DOE/EA 1396

Final

Environmental Assessment

Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant 

and Direct-Use Geothermal 

Application at AmeriCulture Inc., 

Cotton City, NM

U.S. Department of Energy 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

August 2002
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Pre-Decisional Draft i August 2002

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED................................................................................................1-1

1.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................1-1

1.2 Purpose and Need for Agency Action...............................................................1-5

1.3 Public Involvement ...........................................................................................1-5

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES ........................2-1

2.1 Location ............................................................................................................2-1

2.2 Existing Facilities..............................................................................................2-1

2.3 Proposed Action................................................................................................2-6

2.3.1 Proposed Power Plant ...........................................................................2-6

2.3.2 Cooling Towers...................................................................................2-11

2.3.3 Changes to Existing Geothermal Well................................................2-13

2.3.4 Direct Use of Geothermal Fluid..........................................................2-13

2.3.5 Reinjection of Cooled Geothermal Fluid............................................2-15

2.4 No Action Alternative .....................................................................................2-16

2.5 Related Actions...............................................................................................2-17

3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT....................................................................................3-1

3.1 Geology and Soils.............................................................................................3-1

Soils ...............................................................................................................3-1

Structural Geology............................................................................................3-3

Mineral Resources.............................................................................................3-3

Geothermal Resources ......................................................................................3-3

3.2 Water Resources ...............................................................................................3-6

Surface Hydrology............................................................................................3-6

Groundwater Hydrology...................................................................................3-7

3.3 Climate/Air Resources......................................................................................3-7

3.4 Biological Resources.........................................................................................3-8

Vegetation.........................................................................................................3-8

Wetlands............................................................................................................3-9

Wildlife .............................................................................................................3-9

Protected and Sensitive Species........................................................................3-9
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Pre-Decisional Draft ii August 2002

3.5 Cultural Resources..........................................................................................3-10

3.6 Infrastructure ...................................................................................................3-15

Roads .............................................................................................................3-16

3.7 Acoustic Noise ................................................................................................3-17

3.8 Visual Resources.............................................................................................3-17

3.9 Land Use .........................................................................................................3-18

3.10 Socioeconomic Resources...............................................................................3-19

Population and Demographic Characteristics.................................................3-19

Economic Characteristics................................................................................3-19

Community Resources and Social Services....................................................3-21

3.11 Environmental Justice .....................................................................................3-21

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ...................................................................4-1

4.1 Geology and Soils.............................................................................................4-1

4.1.1 Proposed Action....................................................................................4-1

Soils.......................................................................................................4-1

Geothermal Resources ..........................................................................4-2

4.1.2 No Action Alternative ...........................................................................4-4

4.2 Water Resources ...............................................................................................4-4

4.2.1 Proposed Action....................................................................................4-4

Surface Hydrology................................................................................4-4

Groundwater Hydrology.......................................................................4-5

4.2.2 No Action Alternative ...........................................................................4-6

4.3 Climate/Air Resources......................................................................................4-6

4.3.1 Proposed Action....................................................................................4-6

4.3.2 No Action Alternative ...........................................................................4-7

4.4 Biological Resources.........................................................................................4-7

4.4.1 Proposed Action....................................................................................4-7

Vegetation.............................................................................................4-7

Wetlands................................................................................................4-8

Wildlife .................................................................................................4-8

Protected and Sensitive Species............................................................4-9

4.4.2 No Action Alternative ...........................................................................4-9
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Pre-Decisional Draft iii August 2002

4.5 Cultural Resources............................................................................................4-9

4.5.1 Proposed Action....................................................................................4-9

4.5.2 No Action Alternative .........................................................................4-10

4.6 Infrastructure ...................................................................................................4-11

4.6.1 Proposed Action..................................................................................4-11

4.6.2 No Action Alternative .........................................................................4-12

4.7 Acoustic Noise ................................................................................................4-12

4.7.1 Proposed Action..................................................................................4-12

4.7.2 No Action Alternative .........................................................................4-13

4.8 Visual Resources.............................................................................................4-13

4.8.1 Proposed Action..................................................................................4-13

4.8.2 No Action Alternative .........................................................................4-14

4.9 Land Use .........................................................................................................4-14

4.9.1 Proposed Action..................................................................................4-14

4.9.2 No Action Alternative .........................................................................4-14

4.10 Socioeconomic Resources...............................................................................4-15

4.10.1 Proposed Action..................................................................................4-15

4.10.2 No Action Alternative .........................................................................4-16

4.11 Environmental Justice .....................................................................................4-16

4.11.1 Proposed Action..................................................................................4-16

4.11.2 No Action Alternative .........................................................................4-16

5.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS..........................................................................................5-1

6.0 AGENCIES CONTACTED..........................................................................................6-1

6.1 Federal Agencies...............................................................................................6-1

6.2 State Agencies...................................................................................................6-1

7.0 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................7-1

APPENDIX A ...................................................................................................................Glossary

APPENDIX B ................................................................................................ Consultation Letters

APPENDIX C ................................................................................ Enhanced Geothermal System

APPENDIX D ....................................................................Comments on Predecisional Draft EA
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Pre-Decisional Draft iv August 2002

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3-1 Drawdown Results of Pump Tests....................................................................3-5

Table 3-2 Geothermal Water Analysis..............................................................................3-6

Table 3-3 Federal and State Listed Species for Hidalgo County, New Mexico .............3-11

Table 3-4 Comparative A-Weighted Sound Levels ........................................................3-18

Table 3-5 Population, Demographics, Economic Characteristics, 

and Poverty Status...........................................................................................3-20

Table 4-1 Theis Method Drawdown Predictions Resulting from the

Proposed Action................................................................................................4-3

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1 Proposed Project Region in New Mexico.........................................................1-2

Figure 1-2 Location of Lightning Dock Known Geothermal Resource Area ....................1-3

Figure 1-3 Topographic Map of the Vicinity of the Project Area ......................................1-4

Figure 2-1 AmeriCulture’s Existing Facilities...................................................................2-2

Figure 2-2 Aerial Photograph of Location of Proposed Action.........................................2-3

Figure 2-3 Existing Freshwater Well and Pipeline to AmeriCulture Facilities..................2-4

Figure 2-4 Aerials Photograph of Freshwater Well Site ....................................................2-5

Figure 2-5 Pump Test Wells...............................................................................................2-5

Figure 2-6 Location of Elements of Proposed Action at AmeriCulture .............................2-7

Figure 2-7 Location of Power Block and Pipelines on the Site Aerial Photograph...........2-8

Figure 2-8 Proposed Turbine and Generator Layout........................................................2-10

Figure 2-9 Proposed Power Block and Cooling Tower Layout .......................................2-12

Figure 2-10 Flow Diagram for Both Components of Proposed Action..............................2-14

Figure 2-11 Flow Diagram for Direct Use Component of Proposed Action......................2-14

Figure 3-1 Animas Basin....................................................................................................3-2
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Pre-Decisional Draft v August 2002

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

BLM Bureau of Land Management

BTU British Thermal Unit

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

DOE Department of Energy

DOI Department of Interior

EA Environmental Assessment

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

I-10 Interstate 10

KGRA Known Geothermal Resource Area

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NM New Mexico

NMSLO New Mexico State Land Office

NRCS Natural Resource Conservation Service

NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory

NRHP National Register of Historic Places

OEC Ormat Energy Converters

PW Production Well

ROI Region of Influence

SHPO State Historic Preservation Office

TDS Total Dissolved Solids

Tri-State Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.

UBC Uniform Building Code

USC United States Code

USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

WSA Wilderness Study Area
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Pre-Decisional Draft vi August 2002

CHEMICALS AND ABBREVIATIONS

°C degrees Celcius

°F degrees Fahrenheit

ac-ft acre-foot

cm centimeter

dB decibel

dBA A-weighted sound levels

ft foot

ft2square foot

ft/mi feet per mile

ft3/sec cubic feet per second

gpd/ft gallons per day per foot

gpm gallons per minute

ha hectare

hr hour

kg kilogram

km kilometer

kW kilowatt

L liter

lbs pound

lpd/m liters per day per meter

lpm liters per minute

m meter

m

2

square meter

mg milligram

mg/L milligrams per liter

mi2square mile

m/km meters per kilometer

MW megawatt

MWt megawatt thermal

ppm parts per million

psi pounds per square inch
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use 

Geothermal Application at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 1-1 August 2002

1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED

1.1 INTRODUCTION

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is preparing an Environmental Assessment (EA) for 

the construction and operation of a small-scale, approximately 1 megawatt (MW), 

geothermal power plant near Animas and Cotton City, New Mexico (NM), southwest of 

Lordsburg, NM within the Lightning Dock Known Geothermal Resource Area1 (KGRA) 

(Figures 1-1, 1-2, 1-3). The Proposed Action includes the direct use of geothermal fluid 

exhausted from the geothermal power plant as a heating source for tilapia 2 production at an 

existing geothermally-heated fish hatchery. A total of 9.3 acres (3.8 hectares [ha]) would be 

disturbed by the construction of the power plant and associated wells and pipelines. 

Approximately 6.6 acres (2.7 ha) of this would occur on previously disturbed land. The 

remaining 2.7 acres (1.1 ha) acres of disturbance would take place on grazing land. The 

funding decision of the DOE is whether or not to partially fund the Proposed Action.

Through the Geothermal Energy Program, DOE is considering providing financial assistance 

to Exergy, Inc., of Hayward, California, for the development and field verification of a smallscale geothermal power plant, which would be located upstream of an existing geothermallyheated fish hatchery owned by AmeriCulture, Inc., of Cotton City, NM. AmeriCulture, Inc., 

leases the geothermal resource from the State of New Mexico (State of New Mexico

Geothermal Lease No. GTR-304 Assignment 1). 

DOE is also considering partially funding AmeriCulture, Inc., for a direct-use geothermal 

application using fluid discharged from the proposed power plant to heat water for the 

hatchery before being reinjected into a new well. Two system concepts would be

investigated. The preferred concept involves cascading the spent geothermal fluid from the 

proposed geothermal power plant to various thermal processes used for fish production. In 

the second concept, the proposed power plant would not be built, and the fluid from the 

existing geothermal well would be used for all direct-use operations associated with the 

project. Partial funding for this portion of the project would be provided through a National 

Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) subcontract with AmeriCulture, Inc. The proposed 

power plant project would be administered and managed by the DOE Golden Field Office. 

The direct-use application would be managed by NREL.

Since the project would involve Federal funds, it is considered to be the result of a Federal 

action. As such, this action is subject to the requirements of the National Environmental 

Policy Act (NEPA). DOE has determined that an EA would be prepared to evaluate the 

potential environmental impacts that could result from the award of the grant/subcontract and 

 

1

 A Known Geothermal Resource Area is a region identified by the U.S. Geological Survey as containing 

geothermal resources.

2

 Tilapia are a hardy, prolific, fast-growing tropical fish that traces its origins to the Nile River. Tilapia are one 

of the major groups of farm raised fish in the world. Large-scale commercial culture of tilapia is limited almost 

exclusively to the culture of three species: Oreochromis niloticus, O. mossambicus and O. aureus. Of the three 

tilapia species with recognized aquaculture potential, the Nile tilapia, O. niloticus, is by far the most commonly 

used species in fish farming. It has a mild, soft, white fish fillet, with a slightly sweet taste.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use 

Geothermal Application at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 1-2 August 2002

Figure 1-1. Proposed Project Region in New Mexico. 

(Proposed Site is Represented with White Square)

Project Region
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use 

Geothermal Application at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 1-3 August 2002

NMEI 1980

Figure 1-2. Location of Lightning Dock Known Geothermal Resource Area.

KGRA Area
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use 

Geothermal Application at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 1-4 August 2002

Swallow Fork Quadrangle, USGS, 1980

Figure 1-3. Topographic Map of the Vicinity of the Project Area.

Project Area
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use 

Geothermal Application at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 1-5 August 2002

any connected actions (i.e., the construction and operation of the geothermal power plant and 

direct use of the geothermal fluid prior to reinjection).

