposed Action except the open poor to unsuitable for reclamation material
pits would be either partially backfilled or due to a combination of large rock
completely backfilled. Waste rock would outcrops and very shallow soils. The
have to be stored at the proposed dump volume of salvaged material' would be
facilities for a time, until successive mining enough to cover all disturbed areas (except
of the pits is completed and the stored the open pits) with approximately 11.7
waste material is placed in the mined-out inches of cover soil material. All other
pits. impacts would be the same as .the
Proposed Action.
Implementation of Alternative 1 would
require slightly less coversoil material for 4.4.5.2 Recommended Mitigation
reclamation of the waste dumps and the
volume of cover soil material available for Recommended mitigation would be the
reclamation would only be enough to cover same as discussed in Section 4.4.2.2 for the'
all disturbed areas, including the pits, with Proposed Action.
9.9 inches of fair to good cover soil. An
additional 402,494 cubic yards of material 4.4.6 Waste Rock Selective Handling
would be needed for reclamation of the Alternative
pits.
4.4.6.1 Impacts
Implementation of this alternative would
Recommended mitigation would be the require selectively placing acid generating
same as discussed in Section 4.4.2.2 for the rock throughout the waste dumps and
Proposed Action. covering this material with acid
neutralizing rocks.
Implementation of this alternative would
4.4.5.1 Impacts eliminate the potential acidification of the
cover soil material and phytotoxic impacts
Impacts from construction and operation to vegetation and subsequent increased
activities would be the same as described erosion, as discussed under the Proposed
for the Proposed Action. Action. All other impacts would be the
same as the Proposed Action.
23996JR3.4 5/15196(9:12 PM)lRPTI2 4-35

No sensitive plant species are expected to
Recommended mitigation would be the be found, and no unique vegetative
same as discussed in Section 4.4.2.2 for the community types have been identified on
Proposed Action. site. Additionally, there are no riparian
communities on this site. Therefore, these
4.5 VEGETATION issues will not be dealt with further in this
.impact analysis.
4.5.1 Methodology
4.5.2 Proposed Action
The primary effects to vegetation would
result from disturbance or removal of 4.5.2.1 Impacts
natural vegetation through the installation
and operation of the Proposed Action, or As proposed, this alternative would disturb
alternatives as identified and described in a total of 1,103 acres, including the 64
Section 2.0. Potential impacts to acres proposed to be disturbed for the
vegetation include: development and installation of the
powerline. The powerline corridor was
• Disturbance of threatened, not included in the baseline flora and fauna
endangered, or sensitive plant report (W-C 1994), therefore, the
species/communities assumption was made for analysis purposes
• The loss of vegetative cover that the 64 acres of disturbance is equally
resulting in accelerated erosion distributed between the two major
• The long-tenn loss of natural vegetation communities; PI and SB.
communities, (e.g., pinyon-juniper,
which would take up to 80-100 Short-term impacts under the Proposed
years to reach predisturbance Action would· include disturbance of
conditions and any associated approximately 432 acres in the SB zone,
utility such as wildlife habitat, 296 acres in the PI zone, 290 acres in the
firewood, and visual screening of GR zone, and· 85 acres of previously
disturbances disturbed areas (Table 4.5-1). Construction
• The long-term loss of species of the power line would result in the
diversity disturbance of approximately 64 acres of
PI and SB communities. The vehicles
Summo's proposed mitigation measures .utilized d~g the power line construction,
and reclamation plan (Section 2.2.11) and including rubber tired and tracked heavy
the adequacy of the proposed reclamation equipment, would crush the vegetation
along the cross-country routes.
program to achieve a suitable environment
for natural plant succession and a return to Provided the roots of the grasses are "not
pre-mining levels of canopy cover, damaged from rutting, no long-term
productivity, and utility in both the short- impacts to vegetation would be
and long-term. (Section 4.4) are anticipated. If the root systems of the
considered in the final impact analysis. perennial plants along the cross-country
23996,'R3.4 SllSl96(9:12PM)lRPTI2 4-36
travel routes are damaged, annual plants When mining operations end, the waste
such as cheatgrass would increase in the rock dumps, heap leach pad, processing
disturbed areas. area, and haul roads (approximately 799 '
acres) would be scarified and seeded with
Based on BLM's previous experience with the seed mixture shown on Table 2-9 (and
UP&L construction projects, intensive modified if the proposed test plots provide
disturbance is expected to be limited to 1.6 information that different species or
acres (30' radius around each of about 100 quantities of seed would improve
poles). Additional disturbance of an reclamation results).
approximate 10-foot wide corridor along
. the entire 10.8 miles of the powerline Additionally, as discussed in Sections 4.3.1
would affect 13.1 acres. The installation of and 4.4.2.1, potentially acid generating
the powerline would result in material would be placed indiscriminately
approximately 14.7 acres of surface throughout the waste rock dumps which
disturbance that would require reclamation. could result, over time, in localized areas
The remainder of disturbance for of acidic conditions in the plant .growth
construction of the powerline is expected medium placed over the waste rock piles
to require minor reclamation efforts. Trees for reclamation. Phytotoxic impacts to
beneath the line will not be cleared and vegetation would result in a loss of
fewer than a dozen trees are expected to be vegetative cover and productivity, and, in
cut for construction of the power line. turn, lead to increased erosion.
Summo's proposed Inlt1gation for Due to the structure of the subsoils of the
disturbances along the power line route waste dumps, there may not be adequate
include scattering limbs and trees, raking rooting depth for some .native perennial
or harrowing, and reseeding where needed. plant species and the reclamation would
Seed mixes would include grass, forb, and result in a lower plant density and lower
shrub species to be determined by each productivity on 449 acres than the
land owner or manager. predisturbance conditions of the native
plant communities. Annual plant species,
During the 10 years of mining operations such as cheatgrass, would increase in these
when the heap leach pad is in operation, areas. Soil erosion rates would be higher
when the waste rock dump areas are being on these areas resulting in lower densities
used, and when the haul roads are in use; of perennial plants. The potential for
there would be no perennial vegetation establishing native perennial vegetation
growing on 1,039 acres (64 acres along the would be progressively reduced as erosion
powerline route wo!J1d be revegetated increases. Many of these areas would be
immediately following construction). along the slopes of the reclaimed waste
,Concurrent reclamation of disturbed sites dump and heap leach pad areas.
no longer needed for operations would
reduce the total number of acres to be Following mining operations, the pits
reclaimed at closure. would be left open. Approximately 231
acres of PI and SB communities would be
lost. As overbuFden sloughs from the pit
23996IRS.4 S/IS/95(9:12PM)/RPT12 4-37
TABLE 4.5-1
DIRECT IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION

BY FACILITY AND VEGETATIVE COMMUNITY TYPE
C!:!mmynin T~p~
Facility Total Pinyon- Sagebrush Grassland! Previously
Acreage Junil!er Rangeland Disturbed
Open Pits
Sentinel #1 38 10 21 0 7
Sentinel #2 9 7 2 0 0
Centennial 116 0 68 0 48
GTO 68 0 43 0 25
Waste Dumps
DumpD 55 5 50 0 0
DumpC 118 98 20 0 0
DumpB 90 46 39 0 5
Dump A 186 54 132 0 0
Leach Pad Area 266 0 0 266 0
Process Area and Facilities 21 0 0 21 0
Miscellaneous
Haul Roads 33 15 15 3 0
Topsoil Stockpiles 39 29 0 0 0
69-kV Powerline 64 32 32 0 0
Totals 1:103 296 432 290 85
~s, ~ual plant species, such as years for grasses and forbs, 15-20 years for
cheatgrass, would grow on the slopes. shrubs, and 80-100 years for trees.
Plants such as Indian ricegrass, rubber
rabbitbrusb, and sagebrush would grow on Plant species used for revegetation are
some of the more stable slopes. selected for their ability to become quickly
established, provide a stable surface, and
In the short-term, there would be a loss of support a self-perpetuating community.
plant diversity on all reclaimed sites and These species are used to control erosion,
the total number of species would be maximize productivity and canopy cover,
substantially reduced. Over the long-term, and create a suitable environment for
most species could be expected to reinvade natural plant succession rather than
the disturbance areas, though it can take reestablish diversity.
centuries before the original diversity of a
site is returned to predisturbance levels. The use of non-native species, such as
However. even when diversity is lost. crested wheatgrass and yellow sweet
reclaimed communities can achieve clover, in the seed mix could supplement
comparable cover and productivity in 3-5 the native species and increase the
23996'R3.4 SnS/Sl5(9:12PM)IRPT12 4-38
potential for establishing perennial plant non-native species of wheatgrass, and
species during the reclamation of this these species have not precluded native
project. Crested wheatgrass and alfalfa perennial plants.
were seeded in some areas of Lisbon
Valley during the 1960's and 1970's when 4.5~2.2 Recommended Mitigation
railing sagebrush and chaining stands of
pinyon - juniper. Crested wheatgrass has All potentially acid generating waste
been established in many areas of Lisbon .material should be placed in the center of
Valley, including portions of the project the waste dumps and away from the tops
area. Yellow sweet clover is non-native and edges to prevent acidification of the
species that has spread throughout San cover soil material and potential phytotoxic
Juan and Grand Counties. Many times, impacts to vegetation.
even when not included in the seed mix,
yellow sweet clover has been one of the Although the BLM has policies for using
first species to become established on native plant species when possible, the use
surface disturbances. Yellow sweet clover of non-native species would improve the
and alfalfa provide nitrogen fixing potential for establishing perennial plant
properties which would improve the species and displacing undesirable, non-
potential for establishing other plant native annual species such as cheatgrass.
species. Although the BLM has policies The use of non-native species can also
for using native plant species, crested maximize available precipitation, become
wheatgrass and yellow sweet clover have quickly established to minimize erosion,
been previously established in the proposed and improve the potential for establishing
project area. Indian ricegrass is established other species. The following seed mixture
in many of the areas of northern Lisbon is recommended to stabilize top soil
Valley that were chained and seeded with stockpiles and other surface disturbances:
crested wheatgrass, which would indicate
that the crested wheatgrass did not Indian ricegrass 3 pounds/acre
eliminate ·the opportunities for native Crested wheatgrass 3 pounds/acre
Indian ricegrass. Tall wheatgrass 2 pounds/acre
Fourwing saltbush 2 pounds/acre
The use of crested wheatgrass, Bitterbrush 1 pound/acre
intermediate wheatgrass, tall wheatgrass, Yellow sweet clover 112 pound/acre
alfalfa, and yellow sweet clover has been
successful on reclamation projects for oil This seed mixture is a drill seeding rate and
field and mining projects in the UNOCAL would have to be doubled if broadcast
area. Some of these projects included the seeded. This mixture would be modified if
stabilization of poorly developed sqils the proposed test plots provide information
along rocky slopes of pinyon-juniper areas. that different species or quantities of seed
The wheatgrass and alfalfa have remained would improve reclamation results.
in the reclaimed areas, and they have not
expanded into the undisturbed native plant Additionally, to get better shrub re-
commurutIes. These species have been establishment, BLM may require that some.
successful in competing with undesirable
2399600.4 5/15/96(9:12 PM)lRPTI2 4-39
shrub seedlings be planted in conjunction decrease the extent of the waste dumps,
with reseeding efforts. but not eliminate the need 'for them.
Scenario 2 entails complete backfilling of
The authorized officer of BLM will inspect the open pits. This would eliminate waste
public land portions of the power line route dump C to the southeast of the Sentinel
after construction to determine the Pits completely and following the closure
required rehabilitation measures. of the pits, the disturbed areas would be
Rehabilitation will include those measures revegetated. Scenario 1 would not be
identified·· and deemed necessary by the further discussed in these sections since the
authorized officer to ensure successful size of the waste rock piles would be
mitigation of the impacts from the decreased but they would not be eliminated
construction operations. Rehabilitation and the open pits would not be eliminated.
measures will include the following The following discussion centers upon
teclmiques when necessary: Scenario 2.
• Scarification of vehicle tracks that 4.5.4.1 Impacts

are visible from existing roadways,
• Scarification of soil compacted Short-term impacts to vegetation under
during operations, this alternative would be the same as those
• Seeding of the scarified areas with discussed in Section 4.5.2 because
seed mixture developed from the construction and· development activities
mining site, would be the same as for the Proposed
• Rehabilitation of existing trails used Action, including development of the waste
for access during the construction rock piles. However, complete backfilling
operations,and of the pits would eliminate Waste Dump C
• In$ta11ation of barriers or signs to making that 118 acres of disturbance easier
prevent future vehicle use across to reclaim. Additionally, 231 acres of
routes used during construction disturbance due to pit development would
operations. be reclaimed. Thus, all 1,103 acres of
disturbance would be reclaimed under this
4.5.3 No Action Alternative alternative as compared to 872 acres under
the Proposed Action. As discussed in
4.5.3.1 Impacts Section 4.4.4.1, additional cover soil
material would have to be obtained
Under this alternative, there would be no elsewhere for reclamation of the pits.
additional impacts to existing vegetative
communities. 4.5.4.2 Recommended Mitigation
4.5.4 Open Pit Backfilling Recommended mitigation would be the

Alternative same as for the Proposed Action.
Under this alternative, two scenarios exist

(Section 2.3.2). Scenario 1 is a partial
backfilling of the open pits, projected to
239961R3,4 SIlSl96(9:12PM)IRPT12 4-40
4.5.5 Facility Layout Alternative 4.6 WILDLll'E
4.5.5.1 Impacts 4.6.1 Methodology
Under this alternative, Waste Dump D Modification of the existing topography

would be eliminated, and Waste Dump C and vegetation cover in the project area
would be increased to handle this material. may affect wildlife habitat for any species
The expansion of Waste Dump C would be currently utilizing this site year-around or
approximately 50 acres, from 118 acres to seasonally. Additional project impacts to
168 acres. The elimination of Waste wildlife species may be caused from
Dump D would reduce the impacts of the operational disturbances such as noise,
Proposed Action by 5 acres, but would nocturnal lighting, acidic solution
shift impacts from primarily the sagebrush exposure, and increased traffic. If the
zone (Waste Dump C) to the pinion- species affected are listed as Federal or
juniper zone (Waste Dump D) (Table State Threatened, Endangered, or
4.5-2). Candidate species (sensitive species), the
impacts would be substantial. Mitigation
4.5.5.2 Recommended Mitigation efforts suggested would be incorporated
into the analysis of the potential for
Recommended mitigation would be the impacts to wildlife.
same as for the Proposed Action.
Wmter surveys for sensitive species as well
4.5.6 Waste Rock Selective Handling as mule deer and Great Basin western
Alternative rattlesnake were conducted in December of
1995 (W-C 1996). The status of the
4.5.6.1 Impacts majority of the species of concern is
unclear, since the project area provides a
All impacts would be the same as for the potential for spring/summer habitat, not
Proposed Action except the following: winter habitat. Habitat for these species
will be surveyed in the spring of 1996, and
• Selectively handling the coaly waste results incorporated into the Final EIS.
material and placing it in the center of The species that will be surveyed for in the
the waste dumps would eliminate the spring, and therefore addressed generally in
potential for localized acidification of this Draft EIS, include the following:
the cover soil material and phytotoxic burrowing owl, Great Basin western
impacts to vegetation and the rattlesnake, loggerhead shrike, and nesting
associated loss of vegetative cover and raptors.
productivity, and erosion.
Projected project impacts resulting from
Recommended mitigation would be the any of the alternatives would be very
same as for the Proposed Action. similar. These impacts will be analyzed
239961R3.4S/lSI96(9:12PM)lRPTI2 4-41
TABLE 4.5-2
DmECT IMPACTS OF THE FACILITY LAYOUT ALTERNATIVE

BY FACILITY AND VEGETATIVE COMMlJNITY TYPE
C2 mm ll ni n: Typ~
Facility Total Pinyon- Sagebrush Grassland! Previously
Acreage Juniper Rangeland Disturbed
Open Pits
Senfutel #1 38 10 21 0 7
Senttnel#2 9 7 2 0 0
Centennial 116 0 68 0 48
GTO 68 0 43 0 25
Waste Dumps
DwnpD 0 0 0 0 0
Dump C 168 143 25 0 0
DumpB 90 46 39 0 5
DwnpA 186 54 132 0 16
Leach Pad Area 266 0 0 266 0
Process Area and Facilities 21 0 0 21 0
Miscellaneous
Haul Roads 33 15 15 3 0
Topsoil Stockpiles 39 39 0 0 0
69-kV Powerline 64 32 32 0 0
Totals 1098 346 377 290 85
and presented in detail for the proposed dogs, as well as small rodents and
a~on alternative, and referenced in the passerines. Prairie dog towns are a
following alternatives. favored habitat for the burrowing owl and
the black-footed ferret (USFWS 1989;
4.6.2.1 Impacts Terres 1980), both sensitive species.
Although no burrowing owls have been
As identified in Section 4.5.2, it is found, spring surveys will be conducted to
anticipated that a total of 1,103 acres confirm the presence or absence of the
would be disturbed under the proposed species in these areas. No black-footed
action. No habitat for special status ferrets have been identified within the area
species has been identified. However, the of project influence, and no additional
disturbance of these acres would certainly surveys are planned, with the approval of
impact the small mammal and avian the wildlife agencies (Williams 1996).
populations that currently inhabit the area.
According to BLM records (Thompson
The location that is designated to be 1995), a drought in 198911990 caused the
impacted by the leach pad (257 acres),. is dispersal of the prairie dogs, up and down .
currently occupied by Gunnison's prairie Lisbon Valley. Wmter surveys early in
2m&R3.4 SIISJ96(9:11 PM}'RPT12 4-42
1996 confirmed the presence of this mammals, but no plans are in place for
species in the northern and southern deterrents to the avian communities.
reaches of the valley. Approximately 767
acres of occupied habitat were located The proposed heap leach pad, however,
outside of the project influence (yI-C has been designed to safeguard the ground
1996). During disturbance due to water and surface water through the
construction activities, wildlife would construction' of an impervious liner and a
disperse from the area, and settle in stormwater retention system. These .
adjacent, undisturbed areas. Regarding systems would be built to contain a 100-
Gunnis~n' s prairie dogs, and the associated yr., 24-hr storm event (Section 2.2)
faunal component ·of the community,
sufficient populations exist in contiguous Construction of all other facilities would
habitat adjacent to the leach pad area, such have a very localized impact on the
that the impacts due to this construction resident fauna, but the '837 acres to be
and operation activity are negligible in a disturbed by the construction of these
regional context, however, locally the loss facilities is minimal in relationship to the
of a 257-acre town would be substantial. vast region of similar community structure
present in the Lisbon Valley and adjacent
The construction of the leach pad would valleys. As no sensitive species have been
also eliminate two (2) small stock ponds identified in the project area, the impact to
that currently provide water for resident resident small mammal and small avian
fauna. The winter surveys (yI-C 1996) populations due to the construction of
identified a small herd of mule deer these facilities would be negligible,
(minimum size of 30 individuals) that use especially in light of the Ubiquitous
the area in the vicinity of the ponds. This distribution and the high rate of
area provides water, vegetation for reproduction that characterizes these
grazing, as well as browse species, and populations.
good edge habitat for cover with the
pinion-juniper/sagebrush interface in close The winter surveys have identified active
.proximity to the stock ponds and the winter raptors in the area. Two potentially
grassland/rangeland community in the active raptor nest sites have been identified
Woods Meadow. Although this area has within the project boundary. Raptors are
not been designated as critical habitat for susceptlole to disturbance during the
mule deer, it is obvious that a small herd breeding and nesting season. If these nests
use the area. are found during the spring surveys to be
active, construction activities and blasting
Operation of the leach pad area would' from operational activities may disturb the
provide access to acidic ponds for breeding birds. This may be evident in
passerines or migrating water fowl, and behavior ranging from the use of
other wildlife seeking water in this semi- alternative nests (outside the zone of
arid cold desert region. The areas of influence) to abandonment of a nest full of
operation woUld be fenced with a three- eggs, depending on the timing of
strand barbed wire fence, to exclude large disturbance.
23996IR3.4 5/1:5/96(9:11 PM)lRPTI2 4-43

• The presence of a new powerline in the water depletion to the Colorado River
area, is not expected to negatively impact (Table 2-6), and there could be indirect
the raptor population. The powerline's affects on the threatened and endangered
design is "raptor-proof'; power lines are fish species in the Colorado River. The
far enough apart as to preclude any Programmatic Section 7 Consultation for
accidental electrocution from birds Water Depletions for Moab District
contacting two lines while landing on, or (completed in 1994) did not address water
taking off from, these lines. depletions from groundwater in the project
area, and a separate Section 7 Consultation
Other operational impacts include the use for depletion determinations of the
of night lights during the proposed 24-hr proposed Summo project would be
schedule, and the noise from operation, initiated with USFWS,
especially blasting. In accordance with
MSHA standards, blasting would occur 4.6.2.2 Recommended Mitigation
only once every other day, on average, and
only during daylight hours. These As outlined in Sections 2.0, 4.4 and 4.5,
activities would not directly adversely interim and final reclamation plans are in
impact any additional wildlife species, but place. The entire areas of disturbance,
would cause the displacement of the with the exception of the 231 acres of open
resident fauna into adjacent areas outside pits, would be reclaimed and revegetated
of the influence of these disturbances. with species adapted to this environment,
and tested for successful establishment for
An increased number of roads, impacting projected site conditions.
an estimated 33 acres, and the associated
traffic, may increase collision mortality for In cooperation with the UDWR, mitigation
small mammals, deer and passerines. The for the loss of mule deer habitat,
proposed activity along these haul roads is specifically a water source, may be
minimal (Section 3.9), and the direct necessary. This mitigation should include
impact to' resident fauna populations is some habitat enhancement in the local
expected to be negligible. vicinity.
As discussed in Section 4.2.2.1, Following project activities, the open pits

groundwater extracted for process should be fenced with 12-foot chain link
requirements and dust control are, not fence for public safety. These measures
expected to result in direct adverse impacts would also prevent potential falling hazard
to flows in the Dolores River or therefore, for large mammals.
the Colorado River. Likewise, post-
closure, surface water diverted into the If the solution ponds in the leach pad area
Sentinel Pit would have minimal impacts prove to present problems with resident
on flows into the Dolores River and and migratory avian fauna, a: mitigation
Colorado River. plan should be developed by Summo in
consultation with Federal and state
However, the use of groundwater for the regulatory agencies.
proposed mining operations would be a
23996/R3.4 5/15196(9:11 PM)'RPl'12 4-44

All major lighting sources would be 4.6.3 No Action Alternative
shrouded to direct light downwards
towards the area of work. This would 4.6.3.1 Impacts
minimize the area of influence of this light
source, minimizing the impacts to resident Under this alternative, there would be no
nocturnal fauna and nightlighting impacts impacts to the faunal commuriity currently
to humans residing up or down valley. present.
If active raptor nests are found within one- 4.6.4 Open Pit Backfilling
half mile of the project area during the Alternative
spring survey, UDWR, u.s. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS), and BLM 4.6.4.1 Impacts
would be notified. Initial, start-up
construction would need to be curtailed Projected impacts to local wildlife are
within a one-half mile radius of the nest similar to those presented in the proposed
during nesting season of the appropriate action alternative. Primary differences lie
species (projected to be April 15 through in the amount of habitat impacted. These
July 10). If alternate nests for these birds differences are outlined in Section 4.5.4 of
are found within the local region, an this document. Additionally, with the total
alternate method of mitigation would be to backfilling of the pits, the potential for
cap the nests on site, to prevent the large mammals to fall into or be trapped
initiation of usage' with the potential for inside of a pit is eliminated. Partial
interruption, causing the individuals to use backfilling would cause some hazards to
one of the alternate nests. remain.
Based on the Programmatic Section 7 4.6.4.2 Recommended'Mitigation

Consultation for Moab District (ES/6 UT-
94-F-008) and guidance in Moab District Mitigation measures would be similar to
Bulletin UT-060-94-B-63, the potential those suggested in the Proposed Action.
impacts to threatened and endangered fish
species from the depletion of the 4.6.5 Facility Layout Alternative
groundwater could be offset with the
contribution of funds to the Recovery 4.6.5.1 Impacts
Program. The contribution would be a
depletion charge of approximately $12-13 The reduction in vegetated acres lost
per acre-foot of water based on the through the elimination of Waste Dump D,
'average annual depletion of the project. would provide riO significant differences to
No water would be pumped directly from impacts assessed in the Proposed Action.
the Green, Colorado, or Dolores Rivers;
and no water pumping restrictions would 4.6.5.2 Recommended Mitigation
be required for this proposed action.
Recommended mitigation is similar to
those in the Proposed Action.
239961R3.4 5/15/96(9:11 PM)IR1'TI2 4-45

4.6.6 Waste Rock Selective Handling 4.7.2 Proposed Action
Alternative
4.7.2.1 Impacts
4.6.6.1 Impacts
As noted in Section 3.7, actlVltles
Impacts would be the same as those proposed to be conducted by Summo
estimated for the Proposed Action. would impact "acreage in two different
grazing allotnients: approximately 349
4.6.6.2 Recommended Mitigation acres would· be disturbed from
implementation of the Proposed Action in
Recommended mitigation is similar to the Lower Lisbon Allotment (Table 3.7-4)
those in the Proposed Action. and about 480 acres would be disturbed
from the Proposed Action in the Lisbon
4.7 GRAZING Allotment (Table 3.7-5). However, the
area contemplated for Summo's Lisbon
4.7.1 Methodology Valley Project is in an area that has been
disturbed by prior mining and processing
This section addresses the poten,tial operations. Approximately 24 acres of
impacts to livestock (i.e., cattle) grazing land in the Lower Lisbon Allotment and 61
that could result from implementation of acres in the Lisbon Valley would be re-
the Proposed Action. In addition, potential disturbed by Summo's proposed
impacts to cattle grazing associated with operations. As such, the net acreage of
each of the alternatives to the Proposed disturbance that would be directly
Action, as identified in Section 2.3, are attributed to Summo's operations during
addressed below. As noted in Section 3.7, the life-of-mine would be 720 acres (i.e.,
Summo's proposed operations would site disturbance in the Lower Lisbon and
impact two grazing allotments: Pasture Lisbon Allotments of 349 and 480 acres,
No. 1 of the Lower Lisbon Allotment and respectively, for a total of .829· acres less
portions o£:the Lisbon Allo~ent. prior disturbance· in the Lower Lisbon and
Lisbon Allotments of 24 and 61 acres,
The BLM has indicated that the number of respectively, for a total of85 acres).
acres required to support one ADM (i.e.,
carrying capacity) varies throughout the Environmental impacts to cattle grazing
areas that would be disturbed by Summo's woul~ occur in three ways. First, Summo's
proposed Lisbon Valley Project. For proposed operations would "result in the
example,S to 10 acres is needed to support temporary loss of grazing areas during
one ADM in areas with "a active mining operations. Approximately
sagebrush/crested wheatgrass plant 71.6 AUMs of grazing capacity would be
community (BLM 1995c). Table 4.7-1 temporarily lost during development of
addresses the acreage needed for one Summo's Lisbon Valley Project (Table
AUM based on various BLM-identified 4.7-2). The temporary loss of 42.7 AUMs
ecological sites. in the Lower Lisbon Allotment would be
approximately 4 percent of the allotment's
grazing capacity. This level of change
23mru.4 SIlSl96(9:1l PM)/RPT12 4-46
:J.llb
TABLE 4.7-1
ACREAGE REQumEMENTS FOR ONE ADM BY ECOLOGICAL SITE
Ecological Site Acres/ADM Facility