1.2 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR AGENCY ACTION

Geothermal power plants currently generate approximately 2,800 MW of electricity in the 

United States, most of which is provided by plants over 5 MW in size. Although worldwide 

there are approximately 50 geothermal power plants at or below 5 MW power generating 

capacity, only 6 plants in the United States are smaller than 1 MW. Small geothermal power 

plants have the potential for widespread application, but achieving cost-effectiveness in small 

plant sizes presents a number of challenges. To address these challenges, DOE is supporting 

the small-scale field verification projects to (1) determine and validate the economics,

performance, and operational characteristics of small-scale geothermal electric power plants 

in different regions, and (2) determine their ability to provide distributed power in order to 

facilitate their increased use in the western United States.

DOE needs to decide whether to authorize the expenditure of Federal funds to Exergy, Inc., 

for partial funding of construction and field verification of a small-scale geothermal power 

plant south of Lordsburg, NM, at the AmeriCulture site. DOE also needs to decide whether 

to authorize the expenditure of Federal funds to AmeriCulture, Inc., for the direct use of 

geothermal fluid to determine, demonstrate, and validate the operational performance of a 

geothermal direct-use system.

DOE/NREL will take this opportunity to monitor and evaluate the technical and economic 

performance of the proposed power plant and the direct-use project. This information will be 

used to advance the design and use of small-scale geothermal technologies.

This EA was prepared in accordance with Section 102(2) of the NEPA of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 

4332, Council of Environmental Quality regulations, and DOE NEPA Implementing

Procedures (10 CFR 1021).

1.3 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

As part of the EA process, comments on the scope of the assessment were sought from the 

public, regulatory agencies, and other interested parties. A letter describing the scope of the 

project was sent out to all parties on the project’s distribution list. Two responses were 

received. One response was to request a copy of the Pre-decisional Draft EA when it was 

issued. The other response raised the issue of the possible use of the cooled geothermal 

water for irrigation.

The Predecisional Draft EA was sent out for public review. Comments were received from 

the State of New Mexico Environment Department. These comments and associated

responses are presented in Appendix D.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use 

Geothermal Application at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 1-6 August 2002
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application 

at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 2-1 August 2002

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES

This chapter describes the Proposed Action and the No Action Alternative. The Proposed 

Action consists of DOE’s decision to provide partial funding for two components of a 

geothermal system, a proposed power plant and a direct-use application. To present the 

reader and decisionmaker with a means of comparison, this EA discusses effects of the 

proposed power plant and direct-use application together and separately where appropriate. 

Since the Proposed Action consists of potentially adding a new small-scale geothermal power 

plant and a direct use application to an existing system that uses geothermal energy to heat 

water for the tilapia hatchery, the existing facilities are described in detail. The No Action 

Alternative is described in Section 2.4.

2.1 LOCATION

The proposed project would be located in the eastern half of Section 6 and in Section 7, 

Township 25S, Range 19W, Hidalgo County, NM, approximately 16 miles (26 km)

southwest of Lordsburg, and just north of Animas and Cotton City (Figure 1-1). The project 

is within the Lightning Dock KGRA (Figure 1-2).

2.2 EXISTING FACILITIES

AmeriCulture currently operates a commercial tilapia fish hatchery. The hatchery facilities 

include 33,000 ft2 (approximately 3,100 m2) of converted greenhouse space on 15 acres (6 

ha) of private land; large fish breeding tanks and tanks where mature fish are kept with a total 

volume of 170,000 gallons (640,000 l); a 1,200 ft2 [110 m2] small office/shop; and some 

small storage space (see Figures 2-1 and 2-2). 

The fish require warm fresh water. The fresh water is supplied via an existing pipeline from 

an existing well approximately 8,500 ft (2,600 m) to the west (Figure 2-3 and 2-4). After 

circulating in the fish tanks, the water is filtered and recycled. The wastewater left over from 

the filtration is pumped through a pipe to a containment pond just west of the greenhouses 

where it evaporates. The amount of freshwater used varies according to the season. The 

average use is 50 gallons per minute (gpm) (190 liters per minute [lpm]). In a separate 

closed loop, water is circulated through a downhole heat exchanger in a geothermal well 

(AmeriCulture State 1) just to the southeast of the hatchery facilities. The water is heated in 

the exchanger and pumped to the hatchery and is used to maintain the required temperature 

for the fish tanks. The water is then recirculated back to the downhole heat exchanger. At 

this time, no geothermal fluids are pumped to the surface at AmeriCulture. 

The existing geothermal well (AmeriCulture State 1) is located to the southeast of the 

hatchery. It is a 400 ft (122 m) deep 10.75 in (27.3 cm) diameter well that is cemented down 

to 282 ft (86 m). It is expected that the well can deliver more than 1000 gpm (approximately 

3,800 lpm) at 232°F (111°C) (Witcher 2001). Depth to water is approximately 75 ft (23 m). 

The temperature in the well with the heat exchanger in place has been measured at 232°F 

(111°C). A 48-hour flow test was conducted in October 2000, which showed a
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application 

at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 2-2 August 2002

Figure 2-1. AmeriCulture’s Existing Facilities.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application 

at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 2-3 August 2002

USGS 1998a.

Figure 2-2. Aerial Photograph of Location of Proposed Action.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application 

at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 2-4 August 2002 Figure 2-3. Existing Freshwater Well and Pipeline to AmeriCulture Facilities.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application 

at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 2-5 August 2002

USGS 1998b.

Figure 2-4. Aerial Photograph of Existing Freshwater Well Site.

Figure 2-5. Pump Test Wells.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application 

at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 2-6 August 2002

sustained rate of 1,050 gpm (approximately 4,000 lpm) or greater. The stable production 

temperature was 232°F (111°C). The heat exchanger was removed prior to the flow test. The 

water quality of the geothermal fluid is considered good with a total dissolved solid (TDS) of 

approximately 1,050 parts per million (ppm). 

Other wells in the immediate vicinity include an AmeriCulture geothermal well

(AmeriCulture Federal 1) to the west of the hatchery, which is unused, and the Burgett wells 

(Burgett “A,” Burgett “B,” and Burgett “C”) to the east (Figure 2-5), which supply

geothermal fluid used to heat the Burgett greenhouses and produce power in Burgett’s 

turbine/generator.

The Columbus Electric Cooperative, Inc., a member of the Tri-State Generation and

Transmission Association, Inc. (Tri-State), currently supplies electrical power at

AmeriCulture. Columbus Electric interconnects with Tri-State at Deming and Playas, NM 

(see the discussion of infrastructure in Section 3.6). 

2.3 PROPOSED ACTION

The Proposed Action is for Exergy, Inc., in association with AmeriCulture, Inc., to develop 

two components of an integrated geothermal system. The first component (see Section 2.3.1 

below) is an average 1,280 kW gross (1,000 kW net) Kalina Cycle geothermal power plant at 

the AmeriCulture facilities. This power plant would utilize geothermal fluid from the 

existing geothermal well (AmeriCulture State 1) to generate power. The power would be 

used by AmeriCulture or neighboring industry. The second component of the Proposed 

Action (see Section 2.3.4 below) is a direct-use application would be constructed. to utilize 

the geothermal fluid exiting the proposed power plant to heat the water for the fish tanks. If 

for any reason the power plant (first component) was not constructed the direct-use 

application (second component) could still be built. In this case the direct-use applications 

would use the geothermal fluid straight from the existing geothermal well (AmeriCulture 

State 1). The spent geothermal fluid would be reinjected in a new well that would be drilled 

north-northeast of the AmeriCulture site (Figures 2-6 and 2-7).

2.3.1 Proposed Power Plant

The proposed power plant would be constructed within a 0.6 acre (approximately 0.2 ha) area 

approximately 80 ft by 300 ft (24 m by 91 m) on the AmeriCulture site just south of the 

existing hatchery facilities (see Figure 2-2). The proposed power plant would be constructed 

along the pathway of the existing heated water pipeline between the AmeriCulture State 1 

geothermal well and the hatchery. The geothermal fluid for the power plant would be 

pumped from the existing well (AmeriCulture State 1). The production from the well is 

expected to be about 1,000 to 1,200 gpm (3,800 to 4,500 lpm) at 232°F (111°C). A new 

pipeline for the geothermal fluid would be installed along the existing heated water pipeline. 

The geothermal fluid exiting from the proposed power plant is expected to be thermally 

depleted to a temperature of approximately 140°F (60°C). This depleted geothermal fluid 

would used to heat the fish tanks. Once the new geothermal fluid heating system is installed 

the old heated water pipeline would be removed.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application 

at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 2-7 August 2002

Figure 2-6. Location of Elements of Proposed Action at AmeriCulture.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application 

at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 2-8 August 2002

Figure 2-7. Location of Power Block and Pipelines on the Site Aerial Photograph.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application 

at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 2-9 August 2002

The power plant would be designed to use the Kalina Cycle process. The Kalina Cycle 

process uses a working fluid of ammonia and water in a closed loop arrangement. The power 

plant would use the heat from the geothermal fluid to vaporize the ammonia-water working 

fluid in a heat exchanger. The vapor would drive a turbine generator. Figure 2-8 shows the 

layout of the power plant. The “power block” occupies an area of approximately 40 ft by 60 

ft (12 m by 18 m). The power block includes the evaporator-condenser assembly, the 

turbine-generator skid, separator, feed pump, blowdown tank, water storage tank, ammonia 

storage tank, and the control building. The turbine would generate 85 dBA of noise at 3 to 5 ft 

(0.9 to 1.5 m). The ammonia storage capacity that is anticipated for this project would be a 

single tank that would have a volume of 2,000 gallons (approximately 7,600 liters) or less. 

The tank would be surrounded by a berm high enough to contain any spill.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA) require the reporting of hazardous chemical leaks. Reportable 

releases of ammonia usually have to be reported to three different governmental agencies: 

federal, state and local. All three must be notified immediately following a reportable spill or 

release. Any time ammonia is spilled or released to the outside in excess of its reportable 

quantity, 100 lbs per 24 hrs, immediate reports must be made to various government

agencies.

Anhydrous ammonia is a "hazardous chemical" for purposes of OSHA, which prescribes 

handling and storage requirements. Employees must be trained in its safe handling methods, 

and have material safety data sheets readily available. Storage of over 500 lbs of anhydrous 

ammonia must be reported to the Local Emergency Planning Committee. When the ammonia 

is mixed with water, the reportable quantity varies with the concentration of ammonia.

The mixture of two compounds with two different boiling points as the working fluid allows 

a better match to the temperature of the heat source and increased thermal efficiency. The 

relative concentrations of ammonia and water are varied throughout the process to also 

increase efficiency. The relative concentration can also be varied seasonally. Other

geothermal power plants use a single compound working fluid such as isobutane, pentane, or 

ammonia. The higher efficiency of the Kalina Cycle would allow for greater plant capacity 

and energy output for the given heat source compared to other processes and lower capital 

cost.

The power plant would be designed to produce an average gross output of 1,280 kW. The 

power requirement for pumping the geothermal fluid from the well is expected to be

approximately 75 kW. The power requirement for the cycle pumps, cooling water pumps, 

cooling tower fans, and other power plant equipment is expected to be approximately 205 

kW. The remaining power (approximately 1,000 kW) from the proposed power plant would 

be available for use by AmeriCulture and/or a neighboring industry. This is enough power 

for approximately 860 homes (EIA 1997).

The power generated by the proposed power plant would be used by AmeriCulture, Inc. 

AmeriCulture anticipates that implementation of their current expansion plans would result 

in their power needs increasing to 1,000 kW within 2 to 3 years. At that point in time, 

AmeriCulture would be using all the power onsite that is produced by the power plant. Until 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application 

at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 2-10 August 2002 Figure 2-8. Proposed Turbine and Generator Layout
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application 

at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 2-11 August 2002

that point in time, any excess power would be sold to Columbus Electric. Columbus Electric 

is a member of Tri-State. The details under which that power would be sold to Tri-State have 

not yet been worked out. Any safety, switching, transformer, or quality of service equipment 

that would be needed would have to be provided by the generating entity. While the types 

and specifications of the needed equipment have not been detailed, the equipment would be 

located next to the proposed power plant, just to the west of the turbines.

The power lines connected to the AmeriCulture site may not need any upgrades to

accommodate the transmission of the generated power, should any be sold to Columbus 

Electric. The need for upgrades would be dependent on the amount of power that would be 

transmitted. The existing lines provide a moderate capacity for transmission. Potential 

upgrades to the existing power lines could include replacement of the existing lines or 

addition of a new line. Bearing the costs of the new lines would likely be the responsibility 

of the generating entity and would also affect the decision on whether to sell power to 

Columbus Electric. It is anticipated that the replacement line or additional line would be 

strung on the existing poles.