Upland Loam 20 to 30 Sentinel Pits 1 & 2
Waste Dump C
Sage/Grass Areas
Upland Loam seeded with 5 to 10 GTOPit

crested wheatgrass Waste Dumps A, B, & D
Ore Leach PadIProcess Plant Area
Sage/Crested Wheatgrass Areas
Upland Stony Loam 50 P-J Slopes
Upland Shallow Loam 30 to 50 P-J Slopes
Semidesert Stony Loam 50 P-J Slopes
Upland Shallow Loam seeded 10 to 15 P-J Slopes

with crested wheatgrass
Mine site o Centennial Pit
Source: BLM 1996
239%1R3.4 5115196(9:11 PM)lRPTI2 4-47

TABLE 4.7-2
TE:MPORARY GRAZING LOSS
Average Acreage Proposed Disturbed

Area perAUM l AcreageZ LossAUM
Sentinel Pit No.1 25 38 1.5
Centennial Pit 0 116 0
GTOPit 7.5 403 5.3
Waste Dump A 7.5 186 24.8
WasteDumpB 7.5 90 12
WasteDumpC 25 118 4.7
WasteDumpD 7.5 55 7.3
Leach Pad Area 7.5 56 7.5
Process Area and 7.5 21 2.8
Facilities
Haul Roads 7.5 32 4.3
Plant Growth Medium 40 39 1.0
Stockpiles
TOTAL 71.6
Source:
1 Based on values in Table 4.7-1.
2 Based on values in Tables 3.7-4 and 3.7-5.
3 GTO Pit acreage amount reflects proposed purchase by Summo of the Patterson Ranch.
would have little impact on the overall or resource management objectives for
management of the allotment. The either allotment. The loss of 2-5 AUMs
temporary loss of 28.9 AUMs in the within the project area would be absorbed
Lisbon Allotment would be less than 1 by grazing other portions of these
percent of the total AUMs and would not allo~ents.
affect the grazing of the allotment.
This temporary loss would be for the
There would be a permanent loss of 1.9 length of the project since Summo
AUMs in the Lisbon Allotment and 5.3 proposes to fence the entire site. Thus,
AUMs in the Lower Lisbon Allotment. this temporary loss would be for at least 13
The permanent loss of 2-5 AUMs would years:
be difficult to measure due to the size of
the allotments; but these losses, after • 10 years for mining operations,
reclamation, would not affect the • approximately one year for final
implementation of future grazing schedules reclamation
23996/RS.4 SIlSl*(9:1l PM)/RPT12 4-48
• at least two years to allow 4.7.4 Open Pit Backlilling
sufficient vegetative growth to Alternative
establish on reclaimed areas (e.g.,
waste dumps) before grazing would 4.7.4.1 Impacts
resume.
Two scenarios are identified in Section
Second, Summors proposed operations 2.3.2 for pit backfilling: partial and
would result in the permanent loss of complete. Environmental impacts to cattle
grazing areas after cessation of active grazing from these two scenarios are
mining operations. Summo does not addressed below.
propose to reclaim any of the four mine
pits, but would reclaim the remaining Scenario 1 - The environmental impacts to
facilities. As such, a permanent loss of cattle grazing from implementing the
about 7.2 AUMs would result from not partial backfilling scenario would be
. backfilling and reclaiming the Sentinels, comparable to the environmental impacts
Centennial and GTO Pits (Table 4.7-3). of the Proposed Action, as discussed in
Section 4.7.1. Cattle grazing of the
Finally, Summors proposed fencing would reclaimed pit floor should be considered
block normal movement of livestock non-existent ·because of the physical
between two grazing areas. That is, the barriers that Summo would install to bar
fencing would restrict trailing that access to the pit floor. Thus, approximately
currently occurs to gain access by cattle to 71.6 ADM's (Table 4.7-2) would be
other portions of the Lisbon Allotment and temporarily lost for at least 13 years and
to gain access to the Lower Lisbon 7.2 AUMs (Table 4.7-3) would be
Allotment. permanently lost under the partial
backfilling scenario.
Scenario 2 - Environmental impacts to
Summo has proposed to implement its livestock grazing as a result of
operations in a way that minimizes impacts implementing the complete backfilling
to livestock grazing to the extent possible. scenario would occur only during Summors
For example, the waste dumps and haul operations. Approximately 71.6 AUMrs
roads would be reseeded with species would be temporarily lost for about 13
compatible to cattle grazing. In addition, years, as detailed in Section 4.7.1.1, no
the pits would be blocked off during final AUM's would be lost after final
reclamation to minimize access. As such, reclamation since the site would be
no mitigation is recommended. completely reclaimed. Thus,
implementation of this alternative would
4.7.3 No Action Alternative have a net gain over the Proposed Action
of 7.2 AUMs (i.e., no permanent grazing
There would be no impact to livestock .loss would occur from completely
grazing under the No Action Alternative. backfilling the pits).
In addition, the existing approximate 85
acre disturbance associated with prior
development would remain.
239961R3.4 5/15f95(9:34PM)lRPTI2 4-49
TABLE 4.7-3
PERMANENT GRAZING LOSS
Average Acreage Proposed Disturbed

, Area perAUM1 Acreag~ LossAUM
Sentinel Pit No. 1 25 38 1.5
Centennial Pit o 116 o
3
GTOPit 7.5 40 5.3
TOTAL 7.2
1 Based on values in Table 4.7-l.
2 Based on values in Tables 3.7-4 and 3.7-5.
S GTO Pit acreage amount reflects proposed purchase by Summo of the Patterson Ranch.
4.7.4.2 Recommended Mitigation would result in an increase in temporary

loss grazing of only about 2 AUMs, or a
No mitigation is recommended. net reduction in temporary loss grazing of
5.3 AUMs (i.e., 7.3 AUMs less 2 AUMs)
4.7.5 Facility Layout Alternative assuming the area for deleted Waste Dump
D is not fenced. Upon the reclamation of
4.7.5.1 Impacts expanded Waste Dump C, the permanent
loss of grazing capacity would be the same
Under this alternative, there would be no as under the Proposed Action.
change of the impacts to livestock grazing
that is different from the impacts 4.7.5.2 Recommended Mitigation
associated' with the Proposed Action since
Stimmo proposed to fence the entire No mitigation is recommended.
Lisbon Valley Project site.
4.7.6 Waste Rock Selective Handling
However, a slight reduction in the loss of Alternative
temporary grazing would be realized if the
facility layout alternative would be 4.7.6.1 Impacts
implemented and Summo would not fence
off the 55 acres associated with Waste Implementation of the Waste Rock
Dump D. As noted in Table 4.7-2, about Handling Procedure Alternative would
7.3 AUMs would be temporarily lost reduce the potential impacts of acid
during development of Waste Dump D. generation from certain waste rock
Under the facility layout alternative, Waste lithologies. However, the overall direct
Dump D would be eliminated and Waste impact to cattle grazing would not change
Dump C would be expanded by from the Proposed Action. Thus, as with
approximately 50 acres. The disturbance the Proposed Action, approximately 71.6
of an additional 50 acres at Waste Dump C ADM's would be temporarily lost for about
:lJ996IR3.4 SIlSJ96(9:ll PM)IRPT12 4-50
13 years and 7.2 AUMs would be 4.8.2 Proposed Action
permanently lost under this alternative.
4.8.2.1 Impacts
Employment, Earnings, and the Local
No mitigation is recommended. Economy
4.8 SOCIOECONOMICS Employment
4.8.1 Methodology Over the ten-year life of the Proposed

Action, employment would generally
This section describes the potential impacts increase from Year 1 to Year 6 and remain
the Proposed Action would have on constant from Year 6 until completion of
various socioeconomic conditions and mining in Year 10. During initial project
addresses concerns expressed during construction, a workforce of roughly 80
project scoping. These issues include: would be required. Construction of the
leach pad, SXlEW plant, mine office, and
• New employment and earnings that other mine facilities would take
would be generated by the approximately six to ten months. Since
construction and operation of the construction of some of the mine facilities
proposed mine would require contractors that have
• Impacts on the study area economy specialized expertise, it is likely that many
• Impacts on housing in the study of the construction workers would be
area brought in from communities outside of the
• Impacts on tax revenues collected study area for up to ten months. While
by local governments many construction workers would be non-
• Impacts the Proposed Action could local, some of the construction jobs would
have on community facilities and . be filled by local workers. Due to
government services including uncertainties regarding specific contractors
water supply, wastewater that would be used and the precise mix of
treatment, public schools, hea1tJ?, trades and expertise that would be
care, and fire and police protection required, it is unclear how many local
• Potential impacts the Proposed versus non-local construction workers
Action could have on the overall would be hired at this time.
quality of life of the residents in the
study area. After construction is completed, a variety
of salaried and hourly jobs would be
created for a period of ten years, which is
the estimated operational life of the
project. Salaried mine personnel, which
would consist of the mine superintendent,
four mine foremen, two mining engineers,
the chief geologist, the maintenance.
superintendent, and support personnel
23996/R3.4 S/lS!96(9:Il PM)/RPT/2 4-51
would total a constant 12 positions over mechanics helpers, and general laborers.
the life of the project. Administrative and Figure 4.8-1 illustrates the total projected
processing salaried positions would include employment over the life of" the Proposed'
the general manager, chief accountant, Action.
plant superintendent, and other technical
and support positions totaling 14 It is expected that the majority of
, ' employees over the life of the project. It is positions that would be created over the
expected that 38 hourly positions would be ten year operational life of the project
available for ore crushing and stacking, could be filled by residents of the
operations in the SXlEW plant, crane and communities within the study area such as
forklift operators, laboratory technicians, Moab, Monticello, Blanding, and La Sal
security guards, electricians, and welders. (Myrick 1996; Langstan 1996; Curtis
These jobs would also be required over the 1996): Given the distance of the mine site
full ten-year project life. In total, 64 from the communities in southern San Juan
positions would be created that would last County, such as Blu:£I: Montezuma Creek,
throughout the mine's ten-year life. and Mexican Hat, it is unlikely that the
Additional hourly mining jobs, however, project would employ a significant number
would fluctuate over the life of the project. of residents of those communities.
As the mine would enter different stages of There are many skilled workers within
production, actual hourly mining Grand and San Juan counties who could
employment would vary. During the initial staff the project. The decline of the mining
two years of production, hourly mining industry in the early to mid-1980s, fQrced
jobs would number about 46 positions. The many miners to leave the study 'area in
.number of hourly labor mine openings search of work. The trade and-s.~~ce
would increase over the following years of sectors in Monticello and primarily Moab,
the project. During the third year, an however, absorbed a large percentage of
additional 15 positions would open, the remaining former miners. Local
increasing the hourly mining staff total to workers who have mining experience or
61 employees. The third and fourth possess the skills needed to mine would
phases, or Years 4 and 5 and 6 through 10, likely leave the typically lower paying trade
would utilize an estimated 72 and 79 and. service positions for the higher wage
hourly mining workers, respectively. After job opportunities the mine would create.
Year 10, reclamation of the mine would This transfer of workers to mining
last up to 5 years and would employ a employment would represent a loss of less
declining number of workers until than one percent of workers from the
completion. Examples of hourly mining service and trade sectors. Given the
jobs that would be created include drillers, population growth that is projected to
driller's helpers, blasting technicians, heavy occur, the growth in the labor force should
equipment operators (loaders, graders, replace lost service and trade workers.
dozers), truck drivers, fuel and lube
servicemen, heavy equipment mechanics,
23996lR3.4 SIlSl96(9:11 PM)lRPTI2 4-52

Figure 4.8-1
Projected Employment
160~------------------------~----~~-----------
140 -1---------===
...
., 129 -1----...., C Hourly Mining Personnel
~ 100
'-
Q
e Hourly Ore Processing, SXJEW
..,~ 80 III Salary Mine Personnel
§ 60 D&w:r'Pin~ }>ersOnnel
Z 40 • Salary Administrative
29
9
y~ y~ y~ y~ y~ y~ y~ y~ y~ y~
123 456 7 8 9 ro
Phases
In addition, the imminent closure of the second to hourly mining openings in actual
Energy Fuels uranium mine just outside of positions, would payout $14,842,000 in
Blandirig would likely contribute to the payroll. Administrative and processing
number of experienced miners available to salaried positions would pay approximately
staff the project. the Energy Fuels mine is $6,400,000, and $4,380,000 would be paid
scheduled for closure in the near future and for the nnrung salaried positions
will layoff a total of approximately 70 (Gochnour & Associates 1996a).
workers. Miners have already been laid-off
and are anxiously awaiting new mining Total earnings would increase over the
opportunities (Myrick 1996). Additional operational life of the mine until Year 6,
workers could be available in communities where they would level off. until
in western Colorado, such as Dove Creek, completion of the project. Total earnings
Naturita, and 'Nucla. To the extent the in Years 1 and 2 would be about
project would be staffed by local area $4,461,000 each year. Due to increases in
workers, the project would result in a hourly mine personnel that would be
decrease in the unemployment rate, which utilized, total earnings would rise to about
would be a positive impact on the study $5,096,000 in Year 3, and then to
area economy. As described in Section $5,579,000 per year in Years 4 and 5. In
3.8.2, the unemployment rate in 1995 was Years 6 through 10, total annual earnings
6.3% in Grand County and 7.7% in San would peak at about $5,876,000.
Juan County.
During the reclamation phase, which would
Earnings last .up to five years, additional earnings
would be generated, although they would
The operation of the mine would generate decline relative to the productive phase of
an estimated $54,555,637 in payrolL Of the mine.
that total, the hourly mining labor payroll
for the full 10 years contributes 53 percent
or $28,933,632 to the mine's total payrolL
Processing hourly employment which are
239961R3.4 snS!96(9:J1 PM)JRPT12 4-53.
Local Economy employees currently live, the distribution of
earnings expenditure and the associated
The Proposed Action would have creation of new jobs is uncertain at this
numerous impacts on the local economy of time. It is assumed that many of these new
the study area, as well as the State of Utah. jobs would be created in Monticello and
The project-related creation of new jobs Moab, with the communities of La Sal and
and substantial generation of earnings Blanding also experiencing some indirect
described above would result in reduced job creation as well. In total, direct and
unemployment and increased economic indirect employment that would be created
growth in Grand and San Juan counties. due to the Proposed Action would be 141
To the extent workers would be hired from to 197 private sector jobs over the ten-year
western Colorado (e.g., Dove Creek, operational life of the project, which would
Naturita), economic benefits would be be considered a positive economic impact
experienced there as well. Economic on the study area. These new jobs
benefits would occur as a result of indirectly created by the Proposed Action
expenditure of mine-related earnings on would comprise both expansion of existing
housing, food, and goods and services businesses and creation of new businesses
provided by study area businesses. in Moab, Monticello, and elsewhere. As
Similarly, this spending activity would stated previously, this estimate does not
generate additional sales tax revenue for include mine purchases of equipment and
local cities and counties, as well as the supplies, such as fuel and pipe, which
State of Utah. Estimates of these indirect would further increase indirect employment
economic benefits that would be generated that would be created within the study
by the Proposed Action were calculated by area.
the project team using the Southeastern
Utah Region Input/Output Economic Similarly, the expenditure of mine-related
Model, created by the Governor's Office of earnings in the local economy and the
Planning and Budget. Since it is unclear at indirect creation of jobs would generate
the present time where many of the mine's additional earnings in the local economy
equipment and supply purchases would that would also be spent in the local area.
take place, the model was run using Based on the mine-related earnings
projected employment and earnings values described above, the Proposed Action
only. would indirectly generate an additional
$1,160,000 to $1,528,000'in earnings per
Based on the mine employment projections year over the life of the project which
provided above, the Proposed Action would then decline during reclamation and
would create an additional 31 to 54 new end at completion. These indirect earnings
jobs in local area communities over the life would be generated 'primarily due to the
of the project. These would primarily increased service and trade sector
consist of service and trade sector jobs, employment, but also due to increased
with a few jobs created in finance, transportation and utility employment,
insurance, and real estate, as well as construction employment, and finance,
transportation and public utilities. Since it insurance and real estate employment. In.
is unclear where all of the local project total, direct and indirect private sector
239961R3.4 5IlSI!l6(9:11 PM)/RPT12 4-54
..~
earnings that would be generated due to that a significant economic "bust" would
the Proposed Action would be $5.62 occur as a result of closure of the mine.
million to $7.40 million per year. Over the
ten year life of the project, total direct and Housing - Construction Phase
indirect earnings would be about $68.74
millio~ which would be a substantial During the estimated 10 month
economic benefit to the study area construction period, a projected 80
economy. construction workers would be hired.
Currently, Summo is fairly confident no
Assuming future exploration activities and .firms within the study area have experience
market conditions do not support with the construction of copper mines. It
additional mining in Lisbon Valley in the is likely an outside construction company
future, completion of reclamation and with such a specialty would need to· be
closure of the proposed Lisbon Valley contracted. If a company outside of the
Copper Mine would result in the loss of study area is contracted, it is likely that
employment in Grand and San Juan many of the workers possessing specialized
Counties as roughly 143 mine workers skills would also come from outside the
would be laid off. Service and trade sector local area, resulting in a temporary influx
jobs could also be indirectly lost, due to of residents. While much of the specialized
reduced spending activity by mine workers. construction workforce would be non-
This direct and indirect loss of jobs would local, some of the general construction
represent roughly a 0.2 percent loss of workers (e.g., truck drivers and heavy
employment in Grand and San Juan equipment operators) could be hired from
Counties overall. Unemployed rnme the local communities, thereby reducing
workers would have to seek· other this temporary influx of residents.
employment opportunities in the study
area. Some would find construction Temporary housing, including motel, hotel,
industry jobs, some would have to work in and bed and breakfast units, in the cities of
the lower paying service and trade sectors, Moab and Monticello and the surrounding
and others may leave the study area communities is plentiful. By early summer,
altogether to pursue employment the total number of units available between
opportunities elsewhere in Utah or in other the two cities is 1455. Including the
states. approximate total number of RV hook up
spots adding an additional 457 units, the
Based on projected ·stUdy area population total number of available temporary
and economic growth, it is very likely that housing is 1912 (Snyder 1996, Walker
the overall number of jobs in Grand and 1996). With an abundant number of
San Juan Counties will increase, despite temporary housing options, the study area
closure of the mine in roughly 15 years. would likely not feel a strain from the
Since overall employment will grow in the potential influx of as many as 80 temporary
future and mine closure would result in a construction workers ..
loss of less than one percent of jobs in
Grand and San Juan· Counties, it is unlikely
239961R3.4 5/15/96(9:11 PM)lRPTI2 4-55

Housing - Operational Phase to San Juan County would be $471,600.
This figure would decline to $47,200 in
Monticello and particularly Moab, might Year 10, with a ten-year average of
have difficulty absorbing additional non- $235,800 per year. These revenues would
local workers and families with the be used by the county to fund a variety of
currently low vacancy rates. New government services and community
ordinances and housing projects would facilities utilized by all county residents.
relieve some of the current strain on The San Juan County School District
housing demands. Currently however, the would receive the largest portion of county
City of Moab has a vacancy rate of only ad valorernJproperty tax revenue.
0.9 percent while Monticello has a rate of
4.51 percent (SEUAOQ 1996). This Purchasing activity by Summo would
analysis suggests, however, the likelihood generate sales and use tax revenue for the
of a large influx of new residents to the cities and counties of the study area and
study area is low. the State of Utah.. Although estimates of
local purchasing actlVltIes are very
At the height of the mine's operation, a tentative, estimated sales taxes that would
total of 143 workers would be employed. be paid by the project amount to
Employment opportunities would primarily approximately $740,000 per year. A
be filled by those who worked on the mines portion of these sales tax dollars would be
which were active in the 1980s and who paid to the State of Utah. It is unclear how
are now employed in other sectors. In purchases and associated sales tax revenue
addition, the miners who are currently would be allocated between Grand and San
finishing work at the local uranium mine Juan counties at this time. As described
would likely look for the mining for property tax revenue, this increase in
opportunities presented by the proposed revenue of $740,000 would be used by the
copper mine (Myrick 1996). counties and the state to fund a variety of
services and facilities utilized by all
Tax. Revenue residents. In addition to mine purchases,
employees of the mine would spend a
The Proposed Action would contribute a portion of their earnings on goods and
net revenue increase to San Juan and services provided by businesses within San
Grand counties, as well as the State of Juan and Grand counties. Additional sales
Utah and the Federal government over its tax revenue would be generated through
ten-year life. In San Juan County, the these purchasing activities. Local
physical location of the proposed mine, the governments in turn would use this tax
project would generate considerable ad revenue for providing services and
valorem/property tax revenue. Since mine operating community facilities, thereby
equipment that would be used to assess benefiting local area residents.
valuation would be depreciated over the
life of the project, property taxes collected It is important to note that although the
from the project by San Juan County Proposed Action would result in limited
would gradually decline. In the first year, employment and earnings benefits for the
estimated property tax that would be paid residents of southern San Juan County and
239961R3.4 SIlSl96(9:11 PM)'RPT12 4-56
· the Navajo Nation, tax revenues generated potential that fires or other unplanned
by the project in San Juan County would emergencies requiring assistance could
benefit all residents of San Juan County, occur at the mine site. If such an incident
including those living in and around were to occur, Summo may request the
Mexican Hat, Bluff: and Montezuma Creek assistance of the fire department in
due to increased funding of schools and Monticello and/or medical response
other community facilities and services. services (am~ulance) in Monticello or
Moab. Since it is difficult to predict the
Mineral lease payments would also be extent these serVices would be utilized,· if
collected by the State of Utah for mining at all, it is uncertain whether· this potential
activities that would -occur on state lands. demand would increase costs for those
It is estimated these payments would services appreciably. Based on the current
average $252,100 per year or $2,521,000 status of fire protection and medical
over the life of the project, thereby services in the study area, the rare use of
benefiting the State School Trust· and these services are not predicted to result in
school districts throughout the state major costs to providers and result in any
receiving trust fund monies. reduction in these services to study area
residents.
In summary, from a cost versus benefits
standpoint, the Proposed Action would The Proposed Action would not
contribute millions of dollars to various appreciably increase the population of the
state and local government entities. study area and therefore would not
Despite costs that would be borne by the significantly increase the demand on public
counties for road maintenance, the project schools in Grand or San Juan counties. At
would result in a large net benefit for local present, there is adequate capacity in both
government fiscal conditions. During Grand and San Juan counties to
operations, therefore, impacts would be accommodate some growth, nevertheless.
medium to high, positive. Over time, as Since the Proposed Action would not
production eventually would decline and significantly increase the population of the
end, royalties and tax revenues generated study area, there would be minimal
would also decline and end. increase in demand on medical facilities,
public utilities, water· supply, and
Local FacDities and Services wastewater treatment. The proposed
powerline would supply adequat~ electrical
The Proposed Action would increase wear power for the project. Existing facilities
on county maintained roads· in the study are considered to have excess capacity at
area due to the increase in automobile and the present time and would easily
truck traffic the project would generate. accommodate the modest. increase in
Although this increase in wear would demand the Proposed Action could
increase county road maintenance costs to generate. Thus, no impact is projected.
some extent,. the economic and fiscal
benefits would more than compensate for Since security would be self-provided by
any increase in maintenance costs borne by Summo at the mine site, the project would
San Juan County. In addition, there is the not directly increase the demand for law
239961R3.4 S/!SJ96(9:11 PM)lRPTI2 4-57
enforcement services. Similarly, since only housing, the project could result in positive
a modest mcrease in population would social impacts.
occur in the study area, if any, there would
be a minimal increase in demand for law The study area has a long history of
enforcement services in the communities mining and natural resources extraction
where project workers would live, such as and production. Many residents in the
Monticello and Moab. As described in study area historically derived their
Section 3.8.5, demands for law livelihoods from uranium and vanadium
enforcement services are not nearing mining and milling. In general, the fact
capacity, so a slight increase in demand in that employment in these .industries
study area communities due to the provides higher wages and is the economic
Proposed Action would have no impact. base of the region is well understood in the
communities of the study area. Urilike
Social Impacts and Quality of Life other areas where a new mine or natural
gas development would cause significant
The Proposed Action could impact the changes in the composition and character
aesthetic beauty and recreational value of of local communities, the proposed project
Lisbon Valley to some extent. These would be compatible with other industries
impacts are descnoed in Sections 4.13 and that were established in the study area for
4.16, respectively. Although many decades. For individuals that would be
residents of the study area consider employed directly or indirectly, the project
outdoor recreational opportunities and may have beneficial impacts on quality of
aesthetic beauty to be an important factor life. In general, wages that would be paid
that contributes to quality of life, the to project workers 'would be higher than
Proposed Action would not significantly many of the wages paid to service and
impact quality of life for those people trade sector workers in the study area. In
because the project site is located in a addition, to the extent the proposed project
remote area that is far removed from the provides additional tax revenue and royalty
communities of Moab and Monticello and income to various local government
is not in an important scenic or recreational entities and increases the funding of
use area.' Residents of Moab and important community facilities, such as
Monticello would not see the project site libraries and parks, the project could have
from their communities and would have beneficial impacts on the quality of life in
plentiful outdoor recreational oppo~es the study area.
closer to home.
Alternatively, the creation of higher wage
mining jobs would increase the incomes of Mitigation of socioeconomic impacts
many households in Grand and San Juan would consist of hiring local area workers
counties. To the extent the increase in to the greatest extent possible. This would
income and economic opportunity for minimize the need for recruiting non-local
study area residents reduces problems workers who would move to the study
associated with higb living costs, such as area and increase the demand for
2399&'R3.4 SIlSl!l6(9:11 PM)/RPT12 4-58

pe1ll1anent housing and local government 4.8.5.2 Recommended Mitigation
services and community facilities.
Recommended mitigation would be the
4.8.3 No Action Alternative same as for the Proposed Action.
4.8.3.1 Impacts 4.8.6 Waste Rock Selective Handling

Alternative
Under the No Action Alternative, no
project-related employment, earnings 4.8.6.1 Impacts
generation, or other impacts in the study
area would occur to socioeconomic Impacts for this alternative would be the
resources. In brief: many of the positive same as those described for the Proposed
economic and fiscal impacts that could Action. Modifications to waste rock
result from project would not occur. handling procedures would not appreciably
change mine employment and earnings, nor
4.8.4 Open Pit Backidling Alternative associated economic impacts to the study
area.
4.8.4.1 Impacts
Impacts to socioeconomic conditions for
this alternative would generally be the Recommended mitigation would be the
same as those described for the Proposed same as for the Proposed Action.
Action, although final backfilling of the
Centennial and GTO pits would prolong 4.9 TRANSPORTATION
employment, earnings, and related positive
economic impacts for about one year. 4.9.1 .Methodology
4.8.4.2 Recommended Mitigation The following discussion identifies

potential transportation-related impacts of
Recommended mitigation would be the the Proposed Action and the various
same as for the Proposed Action. project alternatives. Issues addressed
include those identified by the public and
4.8.5 Facility Layout Alternative interested government agencies during the
EIS scoping process. These issues include:
4.8.5.1 Impacts
• Projected volumes of commuter
Impacts for this alternative would be the and truck traffic associated with the
same as those described for the Proposed project
Action. Modifications to the layout of • The potential for an increase in
waste rock dumps would not appreciably accidents along roads that would be
change mine employment and earnings, nor used by the project
associated economic impacts to the study • Anticipated road maintenance
area. requirements due to trucks using
highways and local roads
23996JR3.4 5115196(9:11 PM)JRPT12 4-59
4.9.2 Proposed Action would not be shuttled by Summo to the
mine by bus or vans. Typical commuter
4.9.2.1 Impacts trips would originate in Monticello, Moab,
and possibly Blanding, and Dove Creek,
Traffic on Highways and County Roads Colorado. Commuters driving from Moab
would take U.S. Highway 191 south to La
Project-related traffic would consist of Sal Junction, then proceed east on State
worker commute trips to the mine site, Route 46, and south on Lisbon Valley
truck trips associated with the delivery of Road to reach the mine site. From
various supplies to the mine and shipment Monticello, it is likely that commuters
of copper plates from the mine to their would take U. S. Highway 666 east to
market destinations, and heavy equipment VCoio Road, and proceed north to Summit
movement within the active mining area Point and down Three Step Hill to the
associated with the operation. mine site. From Blanding, commuters
would take U.S. Highway 191 north to
For the Proposed Action, it is estimated Monticello and continue on to the mine as
that there would be approximately 33 described above. From. Dove Creek,
commuter round trips per day during the commuters would take U.S. Highway 666
mine construction period and Years 1 and west to UCoio Road and proceed north to
2 of mine operation for the Monday the mine as described above.
through Friday work week. Weekend shifts
would result in roughly 21 commuter Based on review of projected project
round trips on Saturdays and Sundays. In equipment and supply requirements and
Years 3 through 5, weekday commute trips copper plate production, truck traffic
would increase to 41 trips per day. In Year associated with delivery of supplies and
6, due to anticipated pre-stripping of the shipment of copper plates would include
GTO Pit by a contract firm, commuter approximately seven trips per day by heavy
trips would peak at 73 trips per day. For (I8-wheeler) trucks and approximately
Years 6 through 10, weekday commuter three trips per day by medium (six-wheel)
trips would drop to 43 trips per day. trucks during Years 1 through 3. Heavy
Weekend commuter traffic over the life of truck trips would increase slightly and peak
the project would be lower, ranging from at about nine trips per day during Years 5
21 to about 33 trips per day. In addition, a and 6, while medium trucks would peak at
nominal number of automobile trips is roughly 12 trucks per day in Year 6. The
anticipated for visitors to the mine site. For 'majority of truck trips would enter the
purposes of this analysis, it is expected that study area on U.S. Highway 191 and
approximately two visitor trips per day would proceed to La Sal Junction, then.
would occur due to potential inquiries east on State Route 46, and then south on
about mine employment or general public the Lisbon Valley Road to reach the mine
interest in the operation. site. Truck trips would seldomly use the
UCoio or West Summit Roads to access
It is assumed that most project workers the mine site from the south due to rough
would carpool together in cars and pickup road conditions.
trucks to reach the project site. Workers
23m'R3.4 SIlSJ96(9:11 PM}/RPT12 4-60
None of the highways and local roads that production would end at those pits. Over
would be used by commuters and project- a 24-hour period, this haul traffic would
related trucks are experiencing traffic amount to just over 4 crossings per hour.
congestion at this time. In fact, although Since open pit mining involves periods of
study area traffic volumes have increased both ore extraction and waste rock
substantially over recent years, the removal, ore hauling across the county
transportation system is still operating well road would not necessarily occur every
below its capacity due to the rural day.
character of the study area. From a traffic
and congestion standpoint, the addition of Second, the hauling of waste rock from the
project-related commuter and truck traffic Centennial Pit to Dump C could also
(96 vehicles per day maximum) would involve the crossing of the county road
result in a modest increase in traffic during Years 1 through 9. Based on
volumes, which would not exceed the projected waste rock generation from the
capacity of project area highways or the Centennial Pit, it is estimated that up to
local road network. It is conceivable that 150 roundtrips (3 00 crossings) per day
this increase in traffic could cause modest would occur. Over a 24-hour period, this
traffic delays and inconveniences on rare haul traffic would equate to about 12 or 13
occasions under certam circumstances. crossings per hour.
Mine Traffic Crossing Lisbon Valley In terms of the potential impact to the
Road traveling public, it is important to note that
traffic associated with public use of Lisbon
For heavy equipment operation within the Valley Road is generally very low, but
active mine area, the vast majority of varies depending on the time of year
activity would be in areas closed to the (hunting season, livestock grazing and
public and would not impact the publi~ calving activities result in increased traffic).
transportation network. However, two As described in Section 2.2.2.5, Summo
types of hauling activities would require has proposed to install stop signs at the
the crossing of Lisbon Valley Road and intersection of the haul road with Lisbon
could result in potential conflicts with the Valley Road, as well as install warning
traveling public. First, the hauling of ore signs on the county road along the
from the Sentinel #1 and #2 Pits to the ore northern and southern approaches to the
stockpile area adjacent to the crusher and intersection to alert drivers to the presence
leach pad would involve the crossing of the of the haul trucks and the need to stop.
county road during Years 1 through 7. Finally, the speed limit along the county
These trips would involve large, off-road road would also be reduced to increase
ISO-ton trucks. Based on projected ore reaction time and further reduce the
production from the Sentinel Pits, it is potential for accidents. It is also important
estimated that up to 50 roundtrips (100 to note that· the location of the proposed
crossings) per day would be required to haul road intersection is in an open area
haul the ore across the county road to the with very good sight distance. Assuming
stockpile area during Years 1 through 6, an automobile and haul truck approached
with fewer trips occurring in Year 7 as the intersection· at the same time, both
239961R3.4 5115196(9:11 PM)lRPTJ2 4-61
drivers would see the other vehicle well roughly double the volume of truck and
before reaching the intersection. automobile traffic on the local roads
serving the mine site, thereby increasing
Given the low traffic volume along the the need for maintenance on those roads.
county road, combined with modest truck Although future project activities would
traffic projected that would cross the road increase the need for maintenance on
(up to 13 crossings per hour), the potential county roads, and that maintenance may
for collisions between public vehicles and increase costs borne by the county road
mine trucks is very low. Similarly, due the district, the proposed project would result
sporadic nature of this haul traffic and low in numerous positive economic and fiscal
public traffic volumes along the county impacts on' San Juan County that would
road, it is unlikely that any appreciable likely offset any increase in county road
traffic congestion or significant traffic maintenance costs. A discussion of
delays would occur as a result of the economic and fiscal impacts associated
Proposed Action. with the Proposed Action is presented in
Section 4.8.
Accidents
In terms of the potential for increased
accidents along project area highways and Mitigation measures for transportation
local roads due to project-related traffic, have been described previously and consist
potential future accidents were calculated of installing stop signs, warning signs, and
based on the 1994 accident rate for study reduced speed limits for traffic using
area highways applied to estimated project Lisbon Valley Road in the vicinity of the
traffic. Accordingly, it is estimated that the haul road intersection in the proposed
Proposed Action could result in an increase mining area. These measures would reduce
of 0.88 accident per year, using peak year the potential for collisions between mine
traffic volumes. This would represent a 5.1 haul trucks crossing Lisbon Valley Road
percent increase in accidents over 1994 and public automobiles and trucks. The
levels. reduction of speed through the area would
also reduce wear and tear on the county
Road Wear and Maintenance road. In addition, the encouragement of
Requirements carpooling by mine staff could reduce the
number of commuter vehicle trips to and
The use of county roads by project from the mine site, thereby reducing traffic
workers and trucks to access the mine volumes and further reducing road wear.
development area would increase wear and
tear on those roads to some extent and 4.9.3 No Action Alternative
would increase road maintenance costs.
The San Juan County Road Department 4.9.3.1 Impacts
has responsibility for building, improving,
and maintaining these county roads. Based Under the No Action Alternative, no
on discussions with the County Road project-related automobile or truck traffic
Department, the Proposed Action would would occur. Thus, there would be no
:!3996'R3.4 SIISJ96(9:l1 PM)lRPTI2 4-62

additional traffic volume added to study tear on those roads to some extent and
area highways and roads, no mine-related increase road maintenance costs. However,
haul traffic crossing Lisbon Valley Road, this alternative would result in numerous
no potential increase in accidents within positive economic and fiscal impacts on
the study area, no added wear on county San Iuan County that would likely offset
maintained roads, and no transportation of any increase in county road maintenance
hazardous materials. As a result, no impact costs.
to the transportation network of the study
area would occur. The use and transport of hazardous
materials would be similar to that described
4.9.4 Open Pit BackIilling for the Proposed Action, and the potential
Alternative for accidents and associated environmental
impacts would also be similar.
4.9.4.1 Impacts
Impacts under this alternative would be
very similar to those described for the :Mitigation measures for transportation
Proposed Action. Since backfilling of the under this alternative would be the same as
Centennial and GTO Pits would extend the described for the Proposed Action.
duration of activity at the mine, commuter
trips and truck trips would be extended 4.9.5 Facility Layout Alternative
over a longer period of· time until
backfilling were completed, although the 4.9.5.1 Impacts
number of trips per day would not
increase. All potential impacts to the transportation
system under this alternative would be the
For heavy equipment operation within the same as described for the Proposed Action.
active mine area, hauling activities across The elinrination of Dump D and increased
Lisbon Valley Road would be the same as size of Dump C would not change the
described for the Proposed Action. The overall number or nature of waste rock
method used for backfilling the pits under haul trips.
either scenario would not result in an
. increase in haul trips across Lisbon Valley 4.9.5.2 Recommended Mitigation
Road.
Mitigation measures for transportation
In terms of the potential for increased under this alternative would be the same as
accidents along project area highways and described for the Proposed Action.
local roads due to project-related traffic,
impacts would be the same as described for
the Proposed Action.
The use of county roads by project

workers and trucks to access the mine
development area would increase wear and
23996JR3.4 5/15/96{9: 11 PM:)IRPT12 4-63

4.9.6 Waste Rock Selective Handling Toxicity of Project-Related Hazardous
Alternative Materials
4.9.6.1 Impacts Sulfuric acid. Sulfuric acid is corrosive

and toxic. Inhalation of vapors can cause
All potential impacts to the transportation severe irritation of the respiratory system
system under this alternative would be the and may be fatal: Skin or eye exposure can
same as described for the Proposed Action. result in severe burns. Ingestion can cause
The selective handling and disposal of . severe bums to mouth, throat and stomach
waste rock would not influence or change and may also be fatal. In addition, sulfuric
the overall number or nature of waste rock acid is severely reactive with metals and
haul trips. water. Exposure to sulfuric acid would
most likely occur to mine workers handling
4.9.6.2 Recommended Mitigation the material. It is also possible that spilled
acid could contaminate soils, and destroy
:Mitigation measures for transportation vegetation and wildlife, if exposed, due to
under this alternative would be the same as spill during transport or wind drift from the
described for the Proposed Action. leach pad and conveyor areas. Exposure
due to wind ·drift is unlikely, however,
4.10 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS because spray emitters would not be used
under high wind conditions. Spills during
4.10.1 Methodology transport are possible, but are highly
unlikely due to the lack of traffic
Potential environmental impacts related to congestion in the study area, good sight
the use, storage, and disposal of hazardous distance and limited road hazards on the
materials at the Lisbon Valley Mine are Lisbon Valley Road, and reduced speeds
associated with (1) the potential for proposed for haul trucks serving the mine.
accidental spills or uncontrolled releases
into the environment and (2) nonnal or Extractants. According to product
routine uses of hazardous materials that Material Safety Data Sheets (M:SDS),
could result in contamination of the project hazard characteristics of LIX984N and
site. LIX622N extractants include severe
toxicity to humans and terrestrial and
The following section descnoes the toxic aquatic organisms, moderate flammability,
hazard characteristics of the hazardous and low reactivity. Extractants can cause
materials that would be used at the mine. severe eye and skin irritation andlor bums
Subsequent sections identifY potential if exposed. If inhaled, extractant vapors
impacts that could arise from each of the can cause irritation of the respiratory tract
project alternatives. and is harmful if swallowed. In addition,
extractants can ignite or release harmful
gasses if exposed to heat.
Exposure to extractants would most likely

occur to mine· workers handling the
239961R3.4 SlISJ96(9:11 PM)IRPT12 4-64
material. It is also possible that it could accomplished with minimal risk of
contaminate soils, and hann v~getation and contamination of the environment.
wildlife, if exposed, due to spill during
transport.' Spills during transport are Cobalt Sulfate. Review of the product
possible, but are highly unlikely due to the material safety data sheet has revealed that
lack of traffic congestion in the study area, cobalt sulfate is moderately hazardous to
good sight distance and limited road health and slightly reactive. It is not
hazards on the Lisbon Valley Road, and flammable or corrosive. Cobalt sulfate
reduced speeds proposed for haul trucks would emit toxic sulfur dioxide gas if
serving the mine. exposed to fire. In general, cobalt sulfate
could hann mine workers and possibly
Kerosene. Hazard characteristics of wildlife through exposure to dust, with
kerosene include moderate flammability if irritation of the nose and throat typical
exposed to sufficient heat or flame, and symptoms. Inhalation of cobalt sulfate dust
slight hazards associated with inhalation of can also cause headache, cough, dizziness,
vapors, ingestion, and skin and eye and difficulty breathing, depending on
exposure. Exposure to kerosene would exposure. Ingestion can cause nausea and
most likely occur to mine workers handling vomiting, and possibly death in high
the material. It is also possible that spilled concentrations. For wildlife, exposure to
kerosene could contaminate soils, and cobalt sulfate would only occur if the
hann vegetation and wildlife, if exposed, material were spilled during transport.
due to spill during transport. Spills during Since this material is a solid, cleanup of
transport are possible, but are highly spills could be easily accomplished with
unlikely due to the lack of traffic minimal risk of contamination of the
congestion in the study area, good sight environment.
distance and limited road hazards on the
Lisbon Valley Road, and reduced speeds Chlorine. Potential impacts from a
proposed for haul trucks serving the mine. chlorine release would primarily involve
mine workers and possibly vegetation and
Ferrous sulfate. Review of the product wildlife exposed to leaked gas. Since
material safety data sheet has revealed that chlorine is a gas, any accidentally released
ferrous sulfate is only slightly hazardous to material would be vented into the
health. It is not flammable, corrosive, or atmosphere and would not impact soil or
reactive, although it wotild emit toxic water resources. Chlorine gas is extremely
sulfur dioxide gas if exposed to fire. In toxic and can cause severe injury or death
general, ferrous sulfate could hann mine if inhaled in sufficient concentration. Since
workers and possibly wildlife if exposure a chlorine leak would be readily diluted in
to skin, eyes, and ingestion were to occur the atmosphere, the area of potential
in sufficient quantities. For wildlife, impact would be localized in the vicinity of
exposure to ferrous sulfate would only the leak.
occur if the material were spilled during
transport. Since ferrous sulfate is a solid, Gasoline. Gasoline contains many organic
cleanup of spilled material could be easily compounds. Benzene, one of the
components of gasoline, can potentially
23995JR3.4 5115196(9: II PM)iRPT12 4-65
cause leukemia and is toxic to the blood Given that diesel is a petroleum
and blood-forming tissues. Gasoline hydrocarbon, it is highly flammable and
contains petroleum hydrocarbons, which will ignite if exposed to heat or ignition
can irritate the eyes, skin, and lungs with source, and may explode if it reacts with
prolonged exposure. Overexposure may oxidizing agents. Potential exposure to
cause weakness, headache" nausea, diesel is greatest for mine workers. Other
confusion, blurred vision, drowsiness, and types of exposures that could be
other nervous system effects. Greater experienced are the same as described for
exposure may cause dizziness, slurred gasoline.
speech, flushed face, un~nsciousness, and
convulsions. In addition, gasoline is highly Oil and Lubricants. In general, these
flammable and can explode if it reacts with materials are not acutely toxic, unless
oxidizing agents. Exposure to gasoline exposure is extreme. Exposure to these
would most likely occur to mine workers materials may cause minor skin or eye
during fueling or maintenance of mine irritation. Prolonged exposure to waste oil
vehicles. It is also possible that spilled has caused skin cancer in animal tests.
gasoline could contaminate soils, and harm Potential exposure to oil and lubricants is
vegetation and wildlife. This would be most likely for mine workers during vehicle
unlikely at the mine, however, since maintenance.
gasoline would be stored on a containment
pad and spills of gasoline would be Antifreeze. Routes of exposure can
contained and cleaned up promptly by mine include inhalation, ingestion, absorption,
staff. Spills during transport are possible, skin contact, and eye contact. Some of the
but are highly unlikely due to the lack of effects of exposure to ethylene glycol by
traffic congestion in the study area, good inhalation include headache" nausea,
sight distance and limited road hazards on vomiting, dizziness, drowsiness, irritation
the Lisbon Valley Road, and reduced of the respiratory tract, and loss of
speeds proposed for haul trucks serving the consciousness. Ingestion may cause
mine. nausea, vomiting, headaches, dizziness, and
gastrointestinal irritation. Ingestion may be
Diesel will cause irritation of the skin, eyes, fatal. Liquid may be irritating to skin and
and lungs due to inhalation or direct eyes. Skin absorption may be harmful.
exposure. Extreme overexposure or Chronic effects of overexposure may
aspiration into the lungs will cause lung include damage to kidneys, liver, lungs,
damage andlor death. Overexposure may blood, or central nervous system. Potential
cause weakness, headache, nausea, exposure is most likely for mine workers
confusion, blurred vision, drowsiness, and during vehicle maintenance. Ethylene
other nervous system effects. ,Greater glycol spills can be of concern because of
exposure may cause dizziness, slurred its toxicity, as wildlife and stock may not
speech, flushed face, unconsciousness, and be able to detect its potential hazard.
convulsions. Naphthalene, an ingredient in
diesel fuel, can irritate the eyes, skin and Ammonium Nitrate. Routes of potential
lungs. Prolonged exposure can also be exposure include inhalation and ingestion. ,
toxic to the eyes, liver, kidneys, and blood. Dust inhalation may cause tightness and
~.4 SlISJ96(9:11 PM)/RPl"12 4-66

chest pain, coughing, and difficulty in over the entire life of the project, it is
breathing. Contact with skin or eyes may estimated that there would be 0.51
cause irritation. Ingestion may cause accident involving a truck hauling
headache, nausea, vonntmg, hazardous materials to the mine site over
gastrointestinal irritation, unconsciousness, the entire life of the project. The national
and convulsions. More importantly, accident rate used in this calculation is
ammonium nitrate is highly reactive with likely to be higher than the actual rate for
various materials as it is a strong oxidizer. southeastern Utah because it includes
Contact with other materials may cause fire urban areas which typically have heavier
or explosion. Fire or explosion of pure traffic and more accidents. The national
ammonium nitrate is the most significant rate was used because such an accident
hazard associated with this material. rate was not available for rural Utah. Thus,
the estimated 0.51 accident is probably
4.10.2 Proposed Action higher than would actually be the case.
4.10.2.1 Impacts The environmental impacts of an accident

involving a truck hauling hazardous
Potential for Accidental Spills or materials would depend on the amount and
Uncontrolled Releases the type of material spilled. Potential spill
events could range from a small spill of
Accidental spills or releases of hazardous ammonium nitrate to a major release of
materials could occur during transport to sulfuric acid. In general, the materials of
the mine site, as well as during storage greatest concern would be liquid fuels·
and/or use at the mine due to leaks from (diesel and gasoline), extractant, and
tanks, piping, or liners. ·sulfuric acid. Spills of solid or powdered
hazardous materials (ferrous sulfate,
Transportation of Hazardous Materials ammonium nitrate) are of less concern
because they could be contained and
The Proposed Action would require the cleaned up readily. Sulfuric acid or other
transport of all of the hazardous materials liquid hazardous materials spilled onto the
described above to the mine by truck using ground or into a wash would have the
the highways and local roads of the study potential to harm localized terrestrial
area. Specifically, the majority of these habitat and exposed wildlife and
materials would be transported on U.S. contaminate soils. Flammable liquids, such
Highway 191, State Route 46, and Lisbon as fuels, could ignite in an accident and
Valley Road. Based on projected cause a range fire. Due to the arid climate
consumption of these materials, it is of the study area, surface water only
estimated that about 10 truck trips per day occurs in the study area during storm
would be required for hauling hazardous events. Thus, it is unlikely that surface
materials to the mine. Based on the water resources would be contaminated
Department of Transportation accident after a spill. Similarly, groundwater
statistics for trucks hauling hazardous resources are generally at great depth, and
materials (Abkowitz· et al. 1984), combined it is unlikely that a spill event would
with the number of truck trips anticipated contaminate groundwater. Due to the
23996/R3.4 5/15196(9:11 PM)lRPTI2 4-67
remoteness of the mine site, it is unlikely previously, all hazardous materials would
that an accident involving a truck hauling be stored at the mine either within
hazardous materials would unpact human secondary containment vessels (sulfuric
populations, although it is possible that an acid and kerosene), on an HDPE lined pad
accident could occur in a town such as (diesel and gasoline), within a bermed area
Moab or Monticello. (extractant, ferrous and cobalt sulfate,
ammonium nitrate), or on a concrete floor
The transport of hazardous materials above a drainage sump (oil and lubricants,
would be perfonned by commercial antifreeze). Since all hazardous materials
vendors ~ accordance with Federal and used at the mine would be stored in this
State r~ou1ations. These laws require fashion, it is likely that any spills or
proper placarding of transport trucks, as releases that could occur in the future
well as possession of shipping papers that would be contained and cleaned up with
descn"be the contents of the truck, health minimal opportunity for contamination of
hazards associated with exposure to the the soil and surrounding environment.
material, fire and explosion risks,
procedures for handling spills or releases, Although the identified storage procedures
and emergency response telephone for hazardous materials on site would
numbers. The accidental release of a rnmuruze the risk of environmental
hazardous material during transport to the impacts, the pot~ntial still exists for major
mine site would be the respoIlSl"bility of the spills and releases due to failure of piping
carrier. Each company transporting or liners. For major spills of liquid
hazardous materials would have a Spill hazardous materials above ground due to
Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures failure of piping or other similar incident,
(SPCC) Plan to address spills of their the mine's proposed grading and drainage
cargo. In general, the potential for an design would ensure that any uncontained
accident of this nature is considered to be material would run off into the leach pad,
very low. If such an event were to occur, solution ponds, or stormwater ponds.
the spilled material would be contained and Thus, hazardous materials spilled on the
cleaned up and any contaminated soil surfuce would not be released to the
remediated according to State and Federal environment off site. The leach pad and all
guidelines. of the ponds mentioned above would be
lined and would have ample capacity to
Storage and Use of Hazardous Materials contain spilled hazardous materials. Due to
the potential for future spills, and in
Accidental Wills or uncontrolled releases compliance with various laws and
of hazardous materials could potentially regulations, Summo would prepare a
occur at the mine site for a variety of SPCC Plan for the proposed project as
reasons. The most likely type of spill described in Section 2.2.8. As a part of
would involve small quantities of fuels and implementing that plan, Summo would
oil d~g vehicle fueling and maintenance. maintain necessary spill containment and
Spills of this nature would likely be easily clean up equipment on site and mine staff
contained and cleaned up with rninirna1 would receive spill response training. In the
impact to the environment. As described event of a hazardous materials spill on the
23!l9MU.4 S11S196(9:11 PM)IRPT12 4-68
· surface, mine personnel would ideally be minimized through elimination of
contain and clean up the spill before it sprinkler application of raffinate during
would drain into the lined leach pad or high wind events.
ponds. However, the fact that all surface
drainage would drain into lined areas offers In summary, the preparation of an SPCC
assurance that spilled material would not Plan, along with maintaining associated
impact the environment. . spill response and containment equipment,
and providing thorough staff training
Another type of release of hazardous should ensure effective spill response by
materials that could occur at the mine mine staff. In addition, the design of the
would be associated with failure of a leach proposed project would provide numerous
pad or solution pond liner. Such a release type of containment that would minimize
would be contained by various wick drains, the potential for release of hazardous
underdrains, and sumps that would be materials off-site.
constructed beneath these facilities. Each
underdrain would drain into a sump with a Routine Uses of Hazardous Materials
riser pipe/monitoring well that would be and Wastes Generated
checked routinely. In addition,· a
monitoring well would be installed on the Although the vast majority of hazardous
downgradient side of the leach pad to materials that would be transported to the
detect potential groundwater project site would be completely consumed
contamination from the leach pad. These by mine activities and processes, some
surface drainage and leak detection and hazardous wastes would be generated due
contaimnent features of the project design to routine or normal operations at the mine
would facilitate monitoring of soil and that would require .disposal. Hazardous
groundwater contamination beneath the wastes that would be generated by the
mine site. mine would include small quantities of
solid laboratory wastes, liquid laboratory
Use of ANFO in blasting could contribute wastes, "crud" and cell sludge from the
elevated nitrates, possibly ammonia and SXlEW process, sludges at the bottom of
some dissolved or total organic carbon to the .raffinate and PLS ponds, residual
affect pit water quality. Such effects only wastes in the leach pad,· and waste oil,
would ocCur if ANFO is not completely lubricants, solvents and cleaners, and
consumed during blasting. antifreeze from the mine truck shop.
An additional type of potential hazardous Solid laboratory wastes would be

material release that could impact the transported off site to a licensed facility for
environment would be wind drift of disposal in accordance with state and
raffinate solution from the leach pad to federal regulations. Liquid laboratory
surrounding areas. Due to its acidity, such wastes would be routed to the raffinate
a release would likely damage or destroy pond, where they would volatilize, become
vegetation that were sprayed with the incorporated into the process solution (acid
solution and degrade its suitability as rinses), be neutralized (base rinses), or
wildlife habitat. This type of impact would
239961R3.4 5/1S/96(9:Il PM:)IRPT12 4-69
drop out of solution as precipitates on the' acceptable regulatory levels. The liquid
bottom of the pond. within the pad would then be drained!
emptied by evaporation. The pad would
The operation of the SXIEW plant would then be reclaimed with recontouring and
generate "crud", which is a mixture of capping of the top of the pad to minimize
solids (~ous minenllS and metals) and infiltration. Since infiltration would be
organic liquids. The mine would separate virtually eliminated, and the pad liner
out the organic liquids for reuse in the would not be punctured, any minute
SXlEW circuits and dispose of the solids concentrations of metals or other
on the leach pad. Cell sludge, which can compounds that may remain in the ore
have a high metals content, would be mass after rinsmg would remain
deposited on the leach pad. encapsulated within the pad and would not
escape into the environment as leachate:
Over the life of the project, various solids
and sludges would become deposited on After rinsing and treatment with lime as
the bottoms of the PLS and raffinate needed to increase pH to ,neutral levels,
ponds. These sludges would likely contain concentrations of hazardous materials
metals, acid, and possibly some organic within the leach pad, such as acid, metals,
compounds. At the end of mine life, all and organics should be eliminated or
solutions and liquids would be drained or reduced to very low levels. Reclamation of
would be evaporated from these ponds and the leach pad would eliminate infiltration of
the remaining solids and sludges would be precipitation and prohibit the generation of
tested for metals and other potentially leachate from the pad that could' possibly
hazardous compounds. These solids and contaminate soil and groundwater.
sludges would either be treated in place
(e.g., pH neutralized), or removed for Routine maintenance of mine heavy
disposal at a licensed facility in accordance equipment and other vehicles would
with State and Federal guidelines. generate modest quantities of waste oil and
lubricants, spent solvents and cleaners, and
Operation of the leach pad over the life of waste antifreeze. All of these waste
the project would result in the materials would be periodically collected
accumulation of various chemical residues and transported off site for reprocessing,
within the ore mass. Hazardous materials recycling, or disposal at licensed facilities.
that could be present in residual .form
include varying concentrations of sulfuric In summary, all hazardous wastes
acid, low concentrations of organic generated at the mine over the life of the
compounds from the SXlEW circuits (e.g., project would either be transported off site
extractant and kerosene), and metals for disposal at an appropriate facility or
associated with "crud" and cell sludges treated and neutralized on site to
deposited on the pad from the SXlEW acceptable regulatory levels. Thus, little or
plant As described in Section 2.2.11.2, the no impact associated with the routine use
leach pad would be flushed with fresh of hazardous materials and associated
water and lime, if necessary, to reduce acid wastes generated is projected.
and other chemical constituents to
23m'R3.4 51151%(9:11 PMJIRPTI2 4-70
~?O
4.10.2.2 Recommended Mitigation Action. Modifications to the layout of
waste rock dumps would not appreciably
The sulfuric acid tank and other liquid change the types and quantities of
hazardous materials, such as extractant and hazardous materials used and wastes
diluent would be stored on bermed HDPE- disposed.
lined containment pads, similar to or within
the proposed fuel storage area, to prevent 4.10.5.2 Recommended Mitigation
release of these materials into the soil and
facilitate effective clean up of spilled Recommended mitigation would be the
material. same as for the Proposed Action.
4.10.3 No Action Alternative 4.10.6 Waste Rock Selective Handling