Exergy and AmeriCulture would monitor and report data to the NREL to document the 

facility’s technical and economic performance. The data would include well physical and 

chemical data, plant process thermal, mechanical, and electrical performance, plant

reliability, availability and load factor, plant energy generation, and plant operation and 

maintenance costs.

2.3.2 Cooling Towers

A cooling tower skid would occupy an area approximately 14 ft by 86 ft (4 m by 26 m), 

located just to the east of the proposed power plant (Figure 2-9). The cooling tower skid is 

oriented east-northeast along the prevailing wind direction. The cooling towers would be 25 

ft (7.6 m) high. Similar cooling towers generate 85 dBA of noise at 3 to 5 feet. The cooling 

tower would use evaporative cooling to cool water circulated through a condenser that would 

condense the ammonia-water vapor exiting the turbine. The cooling tower would use fresh 

well water as makeup. The flow rate for this system is 100 gpm (approximately 380 lpm) 

into the cooling towers. After use in the cooling towers, the outflow rate of the blowdown 

water is 30 gpm (approximately 114 lpm). The blowdown water would have a temperature 

range of approximately 40°F to 75°F (4°C to 24°C) depending on the seasonal ambient air 

temperature. To supply the make-up water, a new second freshwater well would be drilled 

adjacent to the existing freshwater well. A new pipeline would be installed. The new 

pipeline would run next to the existing pipeline until it crossed into AmeriCulture property. 

At that point the new pipeline would continue north to the northern edge of the Americulture 

property and then turn east to the greenhouses. The new pipeline would bring the water for 

use in the proposed power plant for the cooling towers. The cooling tower blowdown would 

be mixed with the cooled geothermal fluid for reinjection.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application 

at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 2-12 August 2002 Figure 2-9. Proposed Power Block and Cooling Tower Layout

N

Wind Direction
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application 

at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 2-13 August 2002

2.3.3 Changes to Existing Geothermal Well

The existing heat exchanger would be removed from AmeriCulture State 1 and a Centrilift, 

or similar, pump installed. A new pipeline for the geothermal fluid would be installed along 

the existing heated water pipeline. The measured temperature of the geothermal fluid in the 

well was 232°F (111°C). The production from the well is expected to be about 1,000 to 1,200 

gpm (3,800 to 4,500 lpm). Existing data from a recent flow test and nearby production wells 

indicate that the existing well would be adequate for the proposed power plant (Witcher 

2001). The neighboring greenhouse producer has used nearby wells for over 15 years. 

Pumping rates have occasionally reached 2,000 gpm when thermal demand is maximum and 

their power plant is operational. 

2.3.4 Direct Use of Geothermal Fluid

While the Proposed Action is to develop the direct-use application in association with the 

proposed power plant, it could be implemented without the power plant. According to 

current plans, the direct-use application would use the 140°F (60°C) geothermal fluid exiting 

the power plant for heating the hatchery fish tanks. After use at the hatchery, the exiting 

geothermal fluid, cooled to approximately 100°F (approximately 38°C), would be mixed 

with the blowdown water and piped to the new injection well (detailed in Section 2.3.5) 

(Figure 10). 

If the direct-use application were to be implemented without the proposed power plant, the 

230°F (110°C) geothermal fluid from the AmeriCulture State 1 well would be used to 

directly heat the water for the fish tanks. In this case, the downhole heat exchanger in the 

AmeriCulture State 1 well would be removed and a pump would be installed to pump the

geothermal fluid to the hatchery. This would allow for a greater amount of water to be heated 

to the required temperature. The geothermal fluid exiting the hatchery, cooled to

approximately 130°F (54°C), would be piped away for reinjection in the same manner as 

described above (Figure 11).

The equipment would be the same for either direct-use possibility. The direct-use system 

must be capable of running on either the water discharged from the power plant

(approximately 140°F [60 °C]) or directly from the ground (approximately 230°F [110°C]), 

because power plant downtime is inevitable and fish tanks must still be heated during power 

plant downtimes. Maintaining a pressure of between 30 to 50 pounds per square inch (psi) in 

the direct-use system prevents flashing. The control and variation of pressure is used across 

the geothermal industry to control the point in the system where the geothermal fluid would 

flash to steam.

Under either configuration, AmeriCulture would monitor and report data to the NREL to 

document the direct-use application’s technical and economic performance. The data would 

include well physical and chemical data, thermal, performance, reliability, and maintenance 

costs.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application 

at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 2-14 August 2002

Figure 2-10. Flow Diagram for Both Components of Proposed Action.

Figure 2-11. Flow Diagram for Direct Use Component of Proposed Action.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application 

at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 2-15 August 2002

2.3.5 Reinjection of Cooled Geothermal Fluid

After use in the power plant and the direct-use application, the cooled geothermal fluid 

would be reinjected back into the geothermal resource. The temperature of the cooled 

geothermal fluid to be reinjected would depend on whether both components of the Proposed 

Action (power plant and direct-use application) are constructed, or only a single component 

is constructed (either the power plant or the direct-use application).

Reinjection from Both Power Plant and Direct-Use Application. The Proposed Action 

involves the construction of both the power plant and the direct-use application. The 140°F 

(60°C) geothermal fluid exiting the power plant would be used in the direct-use application 

to heat the water for the hatchery tanks. The temperature of the geothermal fluid exiting the 

direct-use application would be 100°F (38°C). This fluid would be mixed with the 40°F to 

75°F (4°C to 24°C) blowdown water from the cooling tower. Since the flow rate of the 

blowdown water is 30 gpm (114 lpm), or less than 3% of the total mixed fluid flow rate, the 

temperature of the reinjected fluid would be essentially the same as the temperature of the 

cooled geothermal fluid (approximately 100°F (38°C)) (Seawright 2002). 

The reinjection well would be sited at a distance to the north-northwest of the AmeriCulture 

site on leased land that is owned and controlled by the New Mexico State Land Office 

(NMSLO). The NMSLO also owns and controls the mineral rights for this land. The concern 

of the NMSLO is that the cooled geothermal fluid should not be reinjected into an area where 

the geothermal fluid in the ground is hotter. This would avoid any cooling of the resource. 

For the implementation of both components of the Proposed Action, the point where the 

temperature of the fluid to be reinjected equals the temperature of the geothermal fluid in the 

ground is currently calculated to be approximately 3,400 ft (1,000 m) north-northwest of the 

hatchery. An injection well would be drilled at this point; a new spent geothermal fluid 

pipeline built from the power plant to the reinjection well site, and an injection pump 

installed (as shown in Figure 2-6). The new spent geothermal fluid pipeline would be

suspended aboveground on posts or blocks to allow the pipe room to expand and contract 

with the heat from the spent geothermal fluid. The reinjection well is planned to have a 

surface casing of 13-3/8 in. (34 cm) surface casing to a depth of around 150 ft. (46 m). The 

well would have 9-5/8 in. (24 cm) punch perforated casing below the depth of 150 ft. (46 m) 

throughout the injection interval. The planned injection interval would be around 200 to 300 

ft. (60 m to 90m). The total well depth would be between 350 and 450 ft. (107 m and 137 

m).

Reinjection from Power Plant Alone. The cooled geothermal fluid from the power plant 

has a temperature of approximately 140°F (60°C) and a flow rate of approximately 1000 gpm 

(approximately 3,800 lpm). This fluid would be mixed with the 40°F to 75°F (4°C to 24°C) 

blowdown water from the cooling tower. Since the flow rate of the blowdown water is (30 

gpm (114 lpm)) or less than 3% of the total mixed fluid flow rate, the temperature of the 

reinjected fluid would be essentially the same as the temperature of the cooled geothermal 

fluid (approximately 140°F (60°C)) (Seawright 2002). 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application 

at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 2-16 August 2002

For implementation of the proposed power plant alone, the temperature of the cooled

geothermal fluid to be reinjected (140°F (60°C)) would be approximately 40°F (22°C) hotter 

than the fluid would be if both the power plant and the direct-use application (100°F (38°C)) 

were implemented. Therefore, the reinjected fluid would be hotter than the geothermal fluid 

in the ground at the planned location of the reinjection well. This plan would still satisfy 

NMSLO’s concern over cooling the resources by injected fluid cooler that the geothermal 

fluid in the ground at the point of injection. However, should NMSLO disagree, the 

reinjection well may have to be located closer to the AmeriCulture site along the path of the 

proposed reinjection pipeline. The exact location would depend on coordination with the 

NMSLO and the lease holder. 

Reinjection from Direct-Use Application Alone. The geothermal fluid exiting the directuse application at the hatchery would be cooled to approximately 130°F (54°C). Without the 

power plant there would be no cooling towers and no blowdown water. The temperature of 

the reinjected fluid would be approximately 130°F (54°C).

For implementation of only the direct-use application, the temperature of the cooled

geothermal fluid (130°F (54°C)) would be 30°F (16°C) hotter than the fluid would be if both 

the power plant and the direct-use application (100°F (38°C)) were implemented. Therefore, 

the reinjected fluid would be hotter than the geothermal fluid in the ground at the planned 

location of the reinjection well. This plan would still satisfy NMSLO’s concern over cooling 

the resources by injected fluid cooler that the geothermal fluid in the ground at the point of 

injection. However, should NMSLO disagree, the reinjection well may have to be located 

closer to the AmeriCulture site along the path of the proposed reinjection pipeline. The exact 

location would depend on coordination with the NMSLO and the lease holder. 

Irrigation use of geothermal water is not being considered at this time. While it is possible to 

use cooled geothermal water for the irrigation of certain crops, the relatively high dissolved 

solids content (approximately 1,000 ppm) makes the water less suitable than water from the 

Animas Valley underground basin. Although the blowdown water originates from the 

Animas Valley underground basin, its TDS level would be enhanced through evaporation. 

Consequently, it would be well matched for reinjection along with the thermally depleted 

geothermal water.

2.4 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

Under the No Action Alternative, DOE would not provide funds for either the proposed 

power plant or the direct-use application. Neither the proposed power plant nor the directuse application would be built as part of a Federal Action. The fish hatchery operations 

would continue current operations. The use of the geothermal resource would remain the 

same. No information pertinent to small-scale geothermal power plants or direct-use of heat 

from geothermal fluid for aquaculture would be developed from this location.

It is possible that other sources of funding, including private funds, could be obtained by 

AmeriCulture to build either, or both, of these projects. In that case, the projects and their 

impacts could occur anyway. 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application 

at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 2-17 August 2002

As with any business, AmeriCulture has plans and goals for growth of the business. 

Currently, the DOE grants play a role in AmeriCulture’s plans. If the Proposed Action was 

not implemented and the partial funds not awarded, AmeriCulture’s plans would change. 

Any planned expansions would be dependent on the demand for tilapia and economic factors, 

including the price of power and availability of water. 

2.5 RELATED ACTIONS

The largest single greenhouse operation in the United States is a neighbor to the proposed 

project. Burgett Geothermal Greenhouses, Inc., grows cut roses using the heat and power 

generated from the Lightning Dock geothermal resource.

Other potential actions have been proposed in the Proposed Action area, including proposals 

for grants by DOE for other uses of the geothermal resource. One potential action involves 

drilling wells into the deep part of the geothermal resource where limited fluid is present. 

Water would be injected in one well and geothermal fluid would be collected at the nearby 

well. If this project proved successful, a power plant would be constructed to generate 

electricity from the resulting geothermal fluid. DOE also may consider providing future 

funding or partial funding for intermittent resource characterization studies in the area. 

These other actions are not evaluated in this EA. These actions would undergo their own 

review under the NEPA process if these proposals were further developed.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application 

at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 2-18 August 2002
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-1 August 2002

3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

The following environmental resources are discussed to the level of detail commensurate with 

the potential for environmental impact to that resource.

3.1 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

The proposed project site is located with the Animas Valley, which is part of the Animas Basin 

system. The Animas Basin system is located in the Mexican Highland section of the Basin and 

Range physiographic province. The Mexican Highlands, part of the Basin and Range province, 

includes the deserts of southern and western Arizona, southwestern New Mexico, and northern 

Mexico. The Mexican Highlands consist of broad valleys or basins separated by steeply rising 

mountain ranges. Each basin is essentially an independent hydrologic system. Some of these 

basins (including the Animas Basin) have no drainage to the sea and are slowly filling up with 

sand, gravel, and soil washed down from the mountains.

The Animas Basin system is an interconnected group of four subbasins that cover a watershed 

area of about 2,448 mi2 (3,940 km2) (see Figure 3-1). The four subbasins are the Lower Animas, 

Upper Animas, Lordsburg, and Cloverdale (San Luis). The proposed project site is located in the 

southwestern part of the Lower Animas Subbasin. The Lower Animas Subbasin is bounded to 

the east by the Peloncillo Mountains, which form part of the Continental Divide. The Pyramid 

Mountains to the east separate parts of the Lordsburg and Lower Animas subbasins, which 

merge northwest of Lordsburg (NMWRRI 2000). 

Sediments eroded from the mountains have formed broad fans filling the valley floor. The most 

extensive landforms of the Lower Animas Subbasin are broad slopes that fan out from the 

mountain fronts. The slopes of these fans flatten out away from the mountains to form the basin 

floor areas. The basin floor areas range from narrow alluvial flats along the north-south drainage 

ways to broad plains comprising both alluvial flats and playa-lake depressions (NMWRRI 2000).

The Lower Animas Subbasin with an area of about 847 mi2 (1,360 km2) is the deepest part of the 

Animas Basin system in the Cotton City-Alkali Flat area. The fill thickness probably does not 

exceed 2,000 ft (600 m) as indicated by oil and gas exploration drilling and geophysical (seismic 

and gravity) surveys done in the area (NMWRRI 2000). 

The Lower Animas Subbasin includes an extensive (Middle Pleistocene) basalt flow and broad 

alluvial flats, with shallow braided channels of the Lower Animas fluvial system in the AnimasCotton City area. A very large playa-lake complex north of Interstate 10 (I-10) is the ultimate 

sink for much of the storm runoff in the basin system (NMWRRI 2000). 

Soils. Soils in the general vicinity of the AmeriCulture site belong to the Hondale-Playas 

Association, which are deep, moderately fine textured and fine textured, nearly level to gently 

sloping soils on alkali flats (USDA 1973). At the AmeriCulture site, soils are of the Hondale 

series, consisting of very deep, well-drained soils formed in alluvium, derived from mixed 

sediments. This series is extensively distributed throughout southern New Mexico and

southeastern Arizona. Hondale soils are in mixed sediments on old alluvial plains and fans where 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-2 August 2002

Figure 3-1. Animas Basin.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-3 August 2002

flooding is rare, and generally occur from 3,500 to 5,000 ft. Slopes range from 0 to 3 percent 

where Hondale soils are present (USDA 1994). Over the site area, the evaporation rate exceeds 

the permeability of the local soils.

In the area of the Proposed Action, there are areas that have been disturbed by past actions. The 

area immediately surrounding the AmeriCulture hatchery, the local roads, and the parking area to 

the southeast of the hatchery have all been previously disturbed. The area around the existing 

freshwater well was disturbed when the well was drilled. A water tank or stock tank exists just 

to the east of the freshwater well (see Figure 2-4). The pipeline that carries the water from the 

well to the AmeriCulture hatchery runs east paralleling the local road for most of the way then 

angles to the northeast to the hatchery.

Structural Geology. The structural history of southwestern New Mexico is dominated by three 

major tectonic episodes. The following paragraphs discuss these episodes, beginning with the 

oldest and ending with the most recent.

The Laramide Orogeny was a series of mountain-building events that affected much of western 

North America 35 to 75 million years ago. The deformation in the region included several north 

to northwest trending uplifts of 0.5 to 3 miles (0.8 to 5 km). 

During the mid-Tertiary (approximately 20 to 40 million years ago), a large part of the area was 

covered with volcanic ash and sediments and minor volcanic flows. These flows were centered 

near volcanic centers. Some of these volcanic centers formed cauldron complexes where intense 

extension occurred along systems of faults.

In the late Tertiary (approximately 6 to 12 million years ago), basins and ranges were formed 

along widely spaced faults. The valleys or basins of the Mexican highlands were formed this 

way. These valleys and ranges are mostly horst and graben structures. The blocks that have 

been broken and slowly pushed up above the surrounding land to form steeply rising mountain 

ranges are called horsts. The blocks that are depressed relative to the mountain blocks (the 

valleys or basins) are called grabens. These structures are formed when blocks separated by 

faults have been lifted or depressed relative to each other. 

Mineral Resources. There are extensive mineral resources to the north of the Animas Basin. In 

the Animas Basin area, Phelps-Dodge recently closed a copper smelter in Playas. There are old 

inactive mines in the area for gold, silver and copper ores. A small shallow gravel pit is present 

2.5 mi (4 km) to the northwest.

Geothermal Resources. Many of the geothermal systems in New Mexico occur where the late 

Tertiary horsts intersect, older cauldron complexes, and Laramide uplifts. The Lightning Dock 

KGRA in the Animas Valley (Figure 1-2) occurs in an area where these three geologic features 

intersect (Witcher 1995). A KGRA is a region identified by the U.S. Geological Survey as 

containing geothermal resources.

In the region of the Lightning Dock KGRA, a major west-northwest trending structure is thought 

to exist. The fracture zone associated with a large mid-Tertiary caldera/cauldron is immediately 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-4 August 2002

adjacent to or transverses the Lightning Dock Area. The Basin and Range faulting that created 

the Animas Basin system also runs through the Lightning Dock area (Witcher 2001).

The proposed power plant is located adjacent to Burgett Floral Greenhouses, the Nation’s largest 

geothermally-heated greenhouse operation, in the northeast part of the Lightning Dock KGRA. 

In addition to the geologic features discussed above, a north-trending, late Pleistocene fault 

scarp, the southern end of which is in the Lightning Dock KGRA, which may provide a zone of 

open shallow fracture permeability in the KGRA local to the project area (Witcher 2001).

The source of water and heat found in the KGRA is likely background regional heat flow in deep 

bedrock, through which water flows on a regional scale and discharges upward in the Lightning 

Dock KGRA. Some regional aquitards (formations that impede or block water flow) that would 

prevent water from flowing upward are absent, possibly resulting from Cretaceous and Tertiary 

uplift. The intersection of the four tectonic elements discussed above provides the vertical 

fracture permeability that allows water to flow up in the Lightning Dock area (Witcher 2001). 

The capacity of the Lighting Dock KGRA to produce energy has not been fully characterized.

The direct-use geothermal plant at Burgett Floral Greenhouses, whose wells were included in 

aquifer testing at AmeriCulture, water at approximately 244°F (118oC) from three wells in the 

Lightning Dock KGRA. The capacity of the plant is approximately 32.8 megawatts thermal 

(MWt) (OIT 2001), from which approximately 1 MW of power is being generated.

The Lightning Dock KGRA is essentially elliptical in shape, with the long axis oriented northsouth. It is approximately 1 mile wide and 2.5 miles long, and produces 95 to 250o

 F water from 

wells less than 500 feet deep (Fisher et al. 1990). 

The characteristics of the Lightning Dock KGRA have been extensively described using a 

variety of methods, as reported in Callender 1985. A conservative estimate of the volume of the 

Lightning Dock KGRA is approximately 0.75 km3. Porosity is estimated at 20 to 25 percent, and 

specific heat is assumed to range from 0.65 to 0.70 cal/cm3oC. Temperature of the reservoir is 

estimated at 100o C, and mean annual temperature for the area is estimated at 17o C. The total 

heat content of the KGRA is estimated at approximately 2.1 x 1017 joules (Callender, 1985). 

The capability of a geothermal resource area to produce sufficient energy on a sustainable basis 

is dependent on its hydrogeologic properties, which control the ability of subsurface materials to 

transmit the heated water contained within them to one or more wells. To assess the potential for 

sustainable energy production, a 48-hour pump test was conducted using an existing well 

(AmeriCulture State 1) at the proposed project location. This well is 399 ft (122 m) deep, 

producing from a fractured rhyolite reservoir in an open hole from a 282 to 399 ft (86 to 122 m) 

depth. The static water level is approximately 75 ft (23 m) below land surface. Water 

temperature during the last 40 hours of the test remained at 232o F (111oC), or slightly higher. A 

sample of the geothermal water was collected for analysis and found to be of good quality, with 

TDSs of 1,071 milligrams per liter (mg/L) and pH of 8.1.

Drawdown was measured at the AmeriCulture State 1 well. Drawdown was measured in the 

AmeriCulture Federal 1 monitoring well, located 1,170 ft (357 m) northeast of the AmeriCulture 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-5 August 2002

State 1 well. This well is completed in Tertiary to Quaternary deposits from 60 to 223 ft 

(approximately 20 to 68 m) depth. A third well (Burgett “A” State well), associated with a 

neighboring greenhouse operation, was also involved in the test and monitored. This well, 

completed in the fractured rhyolite to a depth of 440 ft (approximately 130 m), is located 825 ft 

(251 m) to the north-northeast of the AmeriCulture State 1 well (Witcher 2001).

During the first 24 hours, only the AmeriCulture State 1 well was pumped at a rate of 1,050 gpm 

(approximately 4,000 lpm). During the second 24 hours, two other wells in the vicinity were 

pumped. The Burgett “C” State well, located 255 ft (77.7 m) southwest of Burgett “A” State 

well and 645 ft (197 m) north of the AmeriCulture State 1 well, was turned on first at a rate of 

650 gpm (2,500 lpm). The Burgett “B” State well, located 345 ft (105 m) southwest of the 

Burgett “A” State well and 600 ft (approximately 200 m) north of the AmeriCulture State 1 well, 

was turned on second at a rate of 1,200 gpm (4,500 lpm). Both of these wells are similar in 

construction to the Burgett “A” State well. Pumping the wells simultaneously provided an 

opportunity to observe the impact of realistic operating scenarios.

An anomalously low drawdown in the AmeriCulture Federal 1 monitoring well appeared to 

indicate that there is a hydrogeologic boundary between the AmeriCulture State 1 well and the 

AmeriCulture Federal 1 well. Because the location and nature of this boundary is not well 

known, the data from the AmeriCulture Federal 1 well could not be used to calculate the 

hydrogeologic characteristics of the system. Data from the AmeriCulture State 1 and Burgett 

“A” State well were used to characterize the aquifer properties. Maximum drawdowns for the 

wells during the various pumping stages are summarized in Table 3-1.

Table 3-1. Drawdown Results of Pump Tests

Drawdown Measurement 

Point First 24 Hours Second 24 Hours

Wells Pumped

AmeriCulture State 1 Pumped 

at 1,000 gpm (approximately 

4,000 lpm)

Wells Pumped

AmeriCulture State 1 Pumped at 1,000 

gpm (approximately 4,000 lpm)

Burgett “B” State Pumped at 1,200 gpm 

(approximately 4,500 lpm)

Burgett “C” State Pumped at 

650 gpm (approximately 2,500 lpm)

AmeriCulture State 1 30 ft (9.1 meters) 32.29 ft (9.84 m)

Burgett “A” State Well 11.6 ft (3.54 meters) 23.4 ft (7.13 meters)

Using the 24-hour pump test data, transmissivity and storativity were calculated according to the 

Cooper and Jacob method to be 62,393 gpd/ft (775,310 lpd/m) and 1.17 x 10-4 (dimensionless), 

respectively. These values were used to project the long-term drawdown effects of pumping the 

well, which are discussed later in Section 4.1.1.

Drilling has commenced for the investigation and feasibility study phase for another potential 

use of the geothermal resource in the area of the Proposed Action. This potential use would 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-6 August 2002

involve drilling wells into the deep part of the geothermal resource where limited fluid is present. 

Water would be injected in one well and geothermal fluid would be collected at the nearby well. 

If this project proved successful, a power plant would be constructed to generate electricity from 

the resulting geothermal fluid.

Table 3-2 presents an analysis of the geothermal fluid present within the AmeriCulture State 1 

Well. Overall the water quality is good (Witcher 2001).