Alternative
4.10.3.1 Impacts
4.10.6.1 Impacts
Since the proposed project would not be
implemented, there would be no transport, hnpacts for this alternative would be the
use, storage, or disposal of hazardous same as those described for the Proposed
materials and wastes, and no impacts Action. Modifications to waste rock
would occur as a result. handling procedures would not appreciably
change the types and quantities of
4.10.4 OpenPit Backidling hazardous materials used and wastes
Alternative disposed.
4.10.4.1 Impacts 4.10.6.2 Recommended Mitigation
hnpacts for this alternative would be the Recommended mitigation would be the
same as those descn"bed for the Proposed same as for the Proposed Action.
Action. Backfilling of mine pits would not
appreciably change the types and quantities 4.11 CULT£J:RAL AND PALEONTO-
of hazardous materials used and wastes LOGICAL RESOURCES
disposed of
4.11.1 Methodology
4.11.1.1 Sensitivity Issues
same as for the Proposed Action. The public scoping process did not identifY
any issues specific to cultural or
4.10.5 FaciUty Layout Alternative . paleontological resources. Uowever, in
response to BLM's consultation with Native
4.10.5.1 Impacts American groups, representatives of the Ute
Tnbe conducted a site visit in March 1996.
hnpacts for this alternative would be the Appropriate nnt:J.gation measures were
same as those described for the Proposed identified by the tnbal representatives and the
239961R3.4 5/15196(9:11 PM)lRPTI2 4-71
Utes have planned a second visit for undetennined, or because unrecorded sites
appropriate closure of the site. Should the may occur.
BLM receive any further responses to the
request for Native American consultations, 4.11.1.3 Paleontological Resources
the infonnation will be included in the Final
EIS. Paleontological resources occur in many
geologic fo~ons. These formations can be
In general, the primary issue concerning ranked to indicate the likelihood of significant .
. cultural resources is the potential for impacts fossil occurrence (BLM 1983).
to significant prehistoric and historic sites,
and to traditional cultural properties. The • Class I areas are those that ar~
primary concern regarding paleontological known or are likely to produce
resources is the potential for impacts to abundant significant fossils that are
geological fonnations that may produce vulnerable to surface disturbing
significant fossils. activities.
• Class II areas are those that show
4.11.1.2 Cultural Resources evidence of fossils but are unlikely
to produce abundant significant
The Proposed Action would consist of fossils.
several :fucilities including open pits, waste • Class ill areas are those that are
rock dumps, ore crushing :fucilities, a heap unlikely to produce fossils.
leach pad, various stonnwater and solution
storage ponds, SXIEW plant, water Procedures that are followed to provide a
production wells with a pipeline conidor, paleontological clearance for a project are
nwnerous support :fucilities, runoff diversion driven by these classifications. A
structures, and 'a power transmission line paleontological survey prior to clearance is
from the Hatch substation to the project site. required for Class I areas. Although surveys
are not required. for, Class II or. Class ill
Impacts include complete or partial areas, mitigation measures may be taken to
destruction of any sites eligIble for or listed protect any significant fossil discoveries
on the NRHP, and in cases of standing (BLM 1983).
structures and sites that are valuable for more
than the scientific information they contain, 4.11.2 Proposed Action
visual interference. Modifications of the
surroundings of traditional cultural properties 4.11.2.1 Impacts
may also be a substantial impact
Section 106 of the National Historic
Indirect impacts such as increased collection Preservation Act requires Federal Agencies
and vandalism to sites made acce5Slble by the to take into account impacts to significant
project and erosion of sites as a consequence cultural resources prior to project approval.
of project activities are also considered The Advisory Council on Historic
adverse impacts. Unknown impacts may Preservation has set out the procedures (36
exist when the NRHP eligtbility of a site is CFR § 800) to be followed to detennine the
239961R3.4 SIlSl96(9:11 PM)lRPTI2 4-72

effects a project may have on significant analysis. This "no adverse effect"
cultural resources. determination does not apply to sites that are
listed on the NRHP or detennined eligible
Since much of the study area had not been under criteria (a), (b), andlor (c) of36 eFR §
previously inventoried for cultural resources, 60.4. None of these types of sites have been
all of the areas proposed for direct impacts identified in the Study Area.
including the powerline and associated access
roads were subjected to an intensive survey Several factors are taken into consideration in
by professional, permitted archaeologists. All the evaluation of impacts. The number of
located sites, and those previously recorded recorded sites and their status with respect to
in impact areas, were evaluated for their the NRHP are heavily weighted.
eligibility to the NRHP. The evaluations and
determinations of eligibility are made by the It is possible that there would be impacts to
BLM (in consultation with the SHPO) based cultural resources from construction of the
upon recommendations of professional Proposed Action. Additionally, the location
archaeologists. of cultural resource sites would restrict the
normal construction procedures for the
All but one of the lmown potentially eligible power line accessing the proposed mine site.
cultural sites are located outside of the areas However, with the implementation. of a
of direct impact. Site 42SA22947 is a mitigation program, there should be no
potential historic property for which impacts adverse effects, as defined in 36 CFR § 800,
appear at this time to be unavoidable. It is to significant cultural resources.
located in the area of the proposed Waste
DumpC. 4.11.2.2 Recommended Mitigation
After the evaluation of a site, a plan best Several measures can be taken to mitigate
suited for mitigating impacts to the individual impacts. Site avoidance is preferred, followed
site or sites would be fonnu1ated in by site protection and data recovery and
consultation with the appropriate agencies analysis. Since archaeological sites are
and implemented. Mitigation in general frequently' detennined eligible to the NRHP
usually consists of three options: avoidance, under criterion (d) of36 CPR § 60.4, adverse
protection, or data recovery and analysis. effects can often be mitigated with the
implementation of a data recovery program if
Archaeological sites detennined eIigIble for impact avoidance is not feastble. It is
the NRHP are usually eligible under criterion anticipated that a combination of these
(d) of36 CFR § 60.4 (see Section 4.11.12) measures would be necessary for the
for the scientific infonnation they may Proposed Action alternative including the
contain. Direct impacts to these types of sites proposed powerline.
are usually mitigated by data recovery if they
cannot be avoided. Under the regulations of To assure that the 23 other potential historic
36 CFR § 800.9 (c), a project would be properties are avoided, their boundaries
considered to have no adverse effect to these should be established by a professional
sites if the data could be substantially archaeologist and the boundaries marked and
preserved through professional recovery and signed pennanently so that it is clear that
239961R3.4 5/15196(9:11 PM)l.RPTI2 4-73
ground disturbing activities cannot occur in sites, an archaeological avoidance plan would
these areas. The proponent's personnel be needed to detennme procedures for
should be educated about the importance of mitigating potential impacts to cultural
avoiding impacts to these areas. They should resources during the construction, operation,
also be informed of what evidence might be and maintenance of the power line. The
found that would indicate the presence of an SHPO would need to review and conrur with
undiscovered cultural resource. the plan. The plan would be prepared by the
Archaeological Consultant who completed
Ifsite42SA22947 is determined to be eligtole the field inventory and report of cultural
to the NRHP. a data recovery plan would resources along the proposed power line
need to be formulated and executed to route.
mitigate any adverse effects the Proposed
Action would have on this site. Development In order to ensure that the procedures for
of a data recovery plan would involve archaeological avoidance would be
consultation among the BLM, SHPO, implemented:
Advisory Council, and project proponent. A
research plan would be formulated using the • The BLM Right-of-Way Grant for
latest research directions and assuring the the power line would not be issued
techniques for data recovery and analysis are until the BLM and SHPO concurred
available and reasonable. Since site that the procedures in the
excavation is a physically destructive means archaeological avoidance plan were
of mitigating impacts, it is done only under adequate;
strict guidance after a comprehensive review • The BLM Right-of-Way Grant
process. this activity must be permitted by would stipulate that the procedures
the BLM under the Archaeological Resource for archaeological avoidance would
Protection Act (ARPA) of 1979, as be followed during all phases of
amended. construction, operation, maintenance,
and abandonment.
In, addition to the mitigation alternatives • There would be pre-work conference
listed above, there are other measures that with the BLM, the holder of the
may be implemented in regard to traditional Right-of-Way Grant, construction
cultural properties. These measures may contractors, and an Archaeological
include time use restrictions, landscaping and Consultant. During the pre-work
replanting, project or site blessing, or conference; each site identified in the
relocation of project elements. These archaeological avoidance plan would
measures would be employed on a situational be inspected, and avoidance
basis, depending on the type of property procedures from the plan would be
being affected, the type of impact, and the discussed.
individuals or group with an interest in the
property.
Due to the number of cultural sites identified

along the power line route and the
complexity for developing mitigation for the
239961R3.4 51151%(9:11 PM)/RPT12 4-74

4.11.3 No Action Alternative 4.11.5 Facility Layout Alternative.
4.11.3.1 Impacts 4.11.5.1 Impacts
The No Action Alternative could potentially Impacts to cultural resources from the
impact cultural resources. An increase in Facility Layout Alternative would be similar
development in this area related to the to those for the Proposed Action with one
Proposed Action could potentially counter a exception. Instead of only one potentially
loss of these resources due to illegal significant cultural resource being committed
collecting and vandalism. WIthout the to data recovery there would then be :five that
Proposed Action these resources could then would have to undergo this form of
continue to be destroyed by these illegal mitigation. Under the Proposed Action
activities. The No Action Alternative could alternative only Site 42SA22947 would
also result in a loss of information that could require data recovery and analysis. Under the
come from Native American consultation and Facility Layout Alternative, not .only this site,
interpretation required under the Proposed but Sites 42SAI0270, 42SA22844,
Action. In that there are no mown 42SA22848, and 22SA22959 would also
paleontological resources in the Study Area, require data recovery and analysis.
this resource should not be impacted by the
No Action Alternative. In that there are no mown significant
paleontological resources in the ~_d'y area,
4.11.3.2 Recommended Mitigation this alternative would have no impacts on
paleontological resources.
Measures that could be undertaken to
mitigate impacts include restricting public 4.11.5.2 Recommended Mitigation
access, increasing BLM patrols, and
increasing on-site presence by local interested Recommended mitigation would be the
groups or citizens. However, these are same as for the Proposed Action.
presently 1imit:ed by available funding and
public interest. 4.11.6 Waste Rock Selective Handling
Alternative
4.11.4 Open Pit Backfilling
Alternative 4.11.6.1 Impacts
4.11.4.1 Impacts Impacts from the Waste Rock Handling

Procedures Alternative would be the same as
Impacts from the Open Pit Backfilling would those discussed under the Proposed Action.
be the same as those discussed under the
Proposed Action. 4.11.6.2 Recommended Mitigation
4.11.4.2 Recommended Mitigation Recommended mitigation would be the

23996/R.3.4 5/15/96(9:35 PM)lRPTI2 4-75

4.12 VISUAL RESOURCES contrasts with the surrounding natural
vegetation. An increase in industrial
4.12.1 Methodology activity would be highly noticeable to
travelers on the Lower Lisbon Valley Road
The assessment of visual impacts is based and attract visual attention. Visual
upon methodologies described in the contrasts created by the project,
Visual Contrast Rating Handbook (BLM particularly color contrasts, may be visible
Manual Handbook, Section 8431-1). The from long distance viewpoints, such as
extent to which the proposed project Lone Pine Peak in Colorado, located
would effect the visual resource depends approximately 50 miles east of the project
on the amount of contrast created between area. At that distance the project would
the proposed facilities and the existing not draw the viewers attention. Although
landscape condition, and visibility of the the proposed project would cause
facilities to sensitive viewpoints within the noticeable changes in the eXistIng
viewshed of the project. Assessing landscape, the area is generally of low
projects in this manner indicates the scenic quality and· sensitivity, and activities
severity of potential impacts and helps in this area would be within guidelines for
guide mitigation measures. Class IV lands.
Impacts would occur if modifications to Reclamation would improve the visual

the landscape caused visual contrasts condition oflands affected by the proposed
affecting the following: the quality of any project and would also mitigate the adverse
scenic resource; scenic resources having visual impacts of past unreclaimed mining
rare or unique value; views from disturbances. Revegetation would reduce
designated or planned parks, wilderness, color and texture contrasts, and the land
natural areas, or other visually sensitive would regain a more natural appearance.
land use; views from travel routes; or However, the open pits and other man-
views from established or planned made landforms created by the waste rock
recreatiorud, educational, or residential piles and the heap leach pads would remain
areas. as a long-term visual intrusion in the
landscape.
Due to intervening topography and the
4.12.2.1 Impacts proponents proposed shrouding of lights,
visual impacts from night lighting are
Construction and operation of the open pit expected to be minimal.
mines, surface fuciIities, waste dumps, and
heap leach pads would introduce visual 4.12.2.2 Recommended Mitigation
contrasts into the existing landscape. Open
pits and surface facilities would alter the For reducing visual contrasts, several types
natural appearance of the landscape, of mitigation can be employed. All are
creating line, form and color contrasts. based on three basic concepts: (1) siting
Areas where rock and soil are to be facilities .in less visible locations, (2)
exposed would cause color and texture minimizing disturbance; and (3) repeating
23995/RJ.4 SIlSl96(9:11 PM)IRPT12 4-76
the basic elements of line, form, color and 4.12.4 Open Pit Backiilling
texture found in the surrounding landscape. Alternative
Depending on the facility, several of the·
following mitigation's would reduce visual 4.12.4.1 Impacts
impacts:
This alternative includes 2 scenarios; under
• During construction, clearing of land scenario I the open mine pits would be
for stockpiles and other project partially back:fi1led, in scenario 2 the pits
facilities· should create curvilinear would be completely backfilled. Other
boundaries instead of straight lines. aspects of Alternative 2 are comparable to
Grading should be done in such a the Proposed Action. Visual impacts
manner that would minimize erosion during .mine operations would be the same
and conform to the natural topography. as described in the Proposed Action. Pit
• Slope gradients on embankments could backfilling would reduce long-term visual
be varied and contoured to create more effects by reducing the amount of visible
diversity of form and repeat the natural landform disturbance. This would occur
shapes found in the surrounding by the reduced height and areal extent of
landscape. the waste dumps and by limiting the depth
• Contrasts in color and texture could be of the mine pits.
minimized by revegetating disturbed
areas as quickly as possible and by 4.12.4.2 Recommended Mitigation
planting species that match in color and
texture the surrounding natural Recommended mitigation here is the same
vegetation. as the Proposed Action. .
• The visual contrast of structures could
be reduced by locating the facilities to 4.12.5 Facility Layout Alternative
take advantage of any available
topographic screening, and by using 4.12.5.1 Impacts
. colors that blend with colors found in
the surrounding landscape and using Under this alternative, Waste Dump D
finishes with low levels of reflectivity. would be eliminated and Waste Dump C
would be expanded. This would reduce
4.12.3 No Action Alternative visual impacts by locating the waste rock
from Dump D in an area on the southeast
4.12.3.1 Impacts side of Dump C with less total visual
impacts than the two dumps would have
Under the No Action Alternative the visual to travelers along the Lower Lisbon Valley
disturbances that would be created by the Road. Other visual impacts would be the
proposed project would not occur, and same as the Proposed Action.
lands that are currently undisturbed would
remain in a natural condition. Past, 4.12.5.2 Recommended Mitigation
unreclaimed mining activities would also
remain as a visible disturbance in the Same as the Proposed action.
landscape.
23996/RS.4 5/15/96(9:1I PM)!RPT12 4-77
4.12.6 Waste Rock Selective Handling Impacts were evaluated based on the
Alternative following criteria:
4.12.6.1 Impacts • Potential conflicts with existing

land use plans (not including
The operational changes that would occur grazing, wildlife, and recreational
under this alternative would not effect the resources covered in previous
overall visual effects of the project from sections)
that described in the Proposed Action. • Proximity to residential or other
sensitive areas
4.12.6.2 Recommended Mitigation • Termination of an existing land use
or land use incompatibility
Same as Proposed Action.
Impacts on grazing, wildlife, and
4.13 LAND USE recreational resources are discussed in
Sections 4.6, 4.7, and 4.16.
4.13.1 Methodology
Impacts to land use were evaluated based
on infonnation from maps, existing 4.13.2.1 Impacts
literature, and government agencies. Data
sources for the baseline inventory included The Lisbon Valley Copper Project would
USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle potentially affect 247 acres of private (fee)
sheets, aerial photographs, the Grand land, 574 acres of BLM land, and 273
Resource Area Resource Management Plan acres of State Land, for a total of 1,094
(BLM 1985a), and the Proposed Plan of acres (Table 2-1). The project is currently
Operations for the Lisbon Valley Project projected to have a 10-year mining life,
(Summo 1995a). Baseline infonnation was with final closure and reclamation
supplemented by information obtained (including previously un-reclaimed areas)
from the BLM, Moab District Office, the to take five additional years.
School and Institutional Trust Lands
Administration, and San Juan County. Overall, current land use of the Project
Potential impacts to be addressed were Area would not be affected by the
identified during the scoping process. Proposed Action. Land ownership in the
study area would remain the same.
Land-use related issues raised during Implementation of the Proposed Action
scoping include the following: would be consistent with federal, state, and
county land use objectives. The San Juan
• Potential impacts to current land County-maintained road in the Lisbon
uses Valley project area would remain open and
• Possibility of leaving pits open for access to the Lisbon Valley would remain
future IIliI$lg opportunities unrestricted. However, as noted in Section
2.2.9, some trails or roadways around the.
project Area would be closed for public
:23m'R3.4 SIlS/96(9:11 PM)lRPTI2 4-78
safety reasons. Impacts to traffic in the 4.13.6 Waste Rock Selective Handling
study area are discussed in Section 4.9. Alternative
The existing power line and pipeline
corridors shown on Table 3.13-1 would The impacts of this alternative on existing
continue to be used and would not be land use and access would be the same as
disturbed by this project. those identified for the Proposed Action.
4.13.2.2 Recommended Mitigation 4.14 AIR QUALITY
No mitigation measures would be required. 4.14.1 Methodology
4.13.3 No Action Alternative Mining and processing activities at the

Lisbon Valley Project would be sources of
4.13.3.1 Impacts particulate matter, quantified in this EIS as
PMlO (i.e., particulate matter less than 10
Existing land uses would remain microns in aerodynamic diameter). The
unchanged under the No Action primary source of PM10 emissions would
Alternative. Copper mining and heap leach be the crushing circuit. Crushers, screens,
activities would not occur, and the proven and conveyor transfer points would be
ore reserves in the area would remain process emISSIOn sources of PM10 •
undeveloped. As stated in Section 2.3.1, Combustion in the solution heater also
the opportunity for Summo to develop would emit small quantities. of process
mineral resources would be foregone on PMlO.
federal lands. Mineral development in the
~roject Area would depend on the viability Non-process sources of particulate
of extracting minerals solely from state and emissions would result from extracting
fee lands. materials by drilling and blasting, ore and
waste rock handling by mine equipment,
4.13.4 Open Pit Backf"illing hauling of material on unpaved roads, and
Alternative wind erosion from ore and waste rock
storage/disposal areas. Combustion of
The impacts of these alternatives on propane fuel in the solution heater also
existing land use and access would be the would emit small quantities of gaseous
same as those identified for the Proposed combustion pollutants (i.e., nitrogen
Action with the exception that the pits oxides, carbon monoxide, and volatile
would not be open for future mining organic compounds).
activities.
4.14.2.1 Impacts
The impacts of this alternative on existing
land use and access would be the same as Under this alternative, all operations would
those identified for the Proposed Action. be required to obtain construction and
operating pennits from the Utah Division
23996/R3.4 5/15/%(9:!l PM)IRPrI2 4-79

of Air Quality (DAQ). These permits location (Figure 4.14-1). This modeled
would require a demonstration that concentration occurs in year 9 to the
applicable national ambient' air quality southeast of the GTO pit in the nO.rtheast
standards (NAAQS) are met and that quadrant of Section 1. All other modeled
increments of pollution above background emissions at the property boundaJY are
levels are not exceeded. The levels of lower; thus, the mine impacts are estimated
particulates (PM1o) that must be met at the to be within the 24-hr PM10 incremental
property boundaJY are shown in Table standard of 30 llg!m3 at the property
4.14-1. The property boundaJY, around boundaJY.
the area under surface control by Summo,
is shown in Figure 2-1. The NAAQS ambient PMlO standards are
addressed by adding the modeled impacts
Dispersion modeling was used to and the baseline concentration. As
demonstrate compliance with the discussed in Section 3.14, the baseline
applicable State and Federal regulations for concentration of 26 llg/m3 was used in the
pollutants emitted in significant quantities. analysis. As shown in Table 4.14-1, the
Impacts from particulate emissions from maximum 24-hr and annual impacts at the
specific sources of the proposed operation property boundaJY are 56 and 33 f.lg/m3,
were modeled over 24-hr and annual respectively, which are well below the
averaging periods, which is consistent with NAAQS limits.
the averaging periods of the PM10 ambient
standards. Modeled impacts are added to Based on the modeling results which
the estimated background PMlO indicate that the Lisbon Valley Project
concentrations to demonstrate compliance would stay within state and Federal
withNAAQS. emission standards, no impact to air quality
is anticipated from the Proposed Action.
Because the mining activities would occur
in different locations through time, the 4.14.2.2 Recommended Mitigation
impact patterns would be different for
different years. Emissions were modeled in Under DAQ guidelines, mitigation of
years 5 and 9. Year 5 was modeled potential air pollution is required. For the
because activities (and emissions) are Lisbon Valley Project, the air pollution
anticipated to be the highest for that year. emission controls listed in Table 4.14-2 are
Year 9 was modeled because activities anticipated to be imposed by the DAQ.
would be high and concentrated in the Only PMlO emissions would be controlled,
southeast portion of the property. as these emissions are the only pollutant
which could be emitted in substantial
Modeling results indicate that the quantities.
maximum 24-hour PM10 concentrations
along the property boundaJY reach 30
llg!m3 (DAQ incremental standard) at one
239%'R.3.4 5nSl96(9".3S PM)/RPT12 4-80

I
. I
x . receptor Impact unIts are "glm'

SOURCE: AIR SCIENCE INC.. A996
Job No. : 23996
Prepared by : 24-HOUR MAXIMUM
PM to IMPACTS
Dote: 2/13/96
FIG. 4.14-1
TABLE 4.14-1
MAXIMUM PM10 IMPACTS

LISBON VALLEY PROJECT
(CONCENTRATIONS IN Jig/ms)
Average Incremental Baseline Total

Location Interval Impact Standard Cone. Cone. NAAQS
Southeast 24-hr 30 30 26 56 150
annual 7 17 26 33 50
Northwest 24-hr 26 30 26 52 150
annual 7 17 26 33 50
TABLE 4.14-2
PROPOSED AIR POLLUTANT CONTROL TECHNOLOGY

AND ASSUMED EFFICIENCY
LISBON VALLEY PROJECT
Source Control Efficiency

Primary crushing foggers 95.0%
Secondary crushing baghouse 99.6%
Conveyor drops water sprays 83.5%
Drillingl . pneumatic flushing/filter 85.0%
Haul Roads1 water sprays/chemicals 92.0%
2
Stockpiles watering as necessary
Activities in pit have an additional control associated with wind overshadow that is not
included in the listed efficiency:
.
2
Control not accounted for in the emission inventory.
239961R3.4 sn5l96(9:11 PM)lRPTI2 4-82