Table 3-2. Geothermal Water Analysis

Constituent/Characteristic Measurement

pH of water 8.11

Total Dissolved Solids 1071 mg/L

Bicarbonate 2.27 meq/L

Sodium by ICP 319 mg/L

Calcium by ICP 22.7 mg/L

Magnesium by ICP 0.1 mg/L

Potassium by ICP 14.7 mg/L

Chloride by Autoanalyzer 80 mg/L

Sulfate 462 mg/L

Fluoride by electrode - - -

Bromide by Ion Chrom not detected

Arsenic by ICP not detected

Silica by ICP 42.0 mg/L

Strontium by ICP 0.45 mg/L

Lithium by ICP - - -

Boron by ICP 0.37 mg/L

Iron by ICP 1.14 mg/L

pH of water LCS 8.25

pH of water duplicate 8.11

pH of water RPD 0.000

*Data from sample collected on 10/30/00

3.2 WATER RESOURCES

Surface Hydrology. The Lordsburg Subbasin to the northeast contributes flood runoff via 

Lordsburg Draw to the Lower Animas Subbasin (Figure 3-1). The Upper Animas Subbasin 

contributes surface runoff to the Lower Animas Subbasin via a north-flowing Animas Creek 

(Figure 3-1). The transitional boundary between the Upper and Lower Animas subbasins is 

located about 6 mi (approximately 10 km) south of Animas near the end of the entrenched 

Animas Creek (NMWRRI 2000).

There are no major perennial streams in the Animas Basin system with the exception of short 

perennial to intermittent reaches of Animas Creek and a few of its major headwater tributaries, 

all of which are located to the south of the project site. Upper Animas Creek occupies a welldefined valley to a point about 5 mi (8 km) south of Animas, and it contributes runoff and 

aquifer recharge to downstream areas in the Lower Animas Subbasin. The stream-channel 

system rapidly loses its identity in the Animas area. Some parts of the basin floor are occupied 

by a prominent (partly relict) pattern of shallow distributary channels, while other basin-floor 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-7 August 2002

surfaces appear to be mainly sites of sheet flooding during very high storm-runoff events. This 

ill-defined surface drainage pattern ultimately grades north to the (South Alkali Flat) playa-lake 

plain near and north of I-10 (NMWRRI 2000).

In the immediate vicinity of the project site the land has a gentle slope that grades to almost flat 

just to the northwest. Ove r the length of the site there is a slope of approximately 1.5 percent 

from the east to the west-northwest. Just to the west and northwest of the site the slope is less 

than 0.2 percent. The project sits between two very shallow dry washes. One wash

approximately 1,550 ft (472 m) to the north of the site, trends northwest and becomes

indistinguishable from sheetflow features about 3,960 ft (1,210 m) northwest of the site. The 

other wash, approximately 1,500 ft (approximately 460 m) to the south of the site, becomes 

indistinguishable from sheetflow features just south of the site and seems to flow into the 

drainage ditch cut along the north-south trending powerline and access road. This drainage ditch 

runs under the access road to the site and flows into the flat area 2,640 ft (805 m) west of the site.

The most prominent hydrologic feature on the site is a small marshy area of 0.5 to 1 acre (0.2 to 

0.4 hectares) that lies just west of the greenhouses. This feature is formed by the discharge of 

water from the fish tanks at AmeriCulture.

Groundwater Hydrology. The primary aquifer system is formed by unconsolidated to partly 

indurated basin fill, which includes surficial deposits of ancestral Animas Creek, and basin-floor 

facies of Upper and Middle Gila Hydrostratigraphic Units. The aquifer system has unconfined, 

semiconfined and confined components. It is laterally extensive but quite variable in thickness 

(NMWRRI 2000).

Underlying basin fill comprises well-consolidated and partly indurated Middle and Lower Gila 

Hydrostratigraphic Units that have very low hydraulic conductivities. Storage coefficients 

reflect semiconfined and confined aquifer conditions. A very liberal estimate of available 

groundwater of good quality that is stored in the Animas Basin aquifer system is about 1.2 x 1010

m

3 (12 km3

, 9.5 x 106 ac-ft) (NMWRRI 2000).

Reported groundwater pumped for irrigation in 1995 was 2.5 x 106 m3 (2,040 ac-ft) and 17.9 x 

106 m3 (14,542 ac-ft) for the Lordsburg and Animas areas, respectively. The Animas Valley 

underground basin was used to a greater extent in the 1940s when cotton farming occurred in the 

area and required significant amounts of groundwater. At the time, the water rights were 

adjudicated at a level that officials believed could be sustained with minimal impact. No new 

water rights have been added since the 1940s. Since then, agriculture in the area has declined. 

Some of the water rights associated with the declining agricultural activities have been sold to 

other operations. However, most are unused. As a result, the total water use in the area Animas 

Valley is below the level thought be sustained with minimal impact. The water use by

AmeriCulture is provided in Section 3.6 (Infrastructure).

3.3 CLIMATE/AIR RESOURCES

Climate of the Animas Basin system is arid to semiarid except in the highest parts of the San 

Luis, Animas, Guadalupe, Peloncillo and Big Burro ranges. In the town of Animas, at an
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-8 August 2002

elevation of 4,415 ft (1,346 m), the average annual precipitation is 11.03 in (28.02 cm). The 

average total precipitation ranges from 0.20 in (0.5 cm) in April to 2.33 in (5.92 cm) in August. 

The average maximum temperature is 77.3°F (25.2°C). The average maximum temperature in 

summer is 93.6°F (34.2°C), with the hottest month being June (95.4°F [35.2°C]). The average 

minimum temperature in winter of 27.2°F (-2.67°C) with the coldest month being January with 

26.2°F (-3.22°C) (WRCC 2000). Evaporation exceeds precipitation in the Animas Basin.

Evaporation records at Animas indicate an annual evaporative rate of 99.7 in (253 cm). The 

prevailing wind direction at the site is to the east-northeast (Exergy 2001).

The eastern border of the Animas Basin system follows the Continental Divide. Crest elevations 

of the Continental Divide commonly exceed 6,600 ft (2,000 m) in the Sierra San Luis-Southern 

Animas Mountain area. This range is the northern extension of the Sierra Madre Occidental of 

northwestern Mexico, and the Guadalupe/Peloncillo range to the west. It is the first major 

highland area to intercept masses of moist air that seasonally move inland from the Gulf of 

Mexico and the eastern Pacific Ocean. Most of the large precipitation events are in the summer 

and early fall, but lower magnitude (but very effective) precipitation pulses occur during the 

winter and early spring in some years (NMWRRI 2000). Higher parts of the Cloverdale and 

Upper Animas subbasins are significantly cooler and wetter than the Animas-Cotton City, 

Lordsburg area. During the summer, precipitation occurs primarily as thundershowers, with the 

amount of rainfall from these storms being quite variable. Snowfall is the main precipitation 

during winter (NMWRRI 2000).

Except for the Southern Animas-San Luis range and the Guadalupe Mountains, the climate is 

arid with mostly clear skies and limited rainfall and low humidity. The air quality for southern 

rural New Mexico is normally very good. Gaseous emissions are limited. Ambient

concentrations of pollutants have traditionally been within state and Federal standards, although 

during periods of dry weather, particulate levels noticeably increase. No known quantitative data 

exist on the air quality of the area (NMWRRI 2000). The air emissions at the project site consist 

of vehicle exhaust, exhaust from the emergency generators, and from the propane heaters in the 

trailer used as living quarters at the site.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

The AmeriCulture site is about 16 mi (approximately 26 km) southwest of Lordsburg, NM, at an 

elevation of approximately 4,200 ft (approximately 1,300 m). The project site is an area that has 

been previously disturbed by grazing, construction of roads and structures, and other activities. 

A diurnal and nocturnal pedestrian survey was performed at the AmeriCulture site in August 

2001, with some supplemental information collected in January 2002. The following subsections 

address vegetation, wetlands, wildlife, and protected or sensitive species at or adjacent to this 

facility.

Vegetation. The Animas Basin system represents a moderate array of land cover ranging from 

Ponderosa Pine Forest in the higher parts of the Burro Mountains in the north and in the southern 

Animas, Peloncillo, and Guadalupe mountains adjacent to the Cloverdale and Upper Animas 

subbasins. Mixed Piñon-Juniper woodlands and grasslands on lower mountain slopes grade 

rapidly into semidesert-grass and desert-scrub vegetative cover in the rangelands on lower 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-9 August 2002

piedmont slopes and basin floors (McCraw 1985). A large playa-lake plain (Figure 3-1) 

including North and South Alkali Flats, dominates the floor of the Lower Animas Subbasin, and 

large areas are sparsely vegetated cover. Rangeland accounts for the majority of the land cover in 

the area.

The surveyed area consisted primarily of scrub vegetation characteristic of the Chihuahuan 

Desert scrub (Brown 1982). Some grassy areas at the site appear to be diminishing due to 

drought, historic heavy grazing and other land disturbances. Some of the more common plant 

species observed included creosotebush (Larrea tridentata), fourwing saltbush (Atriplex 

canescens), honey mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa), and purple prickly pear (Opuntia violacea 

var. macrocentra). One population of a nonnative and invasive plant species, Yellow starthistle 

(Centaurea solstitialis) or a related species, Malta starthistle (C. melitensis), was discovered in 

the disturbed area by the parking lot near the waste fish water containment pond.

Wetlands. An area where water has been discharged from the fish containment ponds was 

surveyed to determine if there were marshy areas present that are protected and regulated under 

the Clean Water Act. An artificially created marshy area less than one acre in size has been 

created on the edge of a containment pond by waste fish water discharges over a number of 

years. This area supports a small population of wetland vegetation that includes cattail (Typha

sp.), willow (Salix sp.), and sedge (Carex sp). According to the owner, the cattail currently 

present represents growth from several years ago, because the pond no longer reaches the level 

required for their survival.

Wildlife. Only wildlife species representative and common to the area were sighted during the 

biological survey. During the August 2001 nocturnal survey, up to 100 individuals of a species 

of Bufo consistent with the Great Plains toad (Bufo cognatus), were observed along a section of 

the paved road paralleling the fresh (non-geothermal) water pipeline. Power lines run parallel to 

the primary access road to the AmeriCulture site. These lines, and the transmission towers 

supporting the lines, were surveyed for the presence of raptors or other birds; however, none 

were observed.

Protected and Sensitive Species. The principal purpose of the biological survey was to 

characterize the habitat to determine the suitability for species that are federally-listed as 

endangered, threatened, or candidates for listing. Species listed by the State of New Mexico as 

endangered or threatened were also considered in this survey (NMDGF 2000). The New Mexico 

BISON-M database (http://www.fw.vt.edu/fishex/states/nm.htm) and the New Mexico Rare

Plant Technical Council database (http://nmrareplants.unm.edu) were accessed to determine 

species of interest that may be present in Hidalgo County, NM, as was the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (USFWS) endangered species list (http://ifw2es.fws.gov/EndangeredSpecies/Lists/List

Species.cfm).

Available records indicate that 6 federally-listed endangered species, 7 federally-listed (or 

proposed) threatened species, 2 Federal candidate, 20 state-listed endangered species, and 32 

state-listed threatened species have been reported in Hidalgo County where the project site is 

located (see Table 3-3). No federally- or state-listed plant or animal species were observed at the 

AmeriCulture site, and no suitable habitat is present for any federally-listed species. However, 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-10 August 2002

suitable habitat is present for certain state-listed species including the Common Ground Dove

(Columbina passerina pallescens), Mexican Garter Snake (Thamnophis eques megalops), 

Colorado River Toad (Bufo alvarius), Costa’s Hummingbird (Calypte costae), Arizona 

Grasshopper Sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum ammolegus), and Night Blooming Cereus

(Peniocereus greggii). Additionally, no critical habitat for federally protected species occurs on 

the project site. Critical habitat is habitat that has been recognized by the USFWS as essential to 

the conservation and viability of the federally protected species.

Letters have been sent to the USFWS, the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, and the 

New Mexico Department of Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources, Forestry Division

requesting a list of species those agencies are aware of in the project area. 

On April 9, 2002, The USFWS responded to the faxed request with a list of federally-listed 

species including all endangered, threatened, proposed threatened, and candidate species for 

Hidalgo County, New Mexico. All of the species on the USFWS list have been included in the

biological survey and analysis. All USFWS recommendations that pertain to the Proposed 

Action have been addressed and a copy of the letter can be referenced in Appendix B.

3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES

Cultural resources are those aspects of the physical environment that are the product of human or 

societal use, and those institutions that hold communities together and link them to their

surroundings. Cultural resources include expressions of human society and history in the 

physical environment such as prehistoric or historic archaeological sites, buildings, structures, 

objects, districts, or other places including natural features and biota that are considered to be 

important to a culture, subculture, or community. Cultural resources also include traditiona l 

lifeways and practices, and community values and institutions. 