4.14.3 No Action Alternative this alternative. No mitigation is
recommended.
4.14.3.1 Impacts
4.15 NOISE
Under this alternative, no impacts to air
quality of the Lower Lisbon Valley would 4.15.1 Methodology
be expected to occur. The air quality of
the area would remain the same as Noise concerns in industrial areas are
baseline. generally focused in an occupational
context. Work-place noise standards are
4.14.4 Open Pit Backiilling enforced under the Federal Occupational
Alternative Safety and Health Act (OSHA) and the
MSHA, which set permissible noise
4.14.4.1 Impacts exposure limits by time intervals. The
major sources of noise associated with the
Backfilling, either partial or complete, of Lisbon Valley Project would be stationary
the pits would require retrieving waste and ,mobile equipment used in the mining
rock from previously dumped locations and and processing activities, and traffic along
hauling the waste rock to a pit. This the Lower Lisbon Valley Road.
"double handling" of most of the waste
rock would create additional particulate 4.15.2 Proposed Action
emissions over that occurring from the
Proposed Action. These cannot be 4.15.2.1 Impacts
modeled or quantified with the existing
methodology. Under this alternative, all equipment would
be required to operate using approved
4.14.5 Facility Layout Alternative mufflers and other noise abatement devices
in accordance with Federal laws. As such,
The amount of surface area to be disturbed noise levels at the property boundaries
and the amount of waste rock to be would be expected to remain under the 55
disposed under this alternative are very dB level above which noise may be
similar to the Proposed Action. No considered objectionable. Persons in the
additional impacts to air quality are immediate area (recreationists) and along
anticipated from this alternative. No the Lower Lisbon Valley Road would be
mitigation is recommended. 'able to hear certain aspects of the
operation, but the noise levels are not
4.14.6 Waste Rock Selective Handling anticipated to exceed the EPA established
Alternative level of 55 dB outside the property
boundary, except for blasting noise during
The amount of surface area to be disturbed mining activity, for short periods on an
and the amount of waste rock to be average of every other day.
disposed under this alternative are the same
as the Proposed Action. No additional There are currently no residences near the
impacts to air quality are anticipated from proposed project. Residences in the region
23996/R3.4 5115196(9:11 Plv:!)JRPT12 4-83

are more than one mile away and separated 4.15.6 Waste Rock Selective Handling
from the project by ridges. Under calm Alternative
wind conditions, project activities may be
audible; however, the level of noise No additional impacts from noise are
produced by the project is not anticipated anticipated under this alternative. No
to be distin.::,auishable from background mitigation is recommended.
levels, except for the blasting noted above.
4.16 RECREArIONAL
.Although the level of noise is not RESOURCES
anticipated to increase, noise associated
with increased traffic volume may be a 4.16.1 Methodology
nuisance along the Lower Lisbon Valley
Road. The purpose of this section is to identify
and characterize recreational resources in
4.15.2.2 Recommended Mitigation the vicinity of the proposed project in
order to assess what effects the
The maintenance of equipment to satisfy construction and operation of each
OSHA and MSHA regulations concerning alternative may have on existing
noise levels would reduce the noise levels recreational opportunities. The effects to
in the Lisbon Valley Project area. This be considered include temporary disruption
compliance is anticipated to maintain the of use and elimination of use.
noise level below EPA levels of annoyance
and of harm to human health and welfare. Recreational resources could be affected
both directly by physical changes to
4.15.3 No Action Alternative resources, and indirectly by visual or use
influence. Direct impacts would occur if
Under this alternative, no impacts to noise construction or operation of the project
in the Lower Lisbon Valley would be resulted in the termination of use or
expected to occur. The noise levels of the substantial modification to recreational
area would remain the same as baseline. resources within and adjacent to the study
area. Indirect impacts would result if
4.15.4 Open Pit Backf"Illing construction and operation activities
Alternative altered recreation use patterns or
recreation demand and access to use areas
No additional impacts from noise are near the proposed project.
anticipated under this alternative. No
mitigation is recommended. The only issue or concern raised for
recreational resources during the public
4.15.5 Facility Layout Alternative scoping process was the following:
No additional impacts from noise are • Adequacy of the reclamation

anticipated Under this alternative. No standards to return the site to
mitigation is recommended. predisturbance conditions capable
4-84
of supporting current levels of 4.16.2 Proposed Action
recreation and tourism activity
4.16.2.1 Impacts
In response to this issue and other potential
impacts to recreational resources, the Construction activities would result in
following significance criteria have been direct impacts to recreational resources
developed. These include project-related due t.o the loss of some wildlife habitat in
changes that would: the project area. Hunting opportunities
would not be eliminated, but
• Alter or otherwise physically affect implementation of the Proposed Action
established, designated, or planned would likely displace big and small game,
recreational use area or activities and hunters from locations in and around
• Decrease accessibility to areas the proposed project facilities for the life of
established, designated, or planned the mine. Other BLM lands in the vicinity
for recreational use would still provide hunting, camping and
• Affect the duration, quantity, and ATV opportunities.
quality of impact to recreational
resources The Lisbon Valley Road would remain
• Post-closure, fail to reclaim the site open to the public, but access through th~
to approximate levels of project area shown on Figure 1-2 would be
predisturbance utility and to meet restricted for the life of the project. Access
future land management goals of to recreational resources north and south
wildlife habitat and livestock of the project area would not be impacted
grazing by the proposed project.
Impacts to recreation resources would The Proposed Action would not have any
include: direct impacts on the Three Step Hill area
and should not affect Christmas tree
• Eli.inination of established harvesting or firewood collection in this
recreational resources due to the area.
proposed project
• Restriction of access to established Noise levels may indirectly affect the
recreational resources quality of recreation activities due to noise
• Impacts on the duration, quantity, from equipment used for mining and
or quality of the recreational processing activities, and truck traffic
environment or experiences throughout the project area. Noise levels
• Failure of the reclamation plan to may be a nuisance, however, they are not
meet the post-mining land use expected to exceed federal standards, as
objectives for the establishment of discussed further in Section 4.14. The
wildlife habitat and livestock aesthetic quality of surrounding recrea-
grazing. tional use areas would be reduced due to
an increase in the amount of visible land
disturbances.
23996JR3.4 5/15196(9:11 PM)iRPT12 4-85

No impacts are anticipated to regional 4.16.4 Open Pit Backiilling
developed or dispersed recreation sites Alternative
because they are located too far away to be
affected by noise, dust, traffic or visual Impacts would be essentially the same as
imp'acts of the Proposed Action. for the Proposed Action as would
recommended mitigation.
No long-tenn impacts to recreational
resources would occur. Reclamation is 4.16.5 Facility Layout Alternative
expected to return the project area to
similar predisturbance conditions as Impacts would be essentially the same as
discussed in Section 4.4 and the quality of for the Proposed Action as would
dispersed recreation activity would be recommended mitigation.
restored.
4.16.6 Waste Rock Selective Handling
4.16.2.2 Recommended Mitigation Alternative
Recreation impacts that would occur as a Impacts would be essentially the same as
result of construction and operation of the for the Proposed Action as would
proposed project would be reduced recommended mitigation.
through the application of the following
committed mitigation procedures: 4.17 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Cumulative environmental impacts are

• During hunting. season, special
those which result from the incremental
signing to warn the public of
impacts of an action added to other past,
construction and speed limit signing
present, and reasonably foreseeable future
• Enforcement of property boundary
actions, regardless of what agency or
closure requirements to prevent person imdertakes such actions (CEQ
unauthorized motorized use of the 1986: 1508.7). Cumulative impacts can
access roads and to prevent hunting result from individually minor but
accidents. collectively significant actions taking place
over a period oftime. For purposes of this
As such, no additional mitigation is . EIS, the planning horizon is 30 years,
recommended. which takes into account the potential 10
years of Summo copper operations plus 20
4.16.3 No Action Alternative years post-closure. This section addresses
the cumulative impacts of projects in the
No impacts on eXIstIng recreational regional study area (Figure 4.17-1) which:
resources would occur. (1) currently exist, (2) are currently being
constructed, or (3) have a substantial
resource commitment (greater than $10
. million in early 1996) or are evidenced by
paperwork filings with the BLM or other
responsible agencies for land development
approvals.
23996'.R3.4 S/IS/96(lO:06PM)/RPI'12 4-86
o
® 5
SCALE IN MILES
10
Job No.: 23996
~-:-L.
SOURCE: UTAH TRAVEL COUNCIL
Prepared by: S.X.M. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS STUDY AREA

Date: 4/15/96 LISBON VALLEY COPPER PROJECT
AG. 4.17-1
+<11 ~1
Cumulative impacts in the study area for 3. Regarding oil and gas
projects other than Summo's proposed development, the UNOCAL plant
copper mine and related facilities are near La Sal continues operations to
expected to be minor and worthy of only process gas for various pipeline
brief mention, ~th the following reasoning companies, and oil and gas
and background issues in mind: exploration (drilling), development,
production, and transnllssion
1. Potential for additional copper (pipeline) facilities are currently
mining in the ar~ is estimated to active in the project area. It is
be unlikely in the foreseeable expected that these will continue at
future, as documented in Section the current rate or slightly increase
3.1.5. (Fluctuations in mineral in importance during the next few
development related to changes in decades.
vvorld~de econonllc conditions 4. Electrical transmISSIon lines
could affect this situation, but are (powerlines); other than the
beyond the scope of this potential line to service the Summo
document.) No other applications project, are not known or planned.
have been received or are noted by table 3.13-1 shows existing land
BLM to be forthcoming for copper authorizations, includipg power-
development in the study area in lines, in the Summo project vicinity.
the next several years. Effects of 5. No other proposed roads or
past activities, such as those at the residential subdivisions of any
Big Indian Mine and the Keystone magnitude, other than the new
Pit (EPA 1992a), have been noted residents in the Summit Point area
as this study vvas prepared (also see (see Sections 3.13.2 and 4.2.2), are
Section 3.10.2). noted or planned in the study area
2. Additional uranium nrining activity ~thin 10-20 nllles of the project
in the study area is also estimated
site. Other development in the
to . be of little importance to study
Monticello area, generally unrelated
ar~ impacts in the foreseeable
to this project, is likely in the next
future. BLM field visits and
few decades.
literature reviews have noted the
6. No expansion of agricultural lands
effects of past uranium activity in
for grazing or crops, or use of new
the GTO Pit vicinity, and other
water development (e.g., these
prospects in the area. The historic
efforts to mine, process, and mine pit waters) for additional
remedial wastes from uranium irrigated agriculture is projected at
mining in the La Sal vicinity have this time.
also been noted. A geologist
contracted to Summo (Thorson It is ~th this set of reasonably foreseeable
1996c) has also assessed uranium actions in view that the following analyses
potential in the area in the planning are made, by issue, concerning cumulative
for the current Lisbon Valley impacts in the study area. This applies
copper proposal. generally to the Proposed Action, unless
otherwise noted.
239961R3.4 SlISI96(9:3S PM)lRPTI2 4-88

• Based upon past development of • Cumulative impacts to wildlife
geologic resources, the only would continue at the current rate
possibility appears to be further and could increase if construction
development of their reserves by and operations of mining and other
Summo or other operators, thereby activities in the area interrupt use of
expanding pits, dumps, pads, and springs for watering purposes, as
beneficiation facilities, and Lisbon Spring or Huntley Spring.
increasing those impacts discussed • Regarding grazing, 2-5 AUMs
herein. would be permanently lost.
• Regarding hydrology, no Additional impacts would occur in
cumulative effects other than those a cumulative sense only if
specified for the Proposed Action expansion of the currently planned
regarding water supply and water mining operations would occur and
quality in the project vicinity, and additional pit areas would not be
to Lisbon Canyon, McIntyre reclaimed.
Canyon, and the Dolores River are • Socioeconomics cumulative
anticipated. Additional effects impacts are expected to be minimal,
could occur if additional copper or since no other new copper or other
uranium reserves are identified and mining projects are foreseen, and
future mining activity expands in future development ill the
the area. Monticello vicinity from
• Similarly, the only cumulative recreational and related
effects to geochemistry appear to development is likely in the
be from future expanded mining planning process.
operations, with potential for • The number of accidents are
increased impacts from acidity and estimated to increase by 0.88
alkalinity generation. accident per year. No other
• Cumulative impacts to soils in the cumulative impacts to
region are expected to continue at transportation are foreseen, given
the current rate and to be minimal, the capacity and condition of the
with adequate reclamation plans existing network for the proposed
imposed and enforced for all future mining and other uses.
land disturbance activities, • No cumulative impacts are
including any extension of mining predicted for hazardous mateiials
in this locality. and wastes, since no other mining
• Regarding vegetation, cumulative or major industrial projects are
impacts have occurred and will foreseen.
continue to occur from historic and • Cultural and paleontological
any future mining, past chaining of resources cumulative effects are
grazing lands, linear impacts from minimal, based on avoidance
oil and gas pipelines and recommendations and mitigation of
transmission lines, and oil and gas sites that cannot be avoided.
facility pads. • Visual resources cumulative·
effects are minimal following
239961R3.4 5/15/96(9:38 PM)lRPTI2 4-89
reclamation except for the water- • No adverse impacts to geology are
filled pits, and confined to this area; noted from the efficient extraction
no other major visual disturbances of copper mineralization
are anticipated in the region. • Such impacts would occur to
• No cumulative effects to land use geologic resources if pit backfilling
in the region are anticipated from precludes future mining, under the
this project. Open Pit Backfilling alternative
• Cumulative impacts to air quality • Dewatering of the shallow aquifer
(even from extended mining here or in the project vicinity with 161-
new projects elsewhere) would be 1455 ac-ftlyr removed for project
in compliance with aU- standards operations; and interception of up
and such impacts should be to 177 ac-ftlyr of surface flow in
minimal; no other adverse Lisbon Valley by project facilities,
cumulative aU- effects are stated. are the major hydrologic
• Cumulative effects to noise from unavoidable impacts
this and other projects in the region • Under the Open Pit Backfilling
would be negliglole and short-term, alternative, backfilling could
confined to blasting and traffic preclude the use of ponded water in
noises in the immediate project the Sentinel No.1 Pit as a source
vicinity. of recharge to local ground water
• Finally, dispersed recreational resources
activities in his area would • Regarding geochemistry, impacts
continue at the present rate (100- to surface and ground water, soils,
200 visitor days per yr) or may and vegetation from minor amounts
increase during the next 10 yrs. of both acid and alkaline conditions
in pits and waste dumps could
4.18 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE occur; some waste dumps would
IMPACTS remain even with the Open Pit
Backfilling alternative, due to the
NEPA and its implementing regulations as rock swell factor, and backfilled
required by the Council on Environmental waste rock would produce
Quality and BLM (1988) direct that the unavoidable pockets of acid and
BIS shall address the unavoidable adverse aI.kaline conditions in the pits as
impacts which may occur should the wall rock, waste rock, and pit
project be implemented. This project water mix with groundwater and aU-
would create a number of unavoidable during and after backfilling
adverse impacts, as would any proposed • Unavoidable adverse impacts to
development of this magnitude. The soils are expected from the
following predictions are made, by excavation, salvage, stockpiling,
discipline, again with general reference to and redistribution of 1,103 ac of
the Proposed Action unless otherwise native soils.
noted. ..
• Unavoidable losses to vegetation
would occur to the pinyon-juniper
(296 ac), sagebrush (432 ac), and
~.4 SlJSI96(9:3SPM)'RPT/Z 4-90
grassland/rangeland (290 ac) types' • Effective reclamation promotes no
from project development and a unavoidable adverse impacts to
conversion of vegetative type on land use and access except for pit
279 ac of the current pinyon- areas; under the Open Pit
juniper zone that would be Backfilling alternative, closing the
revegetated to grassland and pits to future resource extraction by
shrubland species mining could be an unavoidable
• Loss of existing stock ponds as adverse impact to resource
wildlife and livestock water recovery
sources, temporary loss of 1,018 • Regarding air quality, an increase
acres of vegetated habitat, and in PMI0 emissions above baseline,
disruption due to night lighting and but below air standards, w0l:lld
blasting are the unavoidable occur
adverse impacts for this resource • Unavoidable noise increases
• Grazing acreage would be reduced noticeably above baseline
by fencing and by non-reclamation conditions would occur for short
of the pits, in addition to the periods, and continuous noise
livestock watering issue noted levels above the current rural levels
above would be experienced
• No unavoidable adverse impacts .• Quality of the limited recreational
socioeconomics issues are foreseen activities conducted in the study
• None are identified for area would be diminished during
trnnsportation except an operations due to noise and
estimated increase of 0.88 accident aesthetic effects
per year·
• Similarly, none are identified for 4.19 SHORT-TERM USES VS.
hazardous materials and wastes, LONG-TERl\1
assuming prompt spill cleanup or PRODUCTIVITY
remedy of any process upsets
• No unavoida,ble adverse impacts to The regulations also specify that the
cultural resources and description of impacts should identifY how
paleontology would likely occur short-tenn uses of the environment will
• Mining operations will affect visual affect long-tenn productivity of resources.
resources, conditions noticeably Short-tenn uses are defined as uses during
and unavoidably; these changes to the project life plus reclamation period, or
landfonns (pits, piles and pads) and about 15 years. Long-term productivity
line, color and texture contrasts effects are defined through an additional 35
would be mostly restored during year period, with a total outlook of 50
reclamation; No Action would years from project inception. Again, in
retain the current visual similar fonnat and with qualifications as
interruptions from historic pits, previous sections, the following comments
piles, and structure foundations and are presented by discipline.
abandoned power poles
23990JR3.4 5/15/%(9:38 PM)lRPTI2 4-91
~J
• Regarding geology, short-term benefit raptors in the long-term as
mining of the pits wo~d extract the perches and increased food
resource, and long-term plans to sources; habitat improvements in
leave the pits open would preserve the long-term will generally be
the option of extracting additional beneficial for wildlife, except for
mineralization at a later date should the unreclaimed pits
such become economic • Livestock grazing would
• Concernlng hydrology, short-term experience a short-term loss of
uses of ground water and surface livestock forage, and grazing would
water as noted in Section 4.18 be displaced during mining
above would affect long-term operations; livestock forage would
productive use of water in Lisbon be replaced in the long-term
Valley for other purposes; (except for the pits), and the
currently, no such uses exist or are reclamation may enhance forage
planned production
• Geochemistry issues in the short • Short-term economic benefits
and long-term primarily concern the would occur; no adverse effects on
acid and alkaline impacts discussed the long-term socioeconomic
in 4.18 above productivity of the area are
• Soils would be used in the short- predicted
term, salvaged and replaced for • In the long-term, the
reclamation in the long-term, transportation network would not
resulting in short-term disruption of be compromised if mining activities
natural soil development processes end as projected; extension of such
• Short-term losses of vegetation activities or other development in
would occur on 1,018 previously the area would likely promote
undisturbed ac, of which 872 ac improvements to the network from
would be reclaimed; plant cover increased tax funding
and productivity would return to • No effects are predicted from
pre-mining levels in 3-5 yrs for improper use of hazardous
grasslands, 15-20 yrs for materials or generation or disposal
shrublands, and 80-100 yrs for of hazardous wastes; mining wastes
trees; species diversity would would be properly controlled and
slowly increase but may take reclaimed
centuries before a return to pre- • Not applicable to cultural and
mining levels paleontological resources.
• The short-term losses of 1,018 ac • Short-term visual resources effects
of habitat for the herbivorous prey will generally diminish in the long-
base for raptors, especially from term, but the geometric shapes of
construction, would be re- the waste dumps, pad, and pits will
established in the long-term on 872 remain in the long-term even after
ac of habitat for the rodents that reclamation; under the Open Pit
inhabit this area; the powerline and Backfilling alternative; pit openings
increased road kills will generally would be partially or fully filled and
23996/'R3.4 SIlSl!l6(9:38 PM)/RPT12 4-92
reclaimed, leaving only minor visual recharge and renew over periods of
remnants there; the Facility Layout years and decades; natural surface
alternative would eliminate one drainage patterns would be
dump remnant in the long-term disrupted by project operations in
• Short-term changes in land use the facilities vicinity, perhaps never
would be restored in the long-term to be restored
except for pit acreages • The g~ochemistry of soils, water,
• No long-term air quality effects and rock in the vicinity of the .
are expected dumps and pits would likely ·be
• 'Short-term noise effects on long- irreversibly changed' in the long-
term productivity of the area would term, even though some reversal to
be minimal or nonexistent . move back towards current
• The short-term adverse effects to conditions could occur over a
recreational resources activities period of decades
would be restored in the long-term • Irreversible loss of thousands of
with successful reclamation, except years of soils development in the
for the pit areas natural state would be replaced in
part during reclamation and begin
4.20 lRREVERSmLE OR the soil development process once
lRRETRlEVABLE RESOURCE again
COMMITMENTS • Losses would occur to the pinyon-
juniper habitat (296 ac) and these
The EIS is also to identifY any irreversible are likely irreversible to the
or irretrievable commitments of resources. vegetation community, even in the
that are consumed, committed, or lost long-term; under Open Pit
during the life of the project, following the Backfilling, an additional 231 ac in
uses of the environment identified in the the pit areas would be reclaimed,
previous section. Use of resources is but 279 ac of pinyon-juniper would
required in' the extraction and beneficiation still be replaced with grass and
. of raw materials in a manner that meets the shrub species .
proponent's financial needs, and the • Loss of 231 vegetated acres in the
public's consumptive needs for copper. pits as habitat and changes to the
The following comments are given by topography of the area as the waste
resource discipline. dumps are created would be' the
major resource commitments for
• Mining of approximately wildlife
42,500,000 tons of ore during the • Loss of seasonal livestock grazing
mine life, to produce approximately as noted above for wildlife
170,000 tons of copper cathode, is • No issues are seen for
the primary geologic commitment socioeconomics here
• Use of the hydrologic resources • No losses or commitments are
noted in the previous two sections noted for transportation
is likely not irreversible or • No commitments are noted for
irretrievable, since such resources hazardous materials
239961R3.4 5/15196(9:38 PM)lRPTI2 4-93
• Loss of cultural and
paleontological resources may
occur through testing and
mitigation as recommended by the
SHPO, as this may be necessarily a
destructive process (excavation),
and not all resource knowledge or
integrity is recovered or preserved;
No Action preserves these
resources in-place
• Changes in topography are the
major irreversible commitment for
visual resources impacts
• Copper, as a land use resource,
would be irreversibly and
irretrievably committed for
extraction, beneficiation,
processing, fubrication and use
• No air quality commitments are
noted
• No noise issues are noted
• No notable resource commitments
for recreation are expected
2399&'R3.4 5/15196(9:38 PM)lRPTI2 4-94

5.0
CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION
As an integral part of the EIS preparation 5.1.3 Local Agencies

process, consultation and coordination
were carried out with the following federal, San Juan County Commissioners
state, and local governmental agencies, and San Juan County Corrections and Sheriff's
Native American tribal representatives, and Department
members of special interest groups and the City ofMonticello Police Department
general public. City of Moab Police Department
City of Moab Fire Department
5.1 AGENCIES AND City ofMoab Water District
ORGANIZATIONS City ofMonticello Fire Department
CONSULTED Spanish Valley Water District
Grand County Sheriff's Department
5.1.1 Federal Agencies Grand County School District
Southeastern Utah Association of Local
u.s. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Governments
Land Management
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and 5.2 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Wildlife Service and Geological Survey
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Comments, suggestions, and concerns
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest about the proposed project were gathered
Service during two public scoping meetings held in
National Oceanic and Atmospheric November, 1995 and comment letters later
Administration sent to the BLM. The:first meeting was
held in Moab, Utah on November 1, 1995;
5.1.2 State Agencies 18 individuals attended. The second
meeting was held in Monticello, Utah on
Utah Department of Environmental Quality November 2, 1995; 15 individuals
Utah Division of Wildlife attended.
Utah Water Quality Division
Utah Division of Oil, Gas, and Mining ·5.3 PUBLIC COMMENTORS
.Utah Division of Radiation Control
Utah Department of Employment Security Comments, suggestions, and concerns
Services about the proposed project were gathered
Utah Department of Transportation during a public scoping period from
Utah Power and Light October 11 through November 29, 1995.
Utah Gas and Service For the two public meetings noted above,
the following persons attended:
239961R3.5 5115196(4:39 PM)/RPT13 5-1

Public Meeting Attendees:
Written Comments or Requests for
TunFranklin, 368 E. 100 N. Moab, UT Information were Received from the
Clauclin Akens, PO Box 1387, Moab, UT Following Parties:
Kay Howe, PO 574, Goodland, FL
Tun Kelly, PO Box 494, Moab, UT 1. Ann Marie Brusenhan, Moab, UT,
William Picise, San Juan Planning Com., 10/11/95
Box 205, Monticello, UT 2. Ty Lewis, Monticello, UT,
Ken CU¢s, Job Service, 91 E. Uraniva 10116/95
Ave., Moab, UT 3. Paul Friesema, Moab, UT,
Brad Palmer, BLM-Moab, 82 E Dogwood, 10/16/95
Suite G, Moab, UT 84532 4. Jack Mozingo, Jr., McLean,
Pat Gochnour, Gochnour & Assoc., PO VIrginia, 10/31/95
Box 3207, Englewood, CO 80155 5. John Black, Monticello, UT,
Sal Venticinque, BLM-Moab, 82 E 11/8/95 and 11/13/95
Dogwood, Suite G, Moab, UT 84532 6. Bob Turri, Monticello, UT,
Robert A Prescott, Summo USA, PO Box 11110/95
847,Moab, UT 7. Southern Utah WIlderness Alliance,
Lois Matheson, 4081 S. Aspen Ln., Salt Lake City, UT, 11125/95
Evergreen, CO 80439 8. Kevin Walker, Moab, UT, 11/28/95
Hugh Matheson, Summo USA, Box 847, 9. Dave Focardi, Moab, UT, no date
Moab, UT 10. Kalen Jones, Moab, UT, 11/29/95
GregHabn, Summo USA, 1776 Lincoln 11. Drew Roots, Moab, UT, 11/29/95
St. Suite 11 00, Denver, CO 80203
Tony Gallegos, State ofUtah-D.O.G.M, Comments received through the scoping
3 Triad, Suite 350, SLC, UT 80118 process are summarized in Section 1.3.3.
Lynn Jackson, BLM, 82 E Dogwood,
Suite G, Moab, UT 84532
Chris Paulsen, Woodward-Clyde, 4582 S.
Ulster St., Denver, CO 80237
Peter O'Connor, Westec, Inc., 5600 S.
Quebec, 307-D, Englewood, CO
80111
John K. Black, Monticello City Council,
Monticello, UT
Bob Turri, PO Box 587, Monticello, UT
Ed Scherick, San Juan Co., Box 9,
. Monticello, UT
Kate Kitchell, BLM-Moab, 82 E
Dogwood, Suite G, Moab, UT 84532
Bi11B~tes, uPWR, 455 W. RRAve.,
Price, UT
Scott Henry, Topro Services, PO Box 693,
Monticello, UT
5-2
6.0
LIST OF PREPARERS
The Lisbon Valley EIS was prepared for the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Moab
District Office, by third-party consultants Woodward-Clyde and Westec. BLM and
Woodward-Clyde/Westec personnel involved in the production of the EIS, their
qualifications, and responsibilities are presented below.
Woodward-ClvdeIWestec Team
Scott Memitz
Qualifications: B.A., Geography and History
M.A., Geography
Ph.D., Environmental Studies, Land Resources
19 years of experience
Responsibilities: Project Manager
Public Participation
EIS Scoping
Christine R. Paulsen
Qualifications: BS Forestry Management
Responsibilities: Deputy Project Manager
Task Leader, Soils
Peter O'Connor
Qualifications: BS Range Ecology
13 years experience
Responsibilities: Task Leader, Grazing
Project Description and Alternatives
Daniel J. Davis
Qualifications: BS Geosciences, MS Geochemistry
Responsibilities: Task Leader, Geochemistry
23996/R3.6 5116196(12:06PM)JRPT1RPT13 6-1

GregL.Eddy
Qualifications: BS Civil Engineering
6 years experience
Responsibilities: Project Description and Alternatives
W. Jack Clark
Qualifications: BS Biology and CheJ?Jistry
MS EntomologylBotany
Ph.D. EntomologylW'ildlife Management
Responsibilities: Task Leader, Air Resources/Noise
William. F. HilI
Qualifications: BAGeoiogy
Professional Geologist
Responsibilities: Task Leader, GeologylMinerals
Christopher P. Freeman
Qualifications: BS Environmental Planning
Responsibilities: Task Leader, Socioeconomics, Transportation, Hazardous
Materials
D. Richard Black
Qualifications: BS Range and Wildlife Biology
MS Community Ecology
Ph.D. Ecophysiology (currently pursuing)
11 years experience
Responsibilities: Task Leader, Vegetation, WIldlife, Sensitive Species
David K. Jones
.Qualifications: BS General Agriculture
BS Landscape Horticulture
Graduate Studies Recreation Resources, Landscape
Architecture
15 years experience
Responsibilities: Task Leader, Visuals, Recreatio~ Land Use
23996JR3.6 SIl6l96(12:05PM)IRPT/RPT/3 6-2

David K. Nicholson
Qualifications: BA Geology, MS Geology
6 years experience
Responsibilities: Task Leader, Water Resources
Bob Mutaw
Qualifications: BA Anthropology, MA Anthropology, Ph.D. Anthropology
16 years experience
Responsibilities: Task Leader, Cultural Resources
Jeff Ehrenzeller
Qualifications: BA Environmental Science
MAGeology
18 years experience
Responsibility: Senior Technical Advisor, Water Resources
William Killam
Qualifications: BA Anthropology
20 years experience
Responsibility: Senior Technical Advisor, Cultural Resources, NEPA
Robert Moran
Qualifications: BAZoology
Ph.D. Geological Sciences
25 years experience
Responsibility: Senior Technical Advisor, Geochemistry
u.S. Bureau of Land Management

A. Lynn Jackson Project Coordinator
Qualifications: BS Geology
Responsibilities: Coordination of project
JoeCresto Wildlife Biologist

Qualifications: BS RangelWIldlife
Responsibilities: WildlifeIT&E Species
239961R3.6 S116196(12:06PM)lRPTJRPTI3 6-3

Rich McOure Natural Resource Specialist
Qualifications: BS Wildlife Biology
20 years of service
Responsibilities: Reclamation/Soils
Linda Seibert Wildlife Biologist

Qualifications: BS Wildlife Biology
Responsibilities: WIldlifelT&E Species
Raymon Carling Natural Resource Specialist

Qualifications: . BSBotany
Responsibilities: RangefVegetwtion
l\fary von Koch Realty Specialist

Qualifications: BSIMS Food Science & Technology
Responsibilities: Rights of Way/Land Use
Alex. VanHemert Outdoor Recreation Planner

Qualifications: BS Recreation Management
Responsibilities: RecreationlVisual
Jim Harte Hydrologist

Qualifications BS Hydrology
Responsibilities: Hydrology/Soils
Sal Venticinque Geologist

Qualifications: BAIMA Geology
Respo11S1oilities: GeologylMinerals
Darryl Trotter Environmental Specialist

Qualifications: BSIMS Botany
Responsibilities: T&E Vegetation
6-4
Bruce Louthan Archeologist
.QuaIifications: BAfMA Archeology/Anthropology
Responsibilities: Cultural Resources, Native American Coordination
Tom Rasmussen Paleontologist

QuaIifications: BSZoology
MA Vertebrate Paleontology
ABDGeology
Responsibilities: Paleontology
Bill Thompson Range Conservationist

QuaIifications: BS Range Management
Responsibilities: Range
239961R3.6 5/16196(12:06 PM)IRPT1RPT13 6-5

7.0
GLOSSARY
ACCESS. Access is the physical ability to making. An alternative need not

reach a particular place or area. For substitute for another in all respects.
the public to legally have access to
BLM land, they must have both a AMBIENT. Surrounding, existing.
physical way to get there (waterway,
footlhorse trail~ or road) and ANALY1E. A compound determined by
pennission (easement, right-of-way, or an analysis.
managemen~ sanction) _allowing that
ANIMAL UNIT MONTH (AUM). A
particular type of physical access.
standardized measurement of the
AFFECTED ENVlRONMENT. The amount of forage necessary for the
biological and physical environment complete sustenance of one animal for
that will or may be changed by actions one month; also the measurement of
proposed and the relationship of people the privilege of grazing one animal for
to that environment. one month.
ALLUVIAL. Pertaining to material or BERM. A horizontal bench left in an

processes associated with exposed slope' to increase slope
transportation or deposition by running stability and provide a place for
water. sloughing material to collect.
ALLUVIUM. Soil and rock that is BIG GAME. Those species of large
deposited by flowing water. a
mammals normally managed as sport
hunting resource.
ALLOTMENT. An area of land where
one or more livestock operators graze BORE HOLE. A drill hole from the
their livestock. Allotments generally surface to an orebody.
consist of BLM lands but may also
COLLUVIUM. Fragments of rock carried
include state owned and private lands.
and deposited by gravity.
An allotment may include one or more
separate pastures. Livestock numbers COMPACTION. The process of packing
and seasons of use are specified. firmly and closely together; the state of
ALTERNATIVE. A combination of being so packed, e.g., mechanical
management prescriptions applied in compaction of soil by livestock or
vehicular activity. Soil compaction
specific amounts and locations to
results from particles being pressed
achieve a desired management
emphasis as expressed in goals and together so that the volume of the soil
objectives. One of the several policies, is reduced. It is influenced by the
plans, or projects proposed for decision physical properties of the soil, moisture
239961R3.7 5/15/96(4:41 PM)lRPTI2 7-1

oontent and the type and amount of DEWATERING. The act of removing
oompactive effort. water.
COUNCrr.. ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENDANGERED SPECIES. Any plant or

QUALITY. An advisory council to the animal species which is in danger of
President established by the National extinction throughout all or a
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of significant portion of its range.
1969. It reviews Federal programs for (Endangered Species Act of 1973).
their effect on .the environment,
conducts environmental studies, and ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
advises the President on environmental STATEMENT (EIS). A detailed,
matters. written statement as required by
Section 102(2)(c) of the National
CULTURAL PROPERTY. A definite Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
location of past human activity,
occupation, or use identifiable through EPHEMERAL. STREAM. A stream or
field inventory, historical stretch of a stream that flows only in
documentation, or oral evidence. The direct response to precipitation. It
term includes archaeological, historic, receives no water from springs and no
or architectural sites, structures, or long-continued supply from melting
places with important public and snow or other surface source. Its
scientific uses, and may include definite stream channel is at all times above the
location (sites or places) or traditional water table. These streams do not flow
cultural or religious importance to continuously during periods of as much
specified social andlor cultural groups. as one month.
CULTURAL RESOURCES. A term that EROSION. The group of processes

includes items. of historical, whereby earthy or rocky material is
. archaeological or architectural worn away by natural sources such as
significance which are fragile, limited wind, water, or ice and removed from
and non-renewable portions of the any part of the earth's surface.
human environment.
EROSION SUSCEPTIBILITY. The
DEVELOPED RECREATION SITE. A susceptibility of a soil to erosion when
site developed primarily to no cover is present. The rate of soil
accommodate specific intensive use displacement depends on the physical
activities or grouping of activities such properties of the soil, rainfall intensity
as camping, picnicking, boating, and slope gradient.
swimming, winter sports, etc.· These
sites include permanent facilities such FISCAL CONDmONS. Fiscal oonditions
as roads, trails, toilets, and other includes payments-in-lieu of taxes and
facilities needed to accommodate property taxes.
recreation use over the long term.
239961R3.7 5115196(4:41 PM)IRPT12 7-2

FORAGE. Vegetation used for food by MINERALIZATION. The process by
wildlife, particularly big game wildlife which a valuable mineral or minerals
and livestock. are introduced into a rock resulting in a
potential or actual ore deposit.
FORB. Any herbaceous plant other than a
grass, especially one growing in a field MITIGATION. Actions to avoid,
or meadow. minimize, reduce, eliminate, replace, or
rectify the impact of a management
FREEBOARD. The distance from surface practice.
of a pond to top of a dam.
MONITOR To watch or check.
GROUNDWATER Water contained in Rangeland resources are monitored for
pore spaces of consolidated and changes that occur as a result· of
unconsolidated subsurface materiaL management actions or practices.
HEAP LEACH PAD. A lined are upon OFF-ROAD VEHICLE (ORV). Any
which ore is placed and leached with motorized track or wheeled vehicle
cyanide. Leachate accumulates at the designed for cross-country travel over
base of the ore heap, above the leach any type of natural terrain.
pad liner, and is processed to remove
precious metals from the cyanide ORE-GRADE. When minerals are found in
solution. sufficient concentration to warrant
extraction by mining, the mineralized
HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY. A area is considered an ore deposit. Ore
measure of the ease with which water is mineral that can be extracted from
moves through soil or rock; the ground at a profit. Grade is a term
permeability. used to define the amount of
concentration of a mineral in rock, and
MANAGEMENT UNIT. Geographic
is usually expressed in units of metal
. areas, - not necessarily contiguous,
per ton of rock or in percentage.
which have common management
direction consistent with the - BLM PEAK FLOW. The !ieatest flow attained
allocations. during the melting of the winter
snowpack.
MlNE PIT FOOTPRINT. The su#"ace
. expression of the' area of disturbance PERENNIAL STREAM. A stream or
caused by the mine pit. stretch of a stream that flows
continuously. They are generally fed in
MlNERAL LODE CLAIM. A claim for part by springs, and their upper surface
possession of land in the public domain generally stand lower than the water
(especially national forests) containing table in localities through which they
minerals under the Mining Law of flow.
1872.
239961R3.7 5/15196(4:41 P.M)IRPT12 7-3

PERMEABILITY. The capacity for processes for public lands. This
transmitting a fluid; depends on the size includes public meetings, hearings, or
and shape of the pores, the size and advisory boards or panels that may
shape of their interconnections, and the review resource management proposals
extent of the latter. It is measured by and offer suggestions or criticisms for
the rate at which a fluid of standard the various alternatives considered.
viscosity can move a given distance
through a given interval of time. REAGENT. A substance used in a
chemical reaction to detect, measure,
PERMIT (GRAZING). An authorization examine, or produce other substances.
that pennits the grazing of a specified
number and kind of livestock on a RECORD OF DECISION (ROD). A
designated area of BLM lands for a document separate from but associated
period of time, usually not more than with an environmental impact
one year. statement that publicly and officially
discloses the responsible official's
PIEZO:METER. A well, generally of small decision on the proposed action.
diameter, that is used to measure the
elevation of the water table. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN.
The System that provides a step-by-step
POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE. The process for considering multiple
surface or level to which water will rise resource values, resolving conflicts,
in a well. The water table is a and making resource management
particular potentiometric surface for an decisions.
unconfined aquifer.
RESOURCE OBJECTIVES. The ,desired
PROPOSED ACTION. In tenns of state or condition that a resource
NEPA, the project, activity, or action management policy or program is
" that a Proponent intends to implement designed to achieve. A goal is usually
or undertake and which is the subject not quantifiable and may not have a
of an environmental analysis. specific date by which it is to be
completed. Goals are the basis from
PUBUC LANDS. Any land and interest which objectives are developed.
in land (outside of Alaska) owned by
the United States and administered by RIPARIAN. Situated on or pertaining to
the Secretary of the Interior through the bank of a river, stream, or other
the Bureau of Land Management. body of water. Normally used to refer
to the plants of all types that grow
PUBLIC P ARTICIPATION. ' Part of along or around springs.
BLM's planning system that provides
the opportunity for citizens as SCOPING. A term used to identify the
individuals or groups to express local, process for determining the scope of
regional, and national perspectives and issues related to a proposed action and
concerns in the rule making, decision for identifying significant issues to be
making, inventory and planning, addressed.
239961R3.7 SIlSl96(4:41 PM:)IRPT12 7-4
SEDIMENT. Soil, rock particles and TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS. The dry
organic or other debris carried from weight of dissolved material, organic
one place to another by wind, water or and inorganic, contained in water.
gravity.
TRANSMISSIVITY. The rate at which
SEDIMENTARY. Rock formed of water is transmitted through a unit
sediment, especially: (1) Clastic rocks, width of aquifer under a hydraulic
as, conglomerate, sandstone, and gradient.
shales, formed of fragments of other
rock transported from their sources and UNNECESSARY OR UNDUE
deposited in water. (2) Rocks formed DEGRADATION. Surrace
by precipitation from solution, as rock disturbance greater than what would
salt and gypsum, or from secretions of normally result when an activity is
organisms, as most limestone. being accomplished by a prudent
operator in usual, customary, and
SEDIMENTATION. The action or proficient operations of similar
process of deposition of material borne character and taking into consideration
by water, wind or glacier. the effects of operations. on other
resources and land uses, including
SOIL. The unconsolidated mineral
those resources and uses outside the
material on the immediate surface of
area of operations.
the earth that serves as a natural
medium for the growth of land plants.
VEGETATION (GROUND) COVER.
SOIL PRODUCTIVITY. The capacity of The percent of land surface covered by .
a soil to produce a specific crop such all living vegetation (and remnant
as fiber and forage, under defined levels vegetation yet to decompose) within 20
of management. It is generally feet of the ground.
dependent on available soil moisture
and nutrients and length of growing VISUAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
season. CLASSES. The degree of acceptable
visual changes within a characteristic
SPENT ORE. Ore which has been leached landscape. A class is based upon the
and no longer is yielding leachate that physical and sociological characteristics
is economic to process. of any given homogeneous area and
serves as a management objective.
.SUBSIDENCE. The sinking of a large
part ofthe earth's crust. WASTE ROCK. Rock that has to be
mined to access precious metal-bearing
THREATENED SPECIES. A species that ore, but does not contain enough
the Secretary of Interior has mineral to be mined and processed at a
determined to be likely to become profit.
endangered within the foreseeable
future throughout all or most of its
range. See also "Endangered Species."
'239%fR3.7 SflS/95(4:41 PM)lRPTI2 7-5
WASlE ROCK DUMP. Area which
waste rock is end-dumped from the top
downward, typically without any
selective handling criteria being used to
sort the more reactive waste rock
component.
WATER QUALITY. The chemical,

physical and biological characteristics
of water with respect to its suitability
for a particular use.
WATERSHED. All lands which are

enclosed by a continuous hydrologic
drainage divide and lie upslope from a
specified point on a stream.
D')96IR3.7 S/15196(4:41 PM)/BPTJ2 7-6

8.0
REFERENCES
Abkowitz, M., A. Elger, and S. Srinivasan. Babbit, Bruce. Secretary of the Interior.
1984. Estimating the Release Rates and 1994. Memorandum re: U.S. Dept. of
Costs of Transporting Hazardous the Interior Environmental Justice
Waste. In Transportation of Policy, to be effective June 8, 1995.
Hazardous Materials: Planning and
Accident Analysis. Transportation Bates, Bill. 1995. Utah Division of Wildlife
Research Board. Transportation Resources. Pers. com. with R. Black,
Research Record 977. W-C. December 5.
Adrian Brown Consultants. 1996. Lisbon Black, Kevin D., James M. Copeland, and
Valley Project Hydrogeologic Investi- Steven M. Horvath, Jr. 1981. In
gation. Prepared for Summo USA Graham 1995.
Corp. (Revised) March 15.
Black, Kevin. 1996. Assistant State
Air Sciences Inc., (Air Sciences). 1995. Archaeologist - Colorado. Pers. com.
Memo from Z. Chao to J. Clark, with R Mutaw, W-C. January 27.
WESTEC concerning baseline air
quality data. December 1. Brewer, Corky. 1996. Chief: City of Moab
Fire Department. Pers. com. with D.
1996. Technical Support Gaglione, W-C. January 17.
Document for the Notice of Intent
Lisbon Valley Project. January. Bureau of Land Management (BLM). (date
unk.a). Notice of Plan of Operations,
Alverez, Jonnie. 1996. Assistant, City of UTU-69816. Submitted by Sindor, Inc.
Monticello Police Department.
Pers. com. with D. Gaglione, W-C. ____. (date unk.b), Notice of Plan of
January 17. Operations, UTU-69923. Submitted by
Sindor, Inc.
Anders, Don. 1996. Natural Resource
Conservation Service. Monticello, Utah. ___. (date unk.c), Notice of Intention
Pers. com. with C. Paulsen. W-C. to Conduct Exploration, UTU-69944.
February 8. Submitted by Sindor, Inc.
Anonymous. 1995. The Spanish Trail Cut a Bureau of Land Management. 1980.
Roundabout Path through Utah. The Visual Resource Management. Visual
History Blazer. June. Resource Management Program.
Averett, Richard. 1995. Superintendent of ____. 1983. Grand Resource Area -

Schools, Grand County School District. Proposed Resource Management Plan
School Enrollment Inventory. October 1. and Final Environmental Impact
Statement. December 6.
239961R3.8 5/15/96(4:43 PM)lRPTI2 8-1
1983. Draft E1'lVironmental 1992. Final Environmental
Impact Statement on the Glenwood Impact Statement, Sanchez Copper
Springs Resource Management Plan. Project. Stafford District Office,
United States Department of the Arizona. December.
Interior, Bureau of Land Management,
Glenwood Springs Resource Area, ___. 1993a. Notice of Intention to
Glenwood Springs, Colorado. Conduct Exploration, UTU-66349.
Submitted by Kennecott Exploration.
___. 1985a. Grand Resource Area March 17.
Resource Management Plan (includes
Record of Decision and Final EIS). ___. 1993b. Notice of Intention to
Moab District, Utah. July. Conduct Exploration, UTU-69917.
Submitted by AF. Dearth, August 11.
___. 1985b. Federal Prototype Oil
Shale Tract C-a Off-Tract Lease, Draft ___. 1994. Notice of Intention to
Environmental Impact Statement. Commence Small :Mining Operations,
September. UTU-72491. Submitted by William
V. Harrison. November 7.
_ _-:. 1986a. Decision Record and
Finding of No Significant Impact, EA. _ _-:. 1995a. Notice of Intention to
UT-068-86-29 for KeImine Corp. Commence Small Business Operations,
May 22. UTU-72491 (Amendment). Submitted
by William V. Harrison. January 19.
1986. Visual Resource
Management Inventory. BLM Manual ___" 1995b. Plan of Operations,
Handbook 8410-1. UTU-72499. Submitted by Summo
Minerals. August 10.
___. 1986. Visual Resource Contrast
Rating.. BLM Manual Handbook 1995c. Pers. com. by B.
8431-1. Thompson (BLM) with P. O'Connor,
WES1EC concerning Lower Lisbon
___'. 1988. National Environmental Allotment. October 10.
Policy Act Handbook. H-1790-1.
BLM Manual. Ret 4-1547. 25 _ _ _. 1996. Table provided by the
October. Moab District Office on Feb. 12, 1996.
.....-_-:. 1988a The 1988 Revision of the ___" 1996a. Preparation Plan for
Lower Lisbon and East Coyote Lisbon Valley Project EIS. Moab,
Allotment Management Plan. Utah. Prepared by Woodward-Clyde
February. Consultants. January.
___. 1989. San Juan Resource ___" 1996b. Pers. com. with P.
Management Plan. Moab District, O'Connor, WESTEC and B.
Utah. ApriL Thompson, BLM regarding Lisbon
Valley Allotment. April 9.
239%'R3.3 SIlSl96(4:43 PM)I.RPT12 8-2

___" 1996c. Memorandum by B. Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ).
Thompson, BLM clarifying grazing 1986. Regulations for Implementing.
allotments in and around the area of the Procedural Provisions of The
Summo's Lisbon Valley Project. National Environmental Policy Act. 40
CPR Parts 1500-1508. Executive
_ _----'. 1996d Cortez Pipeline Gold Office of the President. Washington,
Deposit, Final Environmental Impact D.C. July 1.
Statement, VoL 1. Battle Mountain
District, Shoshone-Eureka Resource Craig, Lawrence C. 1981. Lower
Area, Nevada. Janumy. Cretaceous Rocks, Southwestern
Colorado and Southeastern Utah.
Business & Teclmical Assistance Center Presented at Rocky Mountain
(BTAC), Southeastern Utah. 1995. Association of Geologists 1981 Field
Southern Utah District Delta Update. Conference.
BTAC Report. 1996. {3.8.5.2)Cater, Fred Crampton, C. Gregory. 1979. In Graham
W., Jr. 1995. The Salt Anticlines of 1995.
Southwestern Colorado and
Southeastern Utah, in Geology of Parts Curtis, Ken. )996. Utah Department of
of Paradox, Black Mesa, and San Juan Employment Security Services, Moab
Basins. Presented at Four Corners Office. Pers. com. with D. Gaglione,
Field Conference, Four Corners W-C. Janumy 24.
Geological Society.
D.P. Engineering, Inc. (D.P. Engineering).
Chenoweth, William L. 1990. Lisbon 1995. Lisbon Valley Copper Project
Valley, Utah's Premier Uranium Area, . Heap Leach Facilities Geotechnical
A Summary oj Exploration and Ore Feasibility Study - Final· Report.
Production, Utah Geological and July 14.
. Mineral Survey. Open File Report.
July. Dunn, Merritt. 1995. Utah Department of
Employment Security. Grand County
ConeTec. 1995. Field Report - Haztech Utah: Selected Demographic, Labor
Drilling, Lisbon Valley Mine. Market, & Economic Characteristics.
August.
Cornish, R 1996. U.S. Dept. of Energy,
Grand Junction, CO Uranium Mill Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Tailings Radiation Program. Pers. com. 1974. Information on Levels of
from L. Jackson, BLM, to C. Paulsen, Environmental Noise Requisite to
W-C. February 8. Protect Human Health and Welfare
with an Adequate Margin of Safety.
March.
___. 1992a. Preliminary Assessment

Keystone Pit, La Sal, Utah. Prepared
by VRS Consultants and others.
239951R3.8 5/15196(4:43 PM)lRPTI2 8-3
~\\
Contract No. 68-W9-0053. 3 Copper Project and 69 kV
December. Transmission Line, San Juan County,
Utah. Metcalf Archaeological
-. 1992b.
- -Synthetic EPA Method 1312
Precipitation Leach Test for
Consultants, Inc. Eagle, Colorado.
Soils. November. Graham, Carole L., Metcalf Arch.

Consultants. 1995b. Pers. com. with
Ewart, Mark. 1996. Officer, San Juan R. Mutaw, W-C. November 22.
County Corrections. and Sheriff's
Department. Pers. com. with D. Hamp, S., T.J. Jackson, and P.W. Dotson.
Gaglione, W-C. Janmuy. 1995. Contaminant distributions at
typical U.S. uranium milling facilities
Fenneman, Nevin M 1931. Physiography and their effect on remedial action
of the Western United States. decisions. In International Conference
McGraw-Hill, N. Y. on Radiation Protection and
Radioactive Waste Mgmt. in the
Frederickson, D. 1996. Utah Water Quality Mining and Minerals Processing
Division. Pers. com. with David Industries, Johannesburg, So. Africa.
Nicholson, W-C. February 2. February 20-24.
Gochnour & Associates, Inc. (Gochnour). Hanshaw, RR, and G.A. Hill. 1969.
1995. Letter from P. Gochnour to L. Geochemistry and Hydrodynamics of
Jackson, BLM providing responses to the Paradox Basin Region, Utah,
identified BLM concerns. September Colorado, and New Mexico. Chemical
19. Geology. v. 4, p. 263-294.
1996. Miscellaneous Hunt, Charles, R 1967. Physiography of
communications to W-C. January- the United States. W.H. Freeman and
April.. Company, San Francisco.
---- . 1996a. Letter from P. Gochnour

to C. Paulsen. W -C providing
additional information on the Lisbon
Hunt, G. 1996. Utah Division of Oil, Gas,
and Mines. Pers. com. with D.
Nicholson, W-C. January 31.
Valley Project. January 5.
Hurlbut, C.S., and C. Klein. 1977. Manual
. 1996b. Pers. com. with S. Memitz,
--- W-C. January 3 L
of Mineralogy. 19th Edition. John
Wlleyand Sons, New York.
Gochnour, P., Gochnour and Associates. Kelsey Engineering. 1995. Maps and
1996b. Memo to L. Jackson, BLM, with -geologic cross-sections, Summo
comments on the Lisbon Valley PDEIS. Lisbon Valley Project mine pits. June-
March 6. July.
Graham, Carole L. 1995a. Cultural Kuntz, D.W., H.J. Armstrong, and F.J.
Resource Inventory of the SUMMO Athearn (editors). 1989. Faults,
USA Corporation Lisbon Valley
239961R3.S SIl5l96(4:43 PlI.<I)IRPTJ2 8-4
Fossils, and Canyons: Significant Bureau of Land Management. Moab,
Features on Public Lands in Colorado. Utah. September.
Geologic Advisory Group, Colorado
State Office, Bureau of Land Metcalf: Mike, Metcalf Arch. Consultants.
Management, Denver. 1995. Pers. com. with R Mutaw, W-c.
November 27.
Langstan, Lecia. 1996. Utah Department
of Employment Security, Salt Lake Metcru£: Mike, Metcalf Arch. Consultants.
City, Utah. Pers. com. with D. 1996. Pers. com. with R Mutaw, W-C.
Gaglione, W -C. April 3.
LM! Research. 1995. Labor Market Miller, G.C., W.B. Lyons, and A Davis.
Infonnation, Second Quarter. 1996. Understanding the water quality of
pit lakes. Envr. Science & Technology.
Loutham, Bruce, BLM Archaeologist. 30(3): 118A.. 122A
1995. Pers. corn. with R. Mutaw, W-C.
November 22. Modine, Marsha. 1996. Assistant, Spanish
Valley Water District. Pers. corn. with D.
Loutham, Bruce, BLM Archaeologist. Gaglione, W-c. January 17.
1996. Pers. corn. with R. Mutaw, W-C.
January 24. Moten, L. 1996. Utah Division of
Radiation Control. Pers. corn. with D.
Loutham, Bruce, BLM Archaeologist. Nicholson, W-C. January 31.
1996. Pers. com. with R. Mutaw, W-C.
February 14. Multi-Agency Visitors Center. 1995. San
Juan County Utah! Visitors guide
McClelland Laboratories, Inc. 1995-1996. Monticello, UT. 47 pp.
(McClelland). 1994. Report on Static
AGPIANP Tests - Lisbon Valley Waste Myrick, Peggy. 1996. Utah Department of
. Rock Samples. September 20. Employment Security, Blanding, Utah.
Pers. corn. with D. Gaglione, W-c.
McClure, Rich. 1996a Natural Resource January 24.
Specialist, Bureau of Land Management.
Moab, Utah. Comments on Summo National. Academy of Sciences. 1980.
PDEIS. February 1996 version. March. Mineral Tolerance of Domestic
Animals. National Research Council,
McClure, Rich. 1996b. Natural Resource Washington, D.C.
Specialist, Bureau of Land Management.
Moab, Utah. Pers. com. with C. Paul~ National Mining Association. 1995. Facts
W-C. February 9. about Minerals. Published by National
Mining Association, Washington, D.C.
Meiiji Resource Consultants. 1980. Visual
Resource Inventory and Analysis of National Oceanic and Atmospheric
South Central Utah Regional Area. Administration (NOAA). 1973.
Prepared for U.S. Dept. of Interior Precipitation-Frequency Atlas of the .
239951R3.8 5/15196(4:43 PM)/RPI'12 8-5

Western United States, Volume VI, Powell, Fred. 1996. Operations Manager,
Utah. Utah Power and Light. Pers. com. with.
D. Gaglione, W-C. January 18.
_ _~. 1992. Climatological Data for
Utah, September. Rasmussen, Thomas E. 1996. Staff Report:
Results oj the Paleontological Survey
Navajo Nation Historic Preservation jor the Proposed Lisbon Valley Copper
Department. 1991. Navajo Nation Project. United States Department of
Policy to Protect Traditional Cultural the Interior, BLM, Moab District, San
Properties. On file at Navajo Nation, Rafael Resource Area, Price, Utah.
Wmdow Rock, Arizona.
Rodstram, Chuck. 1996. Division Manager,
Nebecker, Clial. 1996. Pers. com. with R Empire Electric. Pers. com. with D.
Mutaw, W-C. Apri14. Gaglione, W-C. January 17.
O'Neil, Brian, Independent Arch. Roring, Corine. 1996. Pers. com. with R
Contractor, Grand Junction. 1996. Mutaw, W-C, Apri14.
Pers. com. with R Mutaw, W-C.
January 27. San Juan Co~ Economic Development
Plan. 1993. U.S. Department of
PacifiCorp. 1995. Application for Agriculture, Forest Service.
Transportation and Utility Systems and'
Facilities on Federal Lands. Schafer, Trent. 1996. Manager, City of
November 6. Monticello. Pers. com. with D. Gaglione,
W-C. January 17.
Paiz, C. D., and J. W. Thackston. 1987a.
Hydrogeologic Units in Cataract Slade, Darrell. 1996. Firefighter, City of
Canyon and Vicinity - Paradox Basin, Monticello Fire Department. Pers. com.
Utah. In Four Comers Geological with D. Gaglione, W-C. January 17.
'Societj Guidebook. 10th Field
Conference, Cataract Canyon. Snyder, Maggie. 1996. Assistant, City of
Moab Water District. Pers. com. with D.
_ _~. 1987b. Summary of Hydro- Gaglione, W-C. January 17 and 19.
geologic Data and Preliminary
Potentiometric Maps in the Vicinity of Southeastern Utah Association of Local
Davis and Lavender Canyons, Paradox Governments (SEUAOG). 1996. Grand
Basin, Utah. In Four Comers and San Juan County Summaries.
Geological Society Guidebook. 10th
Field Conference, Cataract Canyon. 1994. Overall Economic
Development PIan. July.
Permits West, Inc. 1995. Paci:ficorp's PIan of
Development for the Hatch-Summo 1995. Overall Economic
69 kV Powerline. Santa Fe, New Development Plan. Annual Update.
Mexico. November 6. Spangler, L. 1996. U.S. Geological
Swvey. Pers: com. with D. Nicholson,
W-C. January 31.
2399&1R3.S 5115196(4:43 PM)lRPTI2 8-6
Squire, Doug. 1996. Grand COUilty Sheriff's the Lisbon Valley Project. Pers. com.
Department. Pers. com. with D. from P. Gochnour to C. Paulsen, W-C.
Gaglione, W-C. January 17. January 8.
Stokes, W. 1996. School and Institutional Terres, John K. 1980. The Audubon
Trust Lands Administration represen- SOCiety Encyclopedia of North
tative. Pers. com. with K. Baud, W-C, American Birds. Wmgs Books.
regarding state land management plans. Random House Company. New York,
Februmy 14. New York.
Thackston, J. W., B. L. McCulley, and

-· Lands
- -Trust 1996. School and Institutional
Administration. Salt Lake L. M. Preslo. 1981. Groundwater
City, Utah. Pers. com. with C. Paulsen, Circulation in the Western Paradox
W-C. February 9. Basin, Utah. In Rocky Mountain
Association of Geologists - 1981 Field
Summo USA Corporation (Summo). Conference.
1995a. Proposed Plan of Operations
for the Lisbon Valley Project. Prepared Thompson, Bill. 1995. Bureau of Land
for the U.S. Department of Interior, Management, Moab, Utah.
Bureau of Land Management, Moab Pers. com. with R. Black, W-C.
District, Grand Resource Area. ~oust November 27.
8.
Thorson, J.P. . 1996a. Letter from
---- · 1995b. Memorandum from G.