The principal Federal law addressing cultural resources is the National Historic Preservation Act

(NHPA) of 1966, as amended (16 United States Code [USC] Section 470), and implementing 

regulations (36 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 800), that describe the process for

identification and evaluation of historic properties; assessment of the effects of Federal actions 

on historic properties; and consultation to avoid, reduce, or minimize adve rse effects. The term 

“historic properties” refers to cultural resources that meet specific criteria for eligibility for 

listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). This Section 106 process does not 

require preservation of historic properties, but does ensure that the decisions of Federal agencies 

concerning the treatment of these places result from meaningful considerations of cultural and 

historic values and of the options available to protect the properties. The Proposed Action is an 

undertaking as defined by 36 CFR 800.3 and subject to the Section 106 process and other 

Federal requirements. 

The human use of lands now encompassing Hidalgo County and the Animas Valley is believed 

to date back several thousand years. The prehistoric resources of the region are among the least 

surveyed and studied in New Mexico despite the presence of cave sites in the mountains with 

good preservation of artifacts and its designation in the archaeological literature as the focus of 

the Animas occupation. A universally accepted cultural chronology for the area has not been
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-11 August 2002

Table 3-3. Federal and State Listed Species for Hidalgo County, New Mexico

Common Name Scientific Name Federal State Habitat Site Findings

PLANTS

Night Blooming 

Cereus

Peniocereus greggii E Mostly sandy to silty gravelly soils. 

Typically growing up through and 

supported by shrubs especially 

Prosopis glandulosa

Habitat present, Species not observed

Orcutt Pincushion 

Cactus

Escobaria orcuttii E Rocky soils of broken mountainous 

terrain

Habitat not present, Species not observed

Parish's Alkali 

Grass

Puccinellia parishii E Alkaline spring seeps, seasonally wet 

areas. Can persist at springs highly 

impacted by grazing or trampling

Habitat present, Species not observed

MOLLUSCA

Hacheta Grande 

Woodland Snail

Ashmunella hebardi T Under loose stones under unusually 

large pinyon pine

Habitat not present, Species not observed

Shortneck 

Snaggletooth 

Snail

Gastrocopta dalliana 

dalliana

E Only known NM pop. In Indian Creek 

Canyon

Habitat not present, Species not observed

FISH

Loach Minnow Rhinichthys cobitis T T Streams Habitat not present, Species not observed

Roundtail Chub Gila robusta E Mid elevation streams and rivers Habitat not present, Species not observed

Spikedace Meda fulgida T T Riparian areas following fish 

maturation

Habitat not present, Species not observed

AMPHIBIA

Chiricahua 

Leopard Frog

Rana chiricahuensis PT Aquatic areas Habitat not present, Species not observed

Colorado River 

Toad

Bufo alvarius T Typically found around 1500 m in 

Creosotebush and Mesquite vegetation

Habitat present, Species not observed

Lowland Leopard 

Frog

Rana yavapaiensis E Aquatic, deep pools below 1500 m Habitat not present, Species not observed

REPTILES

Gray-checkered 

Whiptail

Cnemidophorus 

dixoni

E Predominantly desert grassland and its 

derivatives

Habitat not present, Species not observed

Mexican Garter 

Snake

Thamnophis eques 

megalops

E In NM, riparian areas 1300-1800 

meters

Habitat present, Species not observed

NM Ridgenose 

Rattlesnake

Crotalus wouldardi 

obscurus

T E mountainous terrain Habitat not present, Species not observed
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-12 August 2002

Table 3-3. Federal and State Listed Species for Hidalgo County, New Mexico (continued)

Common Name Scientific Name Federal State Habitat Site Findings

REPTILES (continued)

Reticulate Gila 

Monster

Heloderma 

suspectum suspectum

E Lower slopes in mountainous and 

outwash plains, especially in arroyos or 

canyons

Habitat not present, Species not observed

Bunch Grass 

Lizard

Sceloporus scalaris 

slevini

T Montane grassland areas Habitat not present, Species not observed

Giant Spotted 

Whiptail

Cnemidophorus burti T Canyon bottom areas in NM Habitat not present, Species not observed

Mountain Skink Eumeces 

tetragrammus 

callicephalus

T Montane areas of Guadalupe Canyon Habitat not present, Species not observed

Green Rat Snake Senticolus triaspis 

intermedia

T Montane and/or riparian areas Habitat not present, Species not observed

Narrowhead 

Garter Snake

Thamnophis 

rufipunctatus 

rufipunctatus

T Montane and adjacent areas Habitat not present, Species not observed

BIRDS

American 

Peregrine Falcon

Falco peregrinus 

anatum

T Cliffy, wooded, forested slopes Habitat not present, Species not observed

Bald Eagle Haliaeetus 

leucocephalus

T T Riparian areas Habitat not present, Species not observed

Common BlackHawkButeogallus 

anthracinus 

anthracunus

T Cottonwood stands near perennial 

streams

Habitat not present, Species not observed

Mexican Spotted 

Owl

Strix occidentalis 

lucida

T Wooded, multicanopy areas Habitat not present, Species not observed

Northern 

Aplomado Falcon

Falco femoralis 

septentrionalis

E E Yucca Grassland and adjacent 

shrubbery

Habitat not present, Species not observed

Whiskered 

Screech Owl

Otus trichopsis 

asperus

T Montane woodlands dominated by at 

least some Cottonwoods

Habitat not present, Species not observed

Common Ground 

Dove

Columbina passerina 

pallescens

E Undeveloped areas below 1650 m Habitat present, Species not observed

Buff-collared 

Nightjar

Caprimulgus 

ridgwayi ridgwayi

E Arid shrublands and woodlandsgenerally in canyons and washesHabitat not present, Species not observed
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-13 August 2002

Table 3-3. Federal and State Listed Species for Hidalgo County, New Mexico (continued)

Common Name Scientific Name Federal State Habitat Site Findings

BIRDS (continued)

Elegant Trogon Trogon elegans 

canescens

E Pine-Oak and Pinyon-Juniper 

vegetation

Habitat not present, Species not observed

N. Beardless 

Tyrannulet

Camptostoma 

imberbe ridgwayi

E Lower elevations in dense stands of 

mesquite along stream courses

Habitat not present, Species not observed

SW Wouldow 

Flycatcher

Empidonax traillii 

extimus

E E Riparian areas consisting of upper story 

cottonwoods and lower story wouldows

Habitat not present, Species not observed

Thick-billed 

Kingbird

Tyrannus 

crassirostris

E In NM, confined to riparian habitats Habitat not present, Species not observed

Mountain Plover Charadrius montanus PT Shortgrass prairies and dry playas Habitat not present, Species not observed

Neotropic 

Cormorant

Phalacrocorax 

brasilianus

T Large bodies of water Habitat not present, Species not observed

Gould's Wild 

Turkey

Meleagrus gallopavo 

mexicana

T Mountainous areas with live oaks Habitat not present, Species not observed

Broad-billed 

Hummingbird

Cynanthus latirostris 

magicus

T Riparian Woodlands Habitat not present, Species not observed

White-eared 

Hummingbird

Hylocharis leucotis 

borealis

T Montane areas Habitat not present, Species not observed

Violet-crowned 

Hummingbird

Amazilia violiceps 

ellioti

T Riparian Woodlands Habitat not present, Species not observed

Lucifer 

Hummingbird

Calothorax lucifer T Slopes and adjacent canyons in 

montane areas

Habitat not present, Species not observed

Costa's 

Hummingbird

Calypte costae T Found in arid scrub terrain Habitat present, Species not observed

Gila Woodpecker Melanerpes 

uropygialis 

uropygialis

T Lower elevation woodlands Habitat not present, Species not observed

Bell's Vireo Vireo bellii T Dense shrubland or woodland in 

riparian areas

Habitat not present, Species not observed

Gray Vireo Vireo vicinior T Open woodlands and shrublands 

featuring evergreens

Habitat not present, Species not observed

Abert's Towhee Pipilo aberti aberti T Thickets of seepwouldow in riparian 

areas

Habitat not present, Species not observed
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-14 August 2002

Table 3-3. Federal and State Listed Species for Hidalgo County, New Mexico (continued)

Common Name Scientific Name Federal State Habitat Site Findings

BIRDS (continued)

Baird's Sparrow Ammodramus bairdii T Grasslands Habitat not present, Species not observed

AZ Grasshopper 

Sparrow

Ammodramus 

savannarum 

ammolegus

T Open stand of creosote bush and 

succulents

Habitat present, Species not observed

Yellow-eyed 

Junco

Junco phaeonotus 

palliatus

T Forested and riparian areas Habitat not present, Species not observed

Varied Bunting Passerina versicolor T Dense stands of Mesquite and 

associated growth in canyon bottoms

Habitat not present, Species not observed

Yellow-billed 

Cuckoo

Coccyzus americanus C Lowland deciduous thickets Habitat not present, Species not observed

MAMMALS

Arizona Shrew Sorex arizonae E Higher elevation mesic forests Habitat not present, Species not observed

Mexican Longnosed BatLeptonycteris nivalis E E In NM, upper desert scrub-pine/oak 

woodlands

Habitat not present, Species not observed

Desert Bighorn 

Sheep

Ovis canadensis 

mexicana

E Arid, mountainous, rocky terrain Habitat not present, Species not observed

Lesser Longnosed BatLeptonycteris 

curasoae 

yerbabuenae

E T Desert scrub areas with little to no 

disturbance. Usually roost in caves

Habitat not present, Species not observed

Western Yellow 

Bat

Lasiurus xanthinus T Woodlands Habitat not present, Species not observed

MAMMALS (continued)

White-sided Jack 

Rabbit

Lepus callotis 

gaillardi

T Grasslands Habitat not present, Species not observed

Southern Pocket 

Gopher

Thomomys umbrinus 

emotus

T Higher elevation riparian areas Habitat not present, Species not observed

Jaguar Panthera onca 

arizonensis

E Lowland riparian terrain Habitat not present, Species not observed

Mexican Gray 

Wolf

Canis lupus baileyi E Shortgrass plains, grassland, savanna, 

and montane areas

Habitat not present, Species not observed

Black-tailed 

Prairie Dog

Cynomys 

ludovicianus

C Shortgrass plains Habitat not present, Species not observed

 Legend: C = Candidate for Protection; E = Endangered; PT = Proposed Threatened; T = Threatened 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-15 August 2002

established, but some general trends have been noted. The Animas Phase (roughly AD 1150 to 

1400) represents a distinct break in pottery style, site location, and architecture from the Classic 

Mimbres Phase, which preceded it. Around AD 1130, throughout the southwest, there appears to 

have been environmental instability and drought. Increased mortality, scrounging for foodstuffs, 

and social instability followed with a presumed outmigration from larger sites to smaller

settlements at lower elevations near agricultural lands. Other researchers connect the Animas 

Phase as an outlier of the Casas Grandes culture of Northern Mexico. Environmental conditions 

in the lowlands prior to the extensive grazing of the more recent past would have provided 

broader range of food resources for prehistoric inhabitants than is apparent today (Stuart and 

Gauthier 1981). The region was not a major focus for Spanish occupation due to limited natural 

resources and Apache raiding, although it did provide a travel and trade corridor to what is now 

Mexico. Animas, south of the project area, was established in 1843 by Spanish settlers. The 

county seat and most important town, Lordsburg, was established in 1880 as a railroad stop. 

Silver and copper mining attracted other settlers around this time. Cotton City, the geographic 

place name nearest the project area was established later, centered around a cotton gin supported 

by local cotton farming (Julylan 1998). 

A record search was conducted to determine whether any cultural resources have been recorded 

at or in the vicinity of the Proposed Action. The closest recorded archaeological site is LA 

88047, which is located 1.5 mi (2.4 km) west of the AmeriCulture facility. It is southwest of the 

existing fresh water supply well across the paved road. LA 88047 is an artifact scatter containing 

lithics, ceramics, ground stone and six fire-affected rock concentrations. It has been attributed to 

the Mogollon Culture, San Luis Phase, dating to as early as AD 700, based on brownware sherds, 

although a similar pottery was in use up to AD 1400. There are no historic buildings and no 

known Native American or other cultural sites near any of the project areas (Ackerly 1992). 