Hahn on Additional Acid-Base
Analytical Data From Lisbon Valley.
J.P. Thorson
(Gochnour &
to P. Gochnour
Associates, Inc.)
providing an evaluation of the potential
June 13. for discovering additional
mineralization in the area of the
---,.___. 1995c. Memorandum from G Summo :Minerals Lisbon Valley
. Hahn· on Acid Generation! Project. January 10.
Neutralization Potential of Waste
Rock, Lisbon Valley Copper Project. ____. 1996b. Letter from J.P. Thorson
May 22. to P. Gochnour (Gochnour &
Associates, Inc.) providing an estimate
---- · 1995d. Letter from R. Prescott to
L. Jackson, BLM providing responses
to identified BLM concerns. September
of volume and tonnage of coaly waste
materiaL January 10.
26. _____. 1996b. Letter to Gochnour and

Associates regarding Lisbon Valley,
____. 1995d. Centennial Pit Geologic Utah uranium occurrences. January 29.
Cross Section A_A', J.P. Thorson.
December 20. Trimble, Stephen. 1989. The Sagebrush
Ocean - A· Natural History of the
Summo USA Corporation. 1996. Identified Great Basin. University of Nevada
list of permits which may be required at Press.
23995JR3.8 5115196(4:43 P.M)IRPT12 8-7

Twitche1, Anne. 1996. Assistant, C~ of Utah Department of Transportation
Moab Police Department. Pers. com. (UDOT). 1995. Unpublished traffic and
withD. Gaglione, W-C. Janumy 17. accident data for the years 1983
through 1994. December.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil
Conservation Service (USDA, SCSO. Utah Governor's Office of Planning and
1991. Soil Survey of Canyonlands Budget. 1994. State of Utah
Area, Utah, Parts of Grand and San Economic and Demographic
Juan Counties. January. Projections. September.
United States Department of Agriculture Valentine, John F. 1980. Range

(USDA) Forest Service. 1979. User Development and Improvements.
Guide to Soils. Mining and Brigham Young University Press.
Reclamation in the West. General Provo, Utah.
Technical Report. INT-68.
Van Hemert, Alex. 1996. Bureau of Land
U.S. Fish and Wtldlife Service (USFWS). Management. Moab, Utah. Pers. com.
1989. Black-footed Ferret Survey with C. Paulsen, W-C. February 9.
Guidelines for Compliance with
Endangered Species Act. Denver, Walker, Rita. 1996. C~ of Monticello.
Colorado and Albuquerque, New Pers. com. with D. Gaglione, W-C.
Mexico. Janumy24.
U.S. Geological Survey. 1992. USGS Weir, Gordon W., and Puffett, Willard, P.
Water Supply Paper. Volume 2, 1981. Incomplete Manuscript on
Colorado River Basin. Stratigraphy and Structural Geology
and Uranium-Vanadium and Copper
Utah Department of Environmental Q~ Deposits of the Lisbon Valley Area,
(DEQ): 1993. (3.2.2.3) Utah-Colorado. US Geological Survey,
Open File Report 81-39.
Utah Department of Environmental Quality
(DEQ). 1994. Standards of Quality for Welsh, J.D. and Associates, in Association
Waters of the State, Utah with Shepard Miller Inc. And hydro
Administrative Code R309-103, April Triad Ltd. 1996 Lisbon Valley Project
2, 1993. Heap Leach Facility Design Report.
Prepared for Summo USA
Utah Department of Environment Quality Corporation. February. Revised
(DEQ), Division of Water Quality. March 1996.
1995. Administrative Rules for
Groundwater Quality Protection. West, N.E. 1988. Intermountain Deserts,
R317-6, Utah Administrative Code. Shrub Steppes, and Woodlands. In:
March 20. North American Terrestrial Vegetation.
Cambridge University Press.
Utah Econ and Demographic Projections.
1994. (3.8.3) .
23996'R3.3 S11S196(4:43PM)lRPTI2 8-8

WESTEC, Inc. (WESTEC). 1995a. Letter Sampling Conducted During Third
from P. O'Connor to L. Jackson, BLM Quarter, 1995, Lisbon Valley Copper
identifying alternatives for the EIS. Project, San Juan County, Utah.
December 12. Prepared for Summo USA
Corporation. November 1.
Williams, RD. 1996. Field Supervisor.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Letter _ _-" 1995e. Results of Single Well
to L. Siebert, BLM; Moab, re: black- Aquifer Pumping Tests, Lisbon Valley
footed ferret surveys. Februaiy 1. Copper Project, San Juan County,
Utah. Prepared for Summo USA
Woodward-Clyde Consultants (W-C). Corporation. June 21.
1996. Lisbon Valley Draft Interim
Biological Resource Report. Prepared ___. 1995£ Preliminary Groundwater
for BLM. Moab, Utah. January. Flow Modeling to Support Pit
Dewatering and Water Supply
___. 1996. Analytical Results for Planning, Lisbon Valley Copper.
Groundwater and Surface Water Project. Prepared for Summo USA
Sampling Conducted During Fourth Corporation. August.
Quarter, 1995, Lisbon Valley Copper
Project, San Juan County, Utah. ___. 1994. Flora and Fauna Baseline
Prepared for Summo USA Data for Lisbon Valley, Utah - Draft
Corporation. January 26. Report. Prepared for St. Mary
Minerals, Inc., Denver, Colorado.
___. 1995a. Hydrologic Environmental W-C. June.
Baseline Evaluation, Lisbon Valley
Copper Project, San Juan County, ___. 1994. Baseline Soils Report
Utah. Prepared for Summo USA Lisbon Valley Copper Project, Lisbon
Corporation. February. Valley Utah. Prepared for St. Mary
Minerals, Inc. August.
___. 1995b. Analytical Results for
Groundwater Sampling Conducted ___. 1982. GeolOgiC Characterization
During First Quarter, 1995, Lisbon Report for the Paradox Basin Study
Valley Copper Project, San Juan Region Utah Study Areas, Vol. IV
. County, Utah. Prepared for Summo Lisbon Valley. Prepared for Battelle
USA Corporation.. July 11. Memorial Institute Office of Nuclear
Waste Isolation. January.
___. 1995c. Analytical Results for
Groundwater Sampling Conducted Younker, Gordon L., John E. Swenson,
During Second Quarter, 1995, Lisbon and Chris Anderson. 1990. Extensive
Valley Copper Project, San Juan Riparian Area Study, Moab District,
County, Utah. Prepared for Summo Utah. Prepared by AAA Engineering
USA Corporation. August 22. and Drafting, Inc. for BLM in
fulfillment of Contract No. YA651-
_ _-" 1995d. Analytical Results for CT9-340082.
Groundwater and SUiface Water
239961R3.8 5/15/96(4:43 PM)lRPTI2 8-9
Zablan, M. 1996. U.S. Fish and WIldlife
Service. Pers. com. with R. Black,
W-C. January 11.
Zufelt, Robert. 1996. Division Manager,

Utah Gas and Service. Pers. com. with
D. Gaglione, W-C. January 17.
23996JR3.S SIlSJ96(4:43 PM)IRPT12 8-10
3/1
9.0
INDEX
Affected Environment: 3-1

Agency Preferred Alternative: 2-45
Air Emission Controls: 2-36
. Air Quality: 3-81,4-79,4-90,4-91,4-93,4-94
Alternatives: 2-41
Alternatives Analyzed in Detail: 1-9
°
Alternatives Considered and Eliminated: 1-1
Authorizing Actions: 1-4
Climate: 3-79,4-79,4-90,4-91,4-93,4-94
Copper Development: 3-12
Crushing Activities: 2-7
Cultural Resources: 3-66,4-71,4-89,4-91,4-92,4-94
Cumulative Impacts: 4-87
Economic Conditions: 3-53

Electrical Power: 2-29
Environmental Consequences: 4-1
EPA Method 1312 - Synthetic Precipitation.Leach Test: 3-33
Facilities and Services: 3:-58

Facility Layout Alternative: 4-4, 4-25,4-28, 4-35, 4-41, 4-45,4-50, 4-59, 4-63, 4-71, 4-75,
4-77,4-84,4-85,4-87
Facility Layout Alternative (BLM Preferred Alternative): 2-42
Features Common to All Alternatives: 2-44
Geochemistry: 3-31,4-26,4-89,4-91,4-90,4-93
Geologic Resources: 3-2,4-89,4-90,4-92,4-93
Geologic Setting: 3-1
Geology and Geotechnical Issues: 3-1,4-1
Geotechnical Considerations: 3-7
Grazing: 3-48,4-46,4-88,4-89,4-91,4-92,4-93
Groundwater Resources: 3-18
Hazardous Materials: 3-65,4-64, 4-89, 4-91, 4-92, 4-93

Highways and Local Roads: 3-61
Historic Mining Operations: 3-66
Housing: 3-57
Hydrology: 3-14,4-5,4-89,4-91,4-93,4-94
239961R3.9 SIl6l96{12:44 PM)lRPT/4 9-1

Irreversible or Irretrievable Resource Commitments: 4-93
Issues and Concerns Analyzed: 1-12
Issues Considered But Not Analyzed: 1-15
Land Use: 3-77,4-77,4-90,4-91,4-93,4-94

Land Use Resources: 3-77
Leach Tests: 3-33
Methodology: 4-1, 4-5, 4-26, 4-29, 4-36, 4-41, 4-46, 4-51, 4-59, 4-64, 4-71, 4-75, 4-77,
4-79,4-84,4-85
Mining Activities: 2-2
No Action Alternative: 2-41,4-3,4-23,4-27,4-34,4-40,4-45,4-49,4-59,4-62, 4-71, 4~74,

4-76,4-78,4-82,4-84,4-87
Noise: 3-84, 4-84
Oil and Gas Development: 3-66

Open Pit Backfilling Alternative: 2-41, 4-4, 4-24, 4-27, 4-35, 4-40, 4-45, 4-49, 4-59, 4-63,
4-71,4-75,4-77,4-78,4-82,4-85,4-87
Paleontological Resources: 3-73,4-71,4-89,4-91,4-92,4-94

Population: 3-56
°
Processing Activities: 2-1
Proposed Action: 2-1, 4-1,4-6,4-26,4-30, 4-36,4-41, 4-46, 4-51, 4-59, 4-67, 4-72, 4-75,
4-78,4-79,4-84,4-86
Public Involvement and Scoping Issues: 1-9
Purpose and Need: 1-4
Reclamation/Closure: 2-37, 3-34, 3-40, 4-32

Records Review and Agencies Contacted (Hazardous Materials): 3-65
Recreational Resources: 3-84, 4-85
Seeping Issues: 1-9

Short-Term Uses Vs. Long-TennProductivity: 4-92
Social Conditions and Quality of Life: 3-60
Socioeco~omics: 3-52,4-51,4-=89,4-91,4-93
Soils: 3-34, 4-89, 4-90, 4-92, 4-93
Soils and Reclamation: 3-34, 4-29
Special Status Species: 3-45, 3-46
Static Test Analyses: 3-32
Summary ofEnviromnental Impacts from Each Alternative Analyzed: 2-45
Support Facilities: .2-24
Surface Water Resources: 3-14
9-2
Threatened and Endangered Species (see Special Status Species)
Transportation: 2-35, 3-61, 4-59, 4-89, 4-91, 4-92, 4-93
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: 4-90

Uranium Mining: 3-2,3-7,3-30,4-18
Vegetation: 3-40,4-36,4-89,4-91,4-92,4-94
Visual Resources: 3-73,4-75,4-89,4-91,4-92,4-:94
Waste Management: 2-34

Waste Rock Selective Handling Alternative: 4-4, 4-25, 4-28, 4-35, 4-41, 4-46, 4-51, 4-59,
4-63,4-71,4-75,4-77,4-84,4-85,4-87
Water Supply: 2-28
Wildlife: 3-45,4-41,4-89,4-91,4-92,4-93
'Work Force: 2-29
239961R3.9 S116I96(J2:44 PM)lRPT/4 9-3
~\
APPENDIX A
USBON VALLEY PROJECI' UNPATENTED CLAIMS
23996JR3.TS S116l96(1:S7PM)lRPTI3
APPENDIX A
LISBON VALLEY PROJECT UNPATEN1ED CLAIMS
Unpatented claims situate in San Juan County, Utah

Township 30 South, Ranges 25 and 26 East
and Township 31 South, Range 26 East
BLM Serial No.

OaimName Book/Page TwnlRge/Sec lIMe
Camel 25/453 30S/25E/25,26 129728
Amended 231/261
Cat 251454 30S/25E/25,26 129729
Amended 2311262
Colt 25/455 30S/25E!25,26 129730
Amended 2311263
Cougar 25/455 30S/25E!25,26,35 129731
Amended 231/263
Cow 251454 30S/25E!25,26 129732
Amended 231/262
Coyote 251456 30S/25E!35 129733
Amended 2311264
Cub 25/456 30S/25E!35 129734
Amended 2311264
Sentinall 47/44 30S/25E/25 129718
Amended 231/256
Sentinal2 47/45 30S/25E125 129719
Amended 231/257
Sentinal3 47/45 30S/25E/25 129720
Amended 231/257
SentmaJ.4 47/46 30S/25E!25,26 129721
Amended 2311258
Sentinal5 47/46 30S/25E/25 129722
Amended 2311258
Sentinal6 47/47 30S/25E125,26 129723
Amended 2311259
Sentinal7 47/47 30S/25E!25 129724
Amended 2311259
Sentinal8 47/48 30S/25E!25,26 129725
Amended 231/260
Sentinal9 47148 30S/25E/25 129726
Amended 2311260
Sentinall0 47/4 30S/25E/25,26 129727
Amended 2311261
23996/R3.EXA 5/16/96(10:35 AM)IRPT A-I

BLM Serial No.
OaimName Book/Page TwnlRge/Sec UMC
Climax 1 R21382 30S/25E/25 129763

Amended 411229
Amended 4871I86
Climax 2 R21382 30S/25E/25 129764
Amended 411230
Amended 487/186
Alpha 1 270/83 30S/25E125 129765
Alpha 2 270/83 30S/25E/25 129766
Alpha 3 270/84 30S/25E/25 129767
Alpha 4 270/84 30S/25E125 129768
Alpha 5 270/85 30S/25E125 129769
Alpha 6 270/85 30S/25E125 129770
Alpha 7 270/86 30S/25E125 129771
Alpha 8 270/86 30S/25E125 129772
CWI 510162 30S/25E125,26,35 129811
CW2 510/63 30S/25E125 129812
CW3 510/64 30S/25E125,26 129813
CW4 510165 30S/25E/25 129814
CW5 510166 30S/25E125 129815
CW6 510167 30S/25E125,26 129816
CW7 510168 30S/25E125 129817
CW8 510169 30S/25E125 129818
CW9 510170 30S/25E125 129819
CWlO 510171 30S/25E/25 129820
CWll 510172 30S/25E/25 129821
CW12 510173 30S/25E/25 129822
Amended 521/9
CWl3, 510174 30S/25E125 129823
CW14 510175 30S/25E125,26 129824
CW15 511/596 30S/25E125 129825
CW16 511/597 30S/25E125 129826
CW19 511/598 30S/25E/25 129827
Amended 521/8
CW22 511/599 30S/25E124,25 129828
KWRI 487/130 30S/25E126 129789
KWR2 487/131 30S/25E126 129790
KWR3 487/132 30S/25E/26 129791
KWR4 4871133 30S/25E/26 129792
KWR5 487/134 30S/25E126 129793
KWR6 487/135 30S/25E/26 129794
KWR7 487/136 30S/25E126 129795
KWR8 487/137 30S/25E126 129796
239961R3,EXA 5116196(10-35 AM)I.RPT A-2

. BLM Serial No.
CIaimName Book/Page TwnlRge/Sec {]Me
KWR 9 Fraction 5011345 30S/25E126 129797

KWRI0 5011346 30S/25E123,26 129798
KWR 11 Fraction 5011347 30S/25E125 129799
KWR 11 Fraction 521/469 30S/25E125 129802
KWR 12 Fraction 5011348 30S/25E125 129800
KWR 13 Fraction 501/349 30S/25E/25 129801
G.M Wallace 484/636 30S/25E125 129829
Fraction (Amended) 4871129
NuZuni45 707/500 30S/25E/35 330150
NuZuni46 707/501 30S/25E/35 330151
NuZuni47 707/502 30S/25E135 330152
Oxide 1 7071734 30S/25E/23,26 327776
Oxide 2 7071735 30S/25E123,26 327777
Oxide 3 . 705/119 30S/25E123 327778
Oxide 4 . 7051120 30S/25E123,26 327779
Oxide 5 7051121 30S/25E123 327780
Oxide 6 705/122 30S/25E123,26 327781
Oxide Fraction 708/345 30S/25E123,26 331632
CWG Fraction 517/275 30S/25E126 129786
CWG Fraction 1 517/276 30S/25E126 129787
CWG Fraction 2 517/277 30S/25E126 129788
CDI 509/508 30S/25E125,26 129773
CD 2 Fraction 509/509 30S/25E125 129774
CD 3 Fraction 509/510 30S/25E/25,36 129775
CD 4 Fraction 509/511 30S/25E125,36 129776
30S/26E/30,31
CD 5 Fraction 509/512 30S/25E125 129777
CD 6 fraction. 509/550 129737
CD 7A Amended 724/350 30S/25E/25 349339
CD8A 722/134 30S/25E125 349340
CD 9A Amended 724/352 30S/25E/25 349341
CD lOA Amended 724/354 30S/25E125 349342
Globe 1 486116 30S/25E126 129782
Amended 489/392
GIobe2 486/17 30S/25E/26 129783
Amended 489/393
GIobe9 486/24 30S/25E123 129784
Amended 489/400
Globe 10 486/25 30S/25E123,26 129785
Amended 489/401
Security 3 377/402 30S/26E131 140827
Security 5 377/403 30S/26E131 140607
23996JR3.EXA 5116/90(10:48 AM)IRPT A-3
J
BIM Serial No.
Claim Name Book/Page TwnlRge/Sec UMC
Security 7 377/404 30S/26E/31 140608

Security 9 377/405 30S/26E/31 140609
Security 11 377/406 30S/26E/31 140610
Security 14 377/407 31S/26E16 140611
Security 15 377/408 31S/26E16 140612
Security 16 377/409 31S/26E/6 140613
Security 18 377/410 31S/26E16 140614
Security 19 3771411 31S/26E/6 140615
Security 20 377/412 31S/26E/6 140616
Security 25 3771413 31S/26E/6 140617
Security 26 377/414 31S/26E15,6 140618
Security 27 377/415 30S/26E/31 140619
Security 28 377/416 30S/26E131 140620
Security 29 377/417 30S/26E/31 140621
Security 30 377/418 30S/26E/31 140622
Security 31 377/419 30S/26E/31 140623
Security 32 377/420 30S/26E/31 140624
Security 33 377/421 30S/26E131 140625
Security 34 377/422 30S/26E131 140626
Security 35 377/423 30S/26E131 140627
Security 36 377/424 30S/26E131 140628
Security 37 377/425 30S/26E131 140629
Security 38 377/426 30S/26E131 140630
Security 39 377/427 30S/26E131 140631
Security 40 377/428 30S/26E131 140632
Security 41 377/429 30S/26E131 140633
Securi,ty 42 377/430 30S/26E131 140634
Security 43 377/431 30S/26E/31 140635
Security 44 377/432 30S/26E131 140636
Secmity45 377/433 30S/26E131 140637
Security 46 377/434 30S/26E131 140638
Security 47 377/435 30S/26E131 140639
Security 48 377/436 30S/26E/31 140640
Security 49 3781341 30S/26E131 140641
Security 50 378/342 30S/26E/31 140642
security 51 3781343 30S/26E131 140643
Security 52 3781344 30S/26E/31 140644
Secmity53 3781345 30S/26E131 140645
Security 54 3781346 30S/26E/31 140646
Secmity55 3781347 30S/26E/31 140647
Security 56 3781348 30S/26E/31 140648
23m'R.3.EXA SIl6l96{1O:3SAM)IRPT A-4

BLM Serial No.
OaimName Book/Page TwnlRge/Sec UMe
STEP 1 733 470 30S/25E127 354577
STEP 2 733 472 30S/25E/27 354579
STEP 4 733 476 30S/25E127 354580
STEP 5 733 478 30S/25E/27 354581
STEP 6 733 480 30S/25E/27 354582
STEP 7 733 482 30S/25E127 354583
STEP 8 733 484 30S/25E/27 354584
STEP 9 733 486 . 30S125E127 354585
STEP 10 733 488 30S/25E/27 354586
STEP 11 7~3 490 30S/25E127 354587
STEP 12 733 492 30S/25E127 354588
STEP 13 733 494 30S/25E127 354589
STEP 14 733 496 30S/25E/27 354590
STEP 15 733 498 30S/25E/27 354591
STEP 16 733 500 30S/25E/27 354592
STEP 17 733 502 30S/25E/27 354593
STEP 18 733 504 30S/25E127 354594
STEP 19 733 506 30S/25E127&34 354595
STEP20 . 733 508 30S/25E127&34 354596
STEP 21 733 510 30S/25E127&34 354597
STEP22 733 512 30S/25E127&34 354598
STEP23 733 514 30S/25E127&34 354599
STEP 24 733 516 30S/25E127&34 354600
STEP 25 733 518 30S/25E/27&34 354601
STEP 26 733 520 30S/25E/27&34 354602
STEP 27 733 522 30S/25E/27,28, 354603
33&34
STEP.28 733 524 30S/25E135 354604
STEP 29 733 526 30S/25E135 354605
STEP 30 733 528 30S/25E135 354606
STEP 31 733 530 30S/25£/35 354607
STEP 32 733 532 30S/25E/35 354608
STEP 33 733 534 30S/25E/35 354609
STEP 34 733 536 30S/25E/35/36 354610
RP21 733 305 30S/26E130 354543
RP22 733 306 30S/26E130 . 354544
RP23 733 307 30S/26E13 0 354545
RP24 733 308 3OS/26E/3 0 354546
RP28 733 309 3OS/26E13 0 354547
RP29 733 310 3OS/26E13 0 354548
RP30 733 311 30S/26E130 354549
RP31 733 312 3OS/26E13 0 354550
23996IR3.ExA S/J6I!J6(10:35 AM)!RPT A-5
J
, BLM Serial No.
OaimName Book/Page TwnlRge/Sec TIMe
RP32 733 313 3OS/26E13 0 354551
RP33 733 314 3OS/26E13 0 354552'
RP36 733 315 3OS/26E13 0 354553
30S/25E125
RP37 733 316 3oS/26E/3 0 354554
30S/25E125
RP38 733 317 3OS/26E13 0 354555
30S/25E125
RP39 733 318 3OS/26E/3 0 354556
30S/25E125
RP40 733 319 3OS/26E13 0 354557
30S/25E125
RP41 733 320 3OS/26E13 0 354558
30S/25E125
RP42 733 321 30S/26E130 354559
30S/25EI25
RP46 733 322 30S/25E124&25 354560
RP47 733 323 30S/25E/25 354561
RP48 733 324 30S/25E125 354562
RP49 733 325 30S/25E125 354563
RP50 733 326 30S/25E125 354564
RP51 733 327 30S/25E125 354565
RP52 733 328 30S/25E125 354566
RP53 733 329 30S/25E125 354567
RP54 733 330 30S/25E125 354568
RP58 733 331 30S/25E124 354569
RP59 733 332 30S/25E124&25 354570
RP60. 733 333 30S/25E125 354571
RP61 733 334 30S/25E125 354572
RP66 733 335 30S/25E124 354573
RP67 733 336 30S/25E124&25 354574
RP74 733 337 3OS/25E123 &24 354575
RP75 733 338 30S/25E123,24 354576
25,26
Lady Buff 1 743 306 30S/25E126 356889
LadyBuff2 743 309 30S/25E126 356890
Lady Buff3 743 312 30S/25E123,26 356891
LadyBuff4 743 315 30S/25E123,26 356892
LadyBuff5 743 318 30S/25E123 356893
LadyBuff6 743 321 30S/25E122,23,26 356894
Lady Buff 7 743 324 30S/25E123 356895
Lady Buff 8 '143327 30S/25E122,23 356896
2399&1U.EXA SII&'96(lo-3S AM)IRPT A-6
$i~
BLM Serial No.
OaimName. Book/Page Twn!Rge!S~ TIMe
Lady Buff 9 743 330 30S/25E123 356897
Lady Buff 10 743 333 30S/25E/22,23 356898
Lady Buff 11 743 336 30S/25E/23 356899
Lady Buff 12 743 339 30S/25E/22,23 356900
Lady Buff 13 743 342 30S/25E/22,23 356901
GKSI
GKS2
GKS3
GKS4
GKS5
GKS6
GKS7
GKS8
GKS9
GKSI0
GKS 11
GKS12
GKS 13
GKS14
GKS 15
GKS16
GKS17
GKS18
GKS 19
GKS20
GKS21
GKS22
GKS23
GKS24
GKS25
GKS26....
GKS27
GKS28
GKS29
GKS30
GKS31
GKS32
GKS33
~S34
GKS35
GKS36
239961.R3.EXA 5/16196(10:35 AM)IRPT A-7