The Area of Potential Effect for cultural resources would be limited to those within the

AmeriCulture project areas that could be physically disturbed by the construction of the

proposed power plant, injection well, pipelines and related facilities. Cultural resource surveys 

were conducted for the proposed facilities in August 2001 and January 2002 by Ms. Katherine 

Roxlau and Mr. Kevin Doyle of Tetra Tech (Roxlau 2002). Much of the project area had been 

previously disturbed by prior activities. One isolated find was recorded in the area of potential 

effect, but no significant cultural resources exist within the entire development area. 

Consultation on this undertaking with the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office

(SHPO) is in progress.

3.6 INFRASTRUCTURE

Fresh water for the hatchery is supplied by an existing well located approximately 8,500 ft 

(2,600 m) to the west (Figure 2-2). The amount of water used at AmeriCulture is 50 gpm (190 

lpm). Water used at the hatchery is filtered and recycled as much as possible. Discharge from 

the hatchery is pumped through a pipe to a containment pond just west of the greenhouses for 

evaporation. The land and water rights where the freshwater well is located are owned by the 

AmeriCulture owner’s family. The water rights are leased to AmeriCulture. The pipeline to 

AmeriCulture from the freshwater well runs through an easement on private land.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-16 August 2002

Electrical power at AmeriCulture is currently supplied by power lines that connect to the site 

from the south. Power lines run parallel to the primary access road to the AmeriCulture site and 

enter the proposed project area from the south.

The local electric provider is Columbus Electric Cooperative, Inc., of Deming, NM. Columbus 

Electric serves approximately 2,500 members in Luna, Grant and Hidalgo Counties in New 

Mexico and Cochise County in Arizona. On June 30, 2000, the merger between Tri-State and 

Plains Electric Generating and Transmission of Albuquerque, NM was finalized. As a result, 12 

New Mexico cooperatives including Columbia Electric became members of Tri-State. 

Tri-State is owned by its 44-member rural electric systems (18 in Colorado, 12 in New Mexico, 8 

in Wyoming and 6 in western Nebraska). The hub of the association’s four-state network of 

transmission lines, substations and power plants is in Westminster, Colorado. 

Tri-State’s owned and contracted mix of electric energy is derived from coal, natural gas and oilfired generation facilities located throughout its four-state member service territory. In addition, 

the association purchases Federal hydropower from the Western Area Power Administration, 

accounting for a substantial portion of the energy Tri-State sells to its 44-member systems. The 

association has exclusive wholesale power contracts with all of its members whereby each

member is obligated to purchase all of its power requirements from Tri-State. Tri-State has 

contracted with several other utilities in the region to sell power that is not currently needed by 

its members. 

Tri-State’s 44 distribution systems directly supply electricity to rural residences, farms and 

ranches, cities, towns and suburban communities, as well as large and small commercial

businesses and industries. Combined, they serve nearly 500,000 customers (based on electrical 

metering devices) in a 250,000 mi2 (650,000 km2) area. Tri-State owns (wholly or jointly) or has 

maintenance responsibilities for over 5,300 mi (approximately 8,500 km) of transmission line 

ranging from 69 kV to 345 kV. 

The Tri-State generating facility closest to the project site is the 250-MW Plains Escalante 

Generating Station, known as PEGS, located near Prewitt, NM, approximately, 220 mi (350 km) 

to the north. 

There are no natural gas utilities at the proposed project site. Heating for the greenhouses and 

the office is provided by geothermal heat. The trailers at the site that provide temporary quarters 

for some employees use propane for heating and cooking. Sanitary wastes are discharged to a 

septic system.

Roads. The project site is accessed by a paved road running approximately 2.5 mi (4 km) east 

from New Mexico State Road 338 (NM 338). NM 338 provides north-south access to the area. 

United States Highway 80 (US 80) also provides north-south access to the area approximately 

6.5 mi (approximately 11 km) west of the project site. I-10, the major east-west artery for 

southwestern New Mexico passes the project site approximately 10 mi (16 km) to the north. 

Other east-west access is provided by NM 9 approximately 15 mi (24 km) to the south. 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-17 August 2002

3.7 ACOUSTIC NOISE

Acoustic noise is defined as sound that is undesirable because it interferes with speech,

communication, or hearing; is intense enough to damage hearing; or is otherwise annoying. The 

physical unit most commonly used to establish a unit of measure that accurately compares sound 

levels is the decibel (dB). The decibel represents a relative measure or ratio to a reference 

pressure. The reference pressure is a sound approximating the weakest sound that a person with 

very good hearing can hear in an extremely quiet room. The reference pressure is 20

micropascals, which is equal to 0 (zero) dB.

A-weighted sound levels (dBA) are typically used to account for the response of the human ear. 

A-weighted sound levels represent adjusted sound levels that are made according to the

frequency content of the sound. Therefore, the dBA is a good correlation to a human’s 

subjective reaction to noise. Table 3-4 presents typical environmental noise on a scale from 0 to 

110 dBA.

While the overall project region has the typical low noise level of many rural areas (around 30 to 

40 dBA), the area immediately around the proposed project area has a higher level of noise. In 

the region, the background noise is primarily due to natural sources like wind, thunder, and 

animals. In the vicinity of the proposed project area, the man-made sources of noise in the area 

include the operational activity at the AmeriCulture fish hatchery and the Burgett’s greenhouse 

(see Figure 2-2). These noise sources consist of the pumps and fans at the existing AmeriCulture 

operations, vehicles, and the Burgett turbine power generator. Workers at AmeriCulture

experience an estimated noise level equivalent to a commercial/light industrial area, around 60 

dBA.

There are two nearby residences. One is the residence of the owner of AmeriCulture. The 

closest noise receptor not associated with these operations is the residence located about 375 ft 

(114 m) southwest of the proposed power plant site. With these sources of noise, the maximum 

background noise level experienced by the nearby receptor is estimated to be around 50 dBA.

3.8 VISUAL RESOURCES

Visibility in the area is generally high. High dust levels, which are typical of the Basin and 

Range Province, also reduce visibility when strong winds occur during dry weather.

Occasionally there is blowing snow in the winter. 

The visual foreground in the area of the proposed project is of flat scrubland where there are no 

structures. The structures in the area include the AmeriCulture greenhouses and office, the 

Burgett greenhouses to the southeast, a residence to the southwest, and a pipe structure to the 

northeast that could be the exposed framework for a greenhouse or storage structure. The re are 

also various pieces of old equipment, small tanks, pipelines, power poles and power lines in the 

foreground. Between the project site and the neighboring residence, a few old school buses are 

stored on the neighbor’s land. The land is very flat so the foreground blends into the mid-ground 

views. In winter, steam plumes from the greenhouses to the south can be seen. The background 

view is of the mountains that border the basin to the east and west.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-18 August 2002

Table 3-4. Comparative A-Weighted Sound Levels

Common Outdoor

Sound Levels

Sound Level

(dBA)

Common Indoor

Sound Levels

Jet flyover at 1000 ft (300 m)

110

Rock band

Gas lawnmower at 3 ft (0.9 m)

100

Inside subway train

Diesel truck at 50 ft (approximately 15 m)

90

Food blender at 3 ft (0.9 m)

Garbage disposal at 3 ft (0.9 m)

Noisy urban daytime 80

Shouting at 3 ft (0.9 m)

Gas lawnmower at 100 ft 

(30 m)

70 Vacuum cleaner at 10 ft (3 m)

Commercial area

Heavy traffic at 300 ft (91 m)

60

Normal speech at 3 ft (0.9 m)

50

Large business office

Dishwasher in next room

Small theater, Large conference 

room (background)

Quiet urban nighttime 45

Library (background)

Quiet suburban nighttime 40

Bedroom at night

Concert hall (background)

Quiet rural nighttime 30

Broadcast and recording studio 

(background)

10

0 Threshold of hearing

The primary viewpoints in the area are from the neighboring residence and NM 338. The view 

of the AmeriCulture facilities from the neighboring residence is obscured in the foreground by 

brush, fences, and the old school buses. In the midground, the tops of the AmeriCulture facilities 

can be seen. The residence also looks over the Burgett greenhouse operations. The largest 

number of viewers would be traveling along NM 338. From NM 338, both the AmeriCulture 

facilities and the larger Burgett facilities can be seen in the mid-ground. In winter, the steam 

plumes from the Burgett facilities are noticeable. The background views of the mountains are 

unimpeded along this stretch of NM 338. 

3.9 LAND USE

A wide variety of land use/landcover categories are present in the Animas Basin system. 

Rangeland is the major land use category with forest areas exclusively located in the highest 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-19 August 2002

parts of the mountain ranges. Basin floors at the system’s northern end include a mix of

rangeland, sparsely vegetated to barren playas and dune lands, and the area’s only sites of

urbanization and irrigation agriculture. Lordsburg is the major urban center with the smaller 

communities of Animas and Cotton City located in the Lower Animas valley agricultural area. 

Irrigated crop acreages in 1995 were reported at 1,015 acres (411 ha) in the Lordsburg “Valley” 

and 7,322 acres (2,963 ha) in the Animas valley (NMWRRI 2000).

The area in the vicinity of the project site is primarily used for grazing. The grazing is not very 

intensive, as the suitable vegetation is sparse. There are two light “industrial” operations in the 

immediate area. These are the AmeriCulture fish hatchery and the Burgett greenhouses. Both of 

these operations lease geothermal resources. There are two nearby residences; one,

approximately 1,500 ft (460 m) to the west of the AmeriCulture facilities is the residence of the 

owner of AmeriCulture. The other residence is closer, approximately 300 ft (90 m) to the 

southwest of the AmeriCulture facilities. 

3.10 SOCIOECONOMIC RESOURCES

This section provides an overview of social and economic conditions present in Hidalgo County, 

NM. Hidalgo County is an appropriate socioeconomic region of influence (ROI) because any 

potential socioeconomic effects of the Proposed Action would likely occur within this

geographic area and the current data is available for this area. Social and economic conditions 

include a baseline description of affected communities, population, ethnicity, social groups, 

economic indicators, and community services and facilities. 

Hidalgo County shares borders with Arizona on the west, Mexico on the south and the east, and 

Grant and Luna Counties on the north and east. Hidalgo County includes 3,447 mi2 (8,930 km2) 

of land with 86 linear miles (140 linear km) on the international border. Lordsburg is the county 

seat and the most populous city with 2,921 residents (Census 2001). The project area is located 

approximately 16 mi (26 km) southwest of Lordsburg. All project activities would be sited on 

lands in unincorporated parts of the county. 

Population and Demographic Characteristics. Population and demographic information is 

presented for comparison purposes in Table 3-5. In the population category, Hidalgo County 

ranks 27 out of 33 counties in New Mexico with a population in 2000 of 5,932. It has declined 

in population since the 1990 census. Much of this decrease can be attributed to the closure in 

1999 of the Phelps-Dodge copper smelter in Playas. The ethnicity and racial breakdown of the 

county population is more homogenous than the state overall with significantly lower

percentages of Native Americans. A higher percentage of the county population reports as 

Hispanic/Latino origin than in the state or Nation (ADE 2001, Census 2001). While there has 

been an outmigration of both Hispanic/Latino and Anglos (non-Hispanic whites) from the county 

from 1980 to 2000, the percentage of persons reporting Hispanic/Latino origin has increased by 

4 percent in the last 20 years (BBER 2000a, Census 2001). Over 90 percent of the Hispanic 

population of New Mexico is native-born; but there is some immigration, primarily from

Mexico. Although Hidalgo County is on the border, the estimated net international migration 

(the difference between immigration and emigration) to Hidalgo County from 1990 to 1999 was 

only 155 persons (BBER 2000b). Given that annual Border Patrol apprehensions in the county 

numbered over 5,500 in 1999, Hidalgo County is not generally the final destination of choice for 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-20 August 2002

legal or undocumented immigration (UA 2001). Prior to the recent economic downturn, the 

population of the county was expected to increase to 6,823 by 2010 and 7,282 by 2030 (BBER 

1997). 

Economic Characteristics. In 2000, Hidalgo County had an average labor force of

approximately 1,974 workers (BBER 2001). Prior to 1999, the largest industries were durable 

goods manufacturing; state and local government; retail trade and services (BEA 2000c). 