BLM Serial No.
OaimName BookIPage TwnlRge/Sec UMe
GKS37
GKS38
GKS39
GKS40
GKS41
GKS42
GKS43
GKS44
GKS45
GKS46
GKS47
Source: Summo (1995)
239961R3..ExA SIl6l96(10:35 AM;)IRYr A-8

APPENDIXB
'STATIC TEST RESULTS
23996/R3.TS SI161!l6(1:57PM)IRPT/3
TABLE B-1
STATIC TEST RESULTS BY ROCK TYPE
SAMPLE DEPTH ROCK SULFUR(%) AGP .ANP NNP .ANP:AGP

(ft) TYPE (sulfidic
sulfur) )
TOTAL SULFIDE SULFATE TONSCaco~f
93-Cl 19 LSIMS 0.032 <0.001 0.032 <0.03 392 +392 >13,000

93-Cl 21 MS 0.028 0.002 0.026 0.06 303 +302.9 5,050
93-Cl 30.5 MS 0.016 <0.001 0.016 <0.03 8.7 +8.7 >290
93-Cl 35.5 LS/SLST 0.016 0.002 0.014 0.06 181 +180.9 3,017
93-Cl 44.5 SLSTIMS 0.088 0.008 0.080 0.25 4.4 +4.1 17.6
93-Cl 46.5 LS 0.Ql8 0.006 0.012 0.19 757 +756.8 3,984
93-C2 17 SLST/SH 0.Ql8 0.002 0.016 0.06 4.4 +4.3 73
i
93-C4 13 COAL 0.600 0.510 0.090 15.94 <0.5 -15.4 <0.03
1
93-C4 • 24 SSISH 0.630 0.520 0.110 16.25 5.1 -11.2 0.3J
93-C5 1 22 COAL 0.900 0.620 . 0.280 19.38 <0.5 -18.9 <0.03
1
93-C5 27 SS(?) 4.150 3.900 0.250 121.88 <0.5 -121.4 <0.004
1
93-C5 34 SHIMS 0.750 0.665 0.085 20.78 <OS -20.3 <0.02
93Ri 2040 COAL 0.320 0.180 0.140 5.63 <0.5 -5.6 <0.09
93R2 40-60 SS 0.360 0.200 0.160 6.25 9.3 3.1 1.49
93R2 60-80 SS 0.190 0.070 0.120 2.19 22.8 20.6 10.4
93R2 1 140-160 SSIMS 0.110 0.025 0.085 0.78 <0.5 -0.8 <0.64
93R2 i 160-1"80 MS 0.032 0.002 0.030 0.06 <0.5 -0.1 <8.00
i
93R2 180-200 MS 0.045 0.003 0.042 0.09 <0.5 -0.1 <5.33
i
93R2 200-220 MS 0.049 0.004 0.045 0.13 <0.5 -0.1 <4.00
i
93R2 220-240 MS 0.054 0.003 0.051 0.09 <0.5 -0.1 <5.33
93R4 40-60 MS 0.021 0.001 0.020 0.Q3 160 160.0 5,120
93R4 60-80 MS 0.037 0.003 0.034 0.09 200 199.9 2,133
93R4 80-100 MS 0.029 0.001 0.028 0.03 300 300.0 9,600
93R4 100-120 MS 0.025 0.001 0.024 0.Q3 315 315.0 10,080
93R4 120-140 MS 0.031 0.001 0.030 0.Q3 300 300.0 9,600
i
93R6 5-20 COAL 0.540 0.370 0.170 11.56 <0.5 -11.6 <0.04
i
93R6 2040 COAL/SS 0.620 0.563 0.057 17.59 <0.5 -17.6 <0.03
93R6 i 40-60 SS. 0.380 0.240 0.140 7.50 6 -1.5 0.80
i
93R6 60-80 SS 0.530 0.310 0.220 9.69 3.8 -5.9 0.39
93R6 80-100 SS 0.700 0.310 0.390 9.69 20.1 10.4 2.07
239961R3.B SIISI96(4:43 PMYRPI"/4 B-1
~\
TABLE B-1
STATIC TEST RESULTS BY ROCK TYPE (Continued)
SAMPLE DEPm ROCK SULFUR(%) AGP ANP NNP ANP:A4

(ft) TYPE (sulfid
sulfur}
TOTAL SULFIDE SULFATE TONS CaCO:V:Kr
93R6 140-160 MS 0.330 0.130 0.200 4.06 76 71.9 18.7
93R6 160-180 MS 0.060 0.001 0.059 0.03 87.1 87.1 2,787
93R6 lS0-200 MS 0.110 0.021 0.089 0.66 98.7 98.0 150
93R6 200-220 MS 0.052 0.001 0.051 0.03 270 270.0 8,640
93R6 220-240 MS 0.029 <0.001 0.029 <0.03 370 370.0 >12,333
93R6 240-260 MS 0.040 0.002 0.038 0.06 345 344.9 5,520
93R6 260-280 MS 0.042 0.002 0.040 0.06 275 274.9 4,400
93R6 280-300 MS 0.037 0.001 0.036 0.03 370 370.0 11,840
93R7' 5-20 SS 0.048 0.008 0.040 0.25 <0.5 -0.2 <2.00
93R7' 20-40 Ss/COAL 0.190 0.010 0.180 0.31 <0.5 -0.3 <1.60
93R7' 40-60 COAIlSS 0.720 0.390 0.330 12.19 <0.5 -12.2 <0.04
93R7 60-80 SS 0.250 0.080 0.170 2.50 8.5 6.0 3.40
93R7 S()"loo SS 0.140 0.030 0.110 0.94 19 18.1 20.3
93R7 100-120 S8 0.150 0.020 0.130 0.62 150 149.4 240
93R7 120-140 S8 0.074 0.002 0.072 0.06 105 104.9 1,680
93R7 140-160 MS 0.078 0.004 0.074 0.13 125 124.9 1,000
93R7 160-i80 MS 0.044 0.002 0.042 0.06 125 124.9 2,000
93R7 180-200 MS 0.100 0.004 0.096 0.13 400 399.9 3,200
93R7 200-220 MS 0.074 <0.001 0.074 <0.03 425 425.0 >14,167
93R7 220-240 MS/SS 0.210 0.050 0.160 1.56 245 243.4 157
93R12 5-20 SS 0.030 0.002 0.028 0.06 12.6 12.5 202
93R12 20-40 SS 0.040 0.001 0.039 0.03 37.7 37.7 1,206
93R12 4()..60 SS 0.018 0.002 0.016 0.06 11.9 11.8 190
93R12 6()..80 SSIMS O.DlS 0.003 0.Dl5 0.09 67.6 67.5 721
93R12 S()"loo MS 0.046 0.001 0.045 0.03 100 100.0 3,200
93R12 100-120 MS 0.034 <0.001 0.034 <0.03 395 395.0 >13,167
93R12 120-140 MS 0.082 0.001 0.081 0.03 410 410.0 13,120
93R12 140-160 MS 0.150 <0.001 0.150 <0.03 305 305.0 >10,167
93R17 5-20 COAL 0.160 <0.001 0.160 <0.03 28.7 28.7 >957
B-2
TABLE B-1
SAMPLE DEPTH ROCK SULFUR(%) AGP ANP NNP ANP:AGP

(ft) TYPE (sulfidic
sulfur) )
TOTAL SULFIDE SULFATE TONSCaCOJl((r
93R17 2Q.,40 COAL 0.076 <0.001 0.076 <0.03 2.9 2.9 >96.7
93R17. 40-60 COAL 0.024 <0.001 0.024 <0.03 86.3 86.3 >2,877
93R17 60-80 MS 0.026 0.002 0.024 0.06 84.9 84.8 1,358
93R17 80-100 MS 0.052 <0.001 0.052 <0.03 400 400.0 > 13,333
93R17 100-120 MS 0.082 <0.001 0.082 <0.03 440 440.0 >14,667
93R17 120-140 MS 0.160 0.010 0.150 0.31 325 324.7 1,040
93R23 5-20 COAL 0.380 0.010 0.370 0.31 4.3 4.0 13.8
93R23 i 20-40 COAL 0.470 0.210 0.260 6.56 <0.5 -6.6 <0.08
93R23! 40-60 SS 0.350 0.180 0.170 5.62 5.2 -0.4 0.92
93R23 60-80 SS 0.180 0.030 0.150 0.94 15.2 14.3 16.2
93R23 80-100 SS 0.180 0.020 0.160 0.62 89.9 89.3 144
93R23 100-120 SS 0.120 0.010 0.110 0.31 75.7 75.4 242
93R23 120-140 SSIMS 0.092 0.026 0.066 0.81 232 22.4 28.6
93R23 140-160 MS 0.040 0.002 0.038 0.06 93.4 93.3 1,494
93R23 160-180 MS 0.120 0.027 0.093 0.84 230 229.2 273
93R23 180-200 MS 0.110 0.010 0.100 0.31 395 394.7 1,264
93R23 200-220 MS 0.084 0.001 0.083 0.03 415 415.0 13,280
93R23 . 220-240 MS 0.180 0.060 0.120 1.88 345 343.1 i84
93R25 5-20 COAL/SS 0.096 0.001 ·0.095 0.03 <0.5 0.0 <16.0
93R25 20-40 SS 0.260 0.020 0.240 0.63 32 2.6 5.12
93R25 40-60 SS 0.086 0.001 0.085 0.03 13.6 13.6 435
93R25 60-80 SS· 0.240 0.040 0.200 1.25 93.8 92.6 75.0
93R25 80-100 SS 0.028 0.001 0.027 . 0.03 U.8 11.8 378
93R25 100-120 SSIMS 0.059 0.002 0.057 0.06 4.3 4.2 68.8
93R25 120-140 MS 0.042 <0.001 0.042 <0.03 70.9 70.9 >2,363
93R25 140-160 MS 0.100 0.014 0.086 0.44 245 244.6 560
93R25 160-180. MS 0.140 <0.001 0.140 <0.03 385 385.0 >12,833
93R25 180-200 MS 0.120 0.010 O.UO 0.31 450 449.7 1,440
93R29 5-20 SS 0.070 0.021 0.049 0.66 32.2 31.5 49.1
23991S1R3.B SIIS/96(4:43 PM)lRPT/4 B-3

TABLE B-1
SAMPLE DEPTH ROCK SULFllR(%) AGP ANP NNP ANP:A

(ft) TYPE (sulfie
sulfur,
TOTAL SULFIDE SULFATE TONS CaCOJIKtz
93R29 20-40 SS 0.061 0.002 0.059 0.06 32.2 32.1 515
93R29 40-60 SS 0.013 0.007 0.006 0.22 7.6 7.4 34.7
93R29 60-80 SSIMS 0.032 0.002 0.030 0.06 48.3 48.2 773
93R29 80-100 MS 0.023 <0.001 0.023 <0.03 130 130.0 >4,333
93R29 100-120 MS 0.025 <0.001 0.025 <0.03 410 410.0 >13,667
93R29 120-140 MS 0.036 0.003 0.033 0.09 400 399.9 4;267
93R29 140-160 MS 0.140 0.020 0.120 0.63 285 284.4 456
94R6 0.0-20.0 AILUV 0.640 <0.001 0.640 <0.03 17.6 17.6 >587
94R6 20.040.0 AILUV/SS 0.300 <0.001 0.300 <0.03 47.1 47.1 >1,570
94R6 40.0-60.0 SS 0.090 <0.001 0.090 <0.03 5.9 5.9 >196
94R6 60.0..80.0 SS 0.030 <0.001 0.030 <0.03 2.3 2.3 >75.7
94R6 80.0-100.0 SS/COAL 0.036 <0.001 0.036 <0.03 3.9 3.9 >130
1
94R6 100.0- COAL 0.940 0.690 0.250 21.56 4.6 -17.0 0.21
120.0
94R61 120.0- COALISS 0.640 0.480 0.160 15.00 9.9 -5.1 0.66
140.0
94R6 140.0- SS 0.340 0.210 0.130 6.56 24.2 17.6 3.69
100.6
94R6 160.0- SS 0.400 0.260 0.140 8.13 53.6 45.5 6.60
180.0
94R6 180.0- SS 0.100 <0.001 0.100 <0.03 6.3 6.3 >209
200.0
94R121 0.0-20.0 AILUV/SS 0.170 <0.001 0.170 <0.03 <0.5 -0.5 16.7
1
94R12 20.040.0 SS 0.180 0.030 0.150 0.94 <0.5 -1.4 <0.53
1
94R12 40.0-60.0 COAL 1.160 0.870 0.290 27.19 1.1 -26.1 0.04
1
94R12 60.0..80.0 COAL/SS 0.720 0.520 0.200 16.25 11.9 -4.4 0.73
94R12 80.0-100.0 SS 0.540 0.370 0.170 11.56 21.4 9.8 1.85
94R12 100.0- SSIMS 0.520 0.380 0.140 11.88 13.9 2.0 1.17
120.0
94R12 120.0- M$ 0.200 0.080 0.120 2.50 169.0 166.5 67.6
140.0
~ SI1S196(4:~3PM}lR.PT/4 B-4
.131
~:
TABLE B-1
SAMPLE DEPm ROCK SULFUR(%) AGP ANP NNP ANP:AGP

(ft) TYPE (sulfidic
sulfur) )
TOTAL SULFIDE SULFATE TONS CaCOJlKf
94R12 140.0- MS 0.200 0.060 0.140 1.88 385.0 383.1 205
160.0
94R12 160.0- MS 0.100 0.008 0.092 0.25 270.0 269.8 1,080
180.0
94R14 0.0-20.0 ALLUV/88 0.340 <0.001 0.340 <0.03 225.0 225.0 >7,500
94R14 20.0-40.0 88 1.020 0.010 1.010 0.31 160.0 159.7 512
94R14 40.0-60.0 88 0.880 0.260 0.620 8.13 39.2 3Ll 4.82
94R14 60.0-80.0 8S 0.580 0.430 0.150 13.44 23.6 10.2 1.76
94R14 80.0-100.0 SS 0.500 0.380 0.120 11.88 33.5 21.6 2.82
94R14 100.0- SS 0.640 0.450 0.190 14.06 66.0 51.9 4.69
120.0
94R14 120.0- SS 0.360 0.210 0.150 6.56 26.7 20.1 4.07
140.0
94R14 180.0- MS 0.200 0.050 0.150 1.56 200.0 198.4 128
200.0
94R14 200.0- MS 0.180· 0.060 0.120 1.88 305.0 303.1 163
220.0
94R14 220.0- MS 0.086 <0.001 0.086 <0.03 305.0 305.0 >10,167
240.0
94R14 240.0- MS 0.078 <0.001 0.078 <0.03 255.0 255.0 >8,500
260.0
9488 0.0-20.0 MS 0.Dl8 <0.001 0.018 <0.03 235.0 235.0 >7,833
94S8 20.0-40.0 MS 0.028 0.002 0.026 0.06 400.0 399.9 6,400
94S8 40.0-60.0 MS 0.028 <0.001 0.028 <0.03 415.0 415.0 >13,933
94S8 60.0-80.0 MS 0.018 <0.001 0.Dl8 <0.03 355.0 355.0 >11,833
94S15 0.0-20.0 MS 0.022 <0.001 0.022 <0.03 395.0 395.0 >13,167
94S15 20.0-40.0 MS 0.032 <0.001 0.032 <0.03 560.0 560.0 >18,667
94815 40.0-60.0 MS/88 0.020 <0.001 0.020 <0.03 295.0 295.0 >9,833
94S29 0.0-20.0 8S 0.200 <0.001 0.200 <0.03 9.0 9.0 >301
94S29 1 20.0-40.0 88 0.290 0.100 0.190 3.12 1.7 -1.5 0.53
94829 1 40.0-60.0 S8 0.570 0.340 0.230 10.62 1.6 -9.0 0.15
94S29 1 60.0-80.0 SS 0.190 0.070 0.120 2.19 <0.5 -2.7 <0.23
239961R3.B S11S196(4:43 PM)lRPT/4 B-5
:I
TABLE B-1
SAMPLE DEPTH ROCK SULFUR(%) AGP ANP NNP ANP:A

(ft) TYPE (sulfie
sulfur.
TOTAL SULFIDE SULFATE TONS CaCO.Yl(r
1 <0.5' <0.53
94519 80.0-100.0 88 0.240 0.030 0.210 0.94 -1.4
94519 100.0- 8SIMS 0.380 0.110 0.270 3.44 47.2 43.8 13.7
120.0
94519 120.0- MS 0.340 0.190 0.150 5.94 84.0 78.1 14.1
140.0
94519 140.0- MS 0.130 0.020 0.110 0.63 120.0 119.4 192
160.0
94519 160.0- MS 0.210 0.020 0.190 0.62 490.0 489.4 784
180.0
94S29 180.0- MS 0.120 <0.001 0.120 <0.03 530.0 530.0 >17,667
200.0
94S29 200.0- MS 0.190 0.040 0.150 1.25 360.0 358.8 288
220.0
94S29 240.0- S8 0.230 0.070 0.160 2.19 115.0 112.8 52.6
260.0
94836 0.0-20.0 AIJ.,UV 0.028 <0.001 0.028 <0.03 145.0 145.0 >4,833
94836 20.0-40.0 AIJ.,UVI 0.044 <0.001 0.044 <0.03 84.5 84.5 >2,817
COAL
948361 40.0-60.0 COAL 0.640 0.490 0.150 15.31 5.r -10.3 0.33
1
94S36 60.0-80.0 COAL/88 1.250 1.080 0.170 33.75 11.7 -22.1 0.35
94836 80.0-100.0 8S 0.330 0.210 0.120 6.56 12.7 6.1 1.94
1
94536 100.0- SS 0.470 0.350 0.120 lQ.94 8.6 -2.3 0.79
120.0
94S36 120.0- 5S 0.350 0.220 0.130 6.87 13.0 6.1 1.89
140.0
94S36 140.0- SS 0.260 0.168 0.092 5.25 25.6 20.4 4.88
160.0
94536 160.0- S5 0.310 0.200 0.1l0 6.25 44.7 38.5 7.15
180.0
94536 180.0- MS 0.320 0.180 0.140 5.63 315.0 309.4 56.0
200.0
94Gl 15.0-20.0 AIJ.,UV 0.028 <0.001 0.028 <0.03 64.0 64.0 >2,133
94Gl 35.0-40.0 SH 0.370 <0.001 0.370 <0.03 19.2 19.2 >640
94Gl 55.0-60.0 SH 0.480 0.020 0.460 0.62 14.0 13.4 22.4
2l:iIIISIlU.8 !illSI\l6(4:oGPM)IlU'l14 B-6
336
TABLE B-1
SAMPLE DEPTH ROCK SULFUR(%) AGP ANP NNP ANP:AGP

(ft) TYPE (sulfidic
sulfur) )
TOTAL SULFIDE SULFATE TONS CaCOsf.Kr
94Gl 75.0-80.0 SH 1.130 0.700 0.430 21.88 77.5 55.6 3.54
94GI 95.0-100.0 SH 1.200 0.680 0.520 21.25 135.0 113.8 6.35
94GI 115.0- SH 1.360 0.790 0.570 24.69 180.0 155.3 7.29
120.0
94Gl 135.0- SH 1.510 0.860 0.650 26.88 320.0 293.1 11.9
140.0
94Gl 155.0- SH 0.870 0.420 0.450 13.13 650.0 636.9 49.5
160.0
94G1 175.0- SH 0.650 0.300 0.350 9.38 500.0 490.6 53.3
180.0
94Gl 195.0- SH 0.660 0.400 0.260 12.50 265.0 252.5 21.2
200.0
94G1 215.0- SH 0.720 0.420 0.300 13.13 92.3 79.2 7.03
220.0
94GI 235.0- SS 0.210 0.130 0.080 4.06 7.7 3.7 1.90
240.0
94GI 1 255.0- COAL 1.830 1.710 0.120 53.44 11.7 -41.7 0.22
260.0
94Gl 1 275.0- SS 1.050 0.880 0.170 27.50 9.4 -18.1 0.34
280.0
94GI 295.0- SS 0.880 0.640 0.240 20.00 37.0 17.0 1.85
300.0
94GI 1 300.0- SS 1.290 1.090 0.200 34.06 16.7 -17.4 0.49
320.0
94GI 1 320.0- SS 0.960 0.760 0.200 23.75 13.1 -10.7 0.55
340.0
94Gl 340.0- SS 0.780 0.580 0.200 18.13 29.3 11.2 1.62
360.0
94Gl 1 360.0- MS 1.320 1.030 0.290 32.19 18.1 -14.1 0.56
380.0
94GI 380.0- MS 0.340 0.220 0.120 6.88 14.0 7.1 2.04
400.0
94Gl 400.0- MS 0.780 0.590 0.190 18.44 185.0 166.6 10.0
420.0
94G7 15.0-20.0 ALLUV 0.064 0.032 0.032 LOO 46.4 45.4 46.4
239961R.3.B SlISI96(4:43 PM)lRPT/4 B-7
~
TABLE B-1
STATIC TEST RESULTS BY ROCK TYPE (Concluded)
SAMPLE DEPm ROCK SULFUR(%) AGP ANP NNP ANP:AI

(ft) TYPE (sulfid
sulfur~
TOTAL SULFIDE SULFATE TONS CaCOJIKtz

94G7 35.0-40.0 SH 0.058 <0.001 0.058 <0.03 73.5 73.5 >2,450
94G7 55.0-60.0 SH 1.160 0.380 0.780 11.87 92.1 80.2 7.76
94G7 75.Q..80.0 SH 1.630 1.110 0.520 34.69 145.0 110.3 4.18
94G7 95.0-100.0 SH 1.560 0.890 0.670 27.81 325.0 297.2 11.7
94G7 115.0- SH 1.500 0.890 0.610 27.81 475.0 447.2 17.1
120.0
94G7 135.0- SH 0.680 0.320 0.360 10.00 655.0 645.0 65.5
140.0
94G7 155.0- SH 0.620 0.310 0.310 9.69 480.0 470.3 49.5
160.0
94G7 175.0- SH 1.080 0.680 0.400 21.25 215.0 193.8 10.1
180.0
94G7 180.0- SHICOAL 1.070 0.750 0.320 23.44 110.0 86.6 4.69
200.0
94G71 200.0- COAIJSS 1.560 1.410 0.150 44.06 23.4 -20.7 0.53
220.0
These rock types are acid-genemting with net neutralization potential less than zero (i.e., NNP <
0), based on the sulfide sulfur concentmtions. All of these acid-generating samples are coal, coal-
bearing. or associated with or adjacent to coal units.
:2
Tons of calcium carbonate needed to neutralize 1000 tons of material.
3
Tons of calcium carbonate available to neutra1ize 1000 tons of material.
Ratios less than 1 «1.00) indicates potential for acid genemtion ratio greater than 1 (> 1.00) indicates
potential to neutra1ize acid. Ratios greater than 3 (> 3:00) indicates strong potential to neutralize acid.
Kev to Rock Types:

LS limestone AGP= Acid Genemtion Potential
. MS mudstone ANP= Acid Neutralization Potential
SLST siltstone NNP= Net Neutralization Potential
SS = sandstone ANP:AGP= Ratio of Acid Neutralization Potential to Acid Generation
SH "" shale Potential
ALLUV alluvium
SOURCE: McClelland 1994.
B-8

Lisbon Valley Copper Project EIS

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Lisbon Valley Copper Project EIS

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

DRIFT .

... r'. ·-~'~:!:,-IJQ'r:'f,

,r-: ,MAY 2, 0 19~6 " , "" .

. P.repared~by:· . ' •. "'<:'.' :. :~: , . . .

LISBON VALLEY COPPER PROJECT

u.s. DEPARTMENT OF THe INTERIOR

Kate Kitchell, Moab District Manager

Moab District Manager

Lisbon Valley Copper Project

(X) Draft () Final

Lead Agency Based on issues and concerns identified

Grand County Comments on this EIS should be directed

Abstract Kate Kitchell, Moab District Manager

239961R3.CS SllS1!16(1:41 PM)lRPT/4

ENV.m.ONMENTAL ANALYSIS PROCESS

o SECtION OF "!HIS as DOCUMENT WHERE "!HIS IIEW IS ADORESSal.

239961R3.1 5/15196(1:50 PM)/RPT/3

DEAR READER LETTER

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................ xiv

EXECUTIVE SlJl\.1J.v.1:AR.Y " ........................................................................................... ES-1

1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1-1

1.1 PlJRPOSE.AND NEED .............................................................................. 1-4

1.3.1 Alternatives Analyzed in Detail ........................................................ 1-9

2.0 ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION ............................... 2-1

2.1 OVERVIEW ............................................................................................... 2-1

2.2.1 General ............................................................ ,................................ 2-1

2.3 ALTERN"ATIVES ..................................................................................... 2-41

2.3.1 No Action Alternative .................................................................... 2-41

2.3.2 Open Pit Backfilling Alternative ..................................................... 2-41

2.4 FEATURES COMMON TO ALL ALTERNATIVES ............................... 2-44

3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONIv.I:ENT .............................................................................. 3-1

3.1 GEOLOGY AND GEOTECHNICAL ISSUES .......................................... 3-1

3.1.1 Study Area. ...................................................................................... 3-1

3.2 ,HYDROLOGY ......................................................................................... 3-14

3.2.1 Study Area. .................................................................................... 3-14

3.3 GEOCIIEl.\.1IS'fR.Y ................................................................................... 3-31

3.3.1 Study Area..................................................................................... 3-31

3.4 SOILS AND RECLAMATION................................................................. 3-34

3.4.1 Study Area..................................................................................... 3-34

3.5 VEGETATION ......................................................................................... 3-40

3.5.1 Study Area. .................................................................................... 3-43

3.5.2 Special Status Species .................................................................... 3-45

3.6 WILDLIFE ............................................................................................... 3-45

3.6.1 Study Area..................................................................................... 3-46

3.7 GRAZIN"G ......................................................................................·.......... 3-48

3.7.1 Study Area..................................................................................... 3-48

3.8 SOCIOECONOMICS ............................................................................... 3~52

3.8.1 Study Area..................................................................................... 3-52

3.9 'TR.ANSPORTATION ............................................................................... 3-61

3.9.1 Study Area..................................................................................... 3-61

3.10 HAZARDOUS MATERIAl..S ................................................................... 3-65

3.10.1 Records Review and Agencies Contacted ..................... :................ .3-65

3.11 CULTURAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES ....................... 3-66

3.11.1 Study Area..................................................................................... 3-66

239961R3.TC S116196{1:S1 PM)lRPTI3 -lI1-

3.12 VISUALRESOURCES ............................................................................ 3-73

3.12.1 Study Area.......................... :.......................................................... 3-73

3.13 LAND USE............................................................................................... 3-77

3.13.1 Study Area .................................................................................... 3-77

3.14 CLIMATE AND AIR QUALITy .............................................................. 3-79

3.14.1 Study Area .................................................................................... 3-79

3.15 NOISE ...................................................................................................... 3-84

3.15.1 Study Area .................................................................................... 3-84