Economic statistics, which include the full impact of the subsequent closure of the Phelps-Dodge 

copper smelter in 1999, have not been compiled but the loss of this employer is reflected in 

outmigration and the high unemployment rate. Phelps-Dodge and its employees also accounted 

for 40 percent of the tax base of Hidalgo County. In 2000, an average of 209 workers (10.6 

percent of the workforce) were listed as unemployed; this number is over twice the national and 

state average (BBER 2001). The most recent monthly data from December 2001, however, 

shows an improvement to 7 percent (NMDL 2002). The current top three employers are the city 

of Lordsburg, Hidalgo County and the U.S. Border Patrol. Other major employers include 

various motels, service stations and restaurants on I-10, Hamilton James Construction, Burgett 

Geothermal Greenhouses, Saucedo’s Supermarket, Phelps-Dodge, Western Bank and the two 

school districts (NMDL 2001, UA 2001). Table 3-5 compares the estimated median household 

incomes, personal income per capita, poverty rates, and unemployment rates for the Hidalgo 

County with the state and Federal government (Census 2001).

Table 3-5. Population, Demographics, Economic Characteristics, and Poverty Status 1

POPULATION GROUP

HIDALGO 

COUNTY

2000

NEW MEXICO

2000

UNITED STATES

2000

Total Population 5,932 1,819,046 281,421,906

White 83.8% 66.8% 75.1%

Black 0.4% 1.9% 12.3%

American Indian, Eskimo, or Aleut 0.8% 9.5% 0.9%

Asian 0.3% 1.1% 3.6%

Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific 

Islander

0.0% 0.1% 0.1%

Other Race 11.9% 17% 5.5%

Two or More Races 2.9% 3.6% 2.4%

Hispanic/Latino Origin (any race) 56.0% 42.1% 12.5%

White, Non-Hispanic/Latino Origin 42.7% 44.7% 69.1%

Unemployment Rate 10.6% 4.9% 4.0%

Personal Income per Capita $17,015

(1997)

$19,298

(1997)

$25,288

(1997)

Median Household Income $28,400

(1997)

$30,836

(1997)

$38,885

(1997)

Living in Poverty 22.6%

(1997)

19.3%

(1997)

13.3%

(1997)

1Original data is gathered from a variety of sources and may have been derived using different methodologies. Race and 

ethnic categories are based on self-reporting during the decennial census. 

Source: Census 2001.

In 1996, approximately 396 people in Hidalgo County had wage or salary jobs in agriculture 

(NMDA 1996). Although relatively few people are employed in agriculture or raising livestock, 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-21 August 2002

the actual importance of ranching and agriculture to the economy of Hidalgo County is much 

larger because many self-employed proprietors depend on agriculture for their income, which 

does not show up in employment statistics (ADE 2001). Hidalgo County ranks number 18 

among the 33 counties in New Mexico in agricultural sales. The cash receipts for the

agricultural sector in 2000 totaled over $27 million (NMDA 2001). Principal crops are chile, 

cotton, feed corn, hay, wheat and cut flowers. The sale of cattle has declined in importance since 

1993 and 1998, as it has in most of the counties of southwest New Mexico. The dollar value of 

livestock declined during that period from $29.5 million to $10.6 million (ADE 2001).

Community Resources and Social Services. This section describes community resources such 

as housing, schools, health services, public safety, and fire protection. According to 2000 census 

figures, there were 2,848 occupied housing units in Hidalgo County, an increase of 18 percent 

from 1990. Homeownership rates are 67.9 percent, slightly less than the state average (Census 

2001).

There are two school districts in Hidalgo County, the Lordsburg Municipal Schools and the 

Animas Public Schools. Public educational institutions in Lordsburg, NM include 3 elementary 

schools, 1 middle school and 1 high school with 874 students enrolled. Animas Public Schools, 

near the project area operate 1 elementary, 1 middle and 1 high school with a total enrollment of 

457 students (NCES 2002). There is one private primary school in Lordsburg, but no public or 

private colleges or universities (NMDE 2002).

There are no hospitals in Hidalgo County. Hidalgo Medical Services in Lordsburg provides 

primary care and a variety of medical, mental health and dental services. The center employs a 

staff of 42 with 3 full time primary care providers and dentists. Those requiring extensive 

treatment or major emergency care must be transported to hospitals in Arizona, Deming or Silver 

City, depending on the location and treatment needs. The county operates its own ambulance 

service, which is based in Lordsburg, NM (NMBJ 2002). Fire protection in Hidalgo County is 

provided by volunteer fire departments. The Hidalgo County Sheriff’s Department consists of an 

elected sheriff and undersheriff, 10 patrol deputies, and detention personnel. The sheriff’s 

department also oversees the central dispatch for the county, which averages 600 calls per month 

for police, fire, medical and animal control. Because of the large unpopulated border area, the 

costs of law enforcement, criminal justice, emergency and indigent health services to address 

illegal immigration and smuggling is a major burden to the limited public resources of Hidalgo 

County (UA 2001).

3.11 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

On February 11, 1994, President Clinton issued Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to 

Address Environmental Justice in Minority and Low-Income Populations. This Executive Order 

requires Federal agencies to identify and address disproportionately high or adverse human

health and environmental effects of Federal programs, policies, and activities on minority and 

low-income populations. Consideration of environmental justice concerns includes race and 

ethnicity data and the poverty status of populations within the ROI (defined as Hidalgo County, 

see Section 3.10 above), as shown in Table 3-5. 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 3-22 August 2002

Environmental justice impacts occur if there are any disproportionately high and adverse human 

health or environmental effects on minority or low-income populations. The 1997 median

household income in Hidalgo County was $28,400 and 22.6 percent of the residents were 

classified by the U.S. Census Bureau as living in poverty, a higher percentage than in New 

Mexico or in the United States (Census 2001). There are no updated income and poverty data 

available, which would include the probable changes in these economic indicators due to the 

closure of the Phelps-Dodge smelter. Minority populations as defined by the U.S. Census 

Bureau are present in the ROI.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final Draft 4-1 August 2002

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

The Proposed Action has two components, the power plant and the direct-use application. The 

impacts of implementing both components are discussed first for each environmental resource. 

Then the environmental impacts for implementing either component alone are discussed. Either 

component implemented alone would involve; the drilling of a new freshwater well, construction 

of a new freshwater pipeline, drilling a reinjection well, construction of a pipeline from the 

AmeriCulture site to the reinjection well, and removal of the existing heat exchanger and 

installation of a downhole pump in the AmeriCulture State 1 well. Therefore, the impacts from 

these actions are common to implementing both components together or implementing either 

component alone.

4.1 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.1.1 Proposed Action

Soils. The Proposed Action includes several activities that would result in the disturbance of 9.3 

acres (3.8 ha) of land. The drilling of a new freshwater supply well, the construction of a second 

freshwater pipeline, the construction of the proposed power plant, the drilling of an injection 

well, and the construction of a new pipeline from the site to the injection well would all involve 

land disturbance.

The drilling of the new freshwater well would take place adjacent to the existing freshwater well. 

Approximately 1 acre (0.4 ha) of the area around the existing freshwater well was disturbed 

when the original well was drilled and has continued to be disturbed over the years from

maintenance activities (see Figure 2-3). The well site covers an area of approximately 2 acres 

(0.8 ha), with a gated road and a water tank. Approximately 8,650 ft (2,640 m) of new

freshwater pipeline would be buried alongside the existing freshwater pipeline. The

approximately 5 acres (2 ha) of land that would be disturbed by trenching and other actions 

during the construction of the new pipeline was previously disturbed by the construction of the 

old pipeline, vehicle use, and powerline and fence installation. Therefore, the drilling of the new 

freshwater well and the construction of the new freshwater pipeline would not require the 

disturbance of additional land.

The proposed power plant and cooling towers would be located in an area that has been

previously disturbed over time by the operations of AmeriCulture and the previous owner. The 

construction of the power plant and cooling towers would only involve the disturbance of 0.6 

acres (approximately 0.2 ha) of disturbed land.

The drilling of the new injection well would disturb up to 1 acre (0.4 ha) of land around the new 

well site. The new pipeline from the proposed project to the new injection well is approximately 

3,000 ft (approximately 900 m) long. With a conservative estimate of a 25-ft (7.6-m) wide area 

of disturbance along the pipeline, an area of approximately 1.7 acres (0.69 ha) of land would be 

disturbed. The land where the proposed injection well and pipeline would be constructed has 

only been disturbed to date by grazing activities and some vehicle use.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final Draft 4-2 August 2002

Implementing the proposed power plant component without the direct-use application

component would result in disturbance of 9.3 acres (3.8 ha) of land as discussed above for 

implementing both components. 

Implementing just the direct-use application would result in disturbance of 8.7 acres (3.2 ha) of 

land as discussed above for implementing both components. The 0.6 acres (approximately 0.2 

ha) of previously disturbed land where the proposed power plant would have been located would 

not be disturbed for the direct-use application.

Geothermal Resources. As stated in Section 2.3, the Proposed Action would involve pumping 

hot (approximately 232°F [111°C]) water from the subsurface geothermal resource located at the 

AmeriCulture facility. This would require drawing approximately 1,000 to 1,200 gpm

(approximately 3,800 to 4,500 lpm) of geothermal fluid from the AmeriCulture State 1 well.

As stated in Chapter 3, the total heat content of the Lightning Dock KGRA has been estimated at 

2.1 x 1017 joules (Callender 1985). To assess the effect on the KGRA as a whole, it is necessary 

to compare the heat required to generate 1 MWe and compare it to the total heat content of the 

shallow reservoir. 

The proposed power plant would use enough heat (13.7 MWt) to generate 1,280 kW gross 

electrical power per year (Exergy 2001). A watt is a unit of measure that is equal to 1 joule per 

second (J/s). The number of joules equivalent to 13.7 MWt is 4.32 x 1014 J/yr. This represents 

only a very small fraction (approximately 0.2 percent) of the 2.1 x 1017 joule heat content 

estimated in Callender 1985. Therefore, it appears unlikely that the proposed withdrawal of 

geothermal waters at the AmeriCulture location would adversely affect the resource as a whole.

The capability of a “wet” geothermal resource is dependent upon its ability to deliver

geothermally-heated water stored in the underlying formations to a well for extraction. 

Accordingly, pump tests and calculations, discussed in Section 3.1.2, were performed to assess 

whether the pumping that would be conducted under the Proposed Action could be expected to 

compromise the geothermally-heated aquifer’s ability to deliver water to the proposed well and 

wells currently operating in the vicinity.

Section 3.1.2 provides an overview of the methods used to define the characteristics of the 

heated water aquifer that make up the geothermal resource to be utilized under the Proposed 

Action. Water temperature was found to be approximately 111oC (232°F), and transmissivity 

and storativity were estimated at 62,393 gpd/ft (775,309 lpd/m) and 1.17 x 10-4 (dimensionless), 

respectively (Witcher 2001).

The Theis Method was used to calculate potential long-term drawdowns resulting from

continuous pumping of 1,200 gpm (4,500 lpm) at the AmeriCulture State 1 well for 20 years. No 

other production or injection wells were included in these calculations. The drawdown at the 

well was calculated to be approximately 60 ft (18 m) after 20 years of continuous pumping. 

Drawdowns at various distances from the pumped well after 20 years (Witcher 2001) are 

summarized in Table 4-1. 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final Draft 4-3 August 2002

Table 4-1. Theis Method Drawdown Predictions Resulting from the Proposed Action

Drawdown - ft (m)

Distance 50 ft 

(15.2 m)

100 ft 

(30.5 m)

500 ft 

(152 m)

1,000 ft 

(305 m)

2,000 ft

(610 m)

1 year 31.2 ft

(9.51 m)

28.6 ft

(8.72 m)

22.7 ft

(6.92 m)

20.2 ft

(6.16 m)

17.6 ft

(5.36 m)

5 years 34.1 ft

(10.4 m)

31.6 ft

(9.63 m)

25.7 ft

(7.83 m)

23.1 ft

(7.04 m)

20.6 ft

(6.28 m)

10 years 35.4 ft

(10.8 m)

32.8 ft

(10 m)

26.9 ft

(8.2 m)

24.4 ft

(7.44 m)

21.8 ft

(6.64 m)

15 years 36.1 ft

(11 m)

33.6 ft

(10.2 m)

27.7 ft

(8.44 m)

25.1 ft

(7.65 m)

22.6 ft

(6.89 m)

20 years 36.7 ft

(11.2 m)

34.5 ft

(10.5 m)

28.2 ft

(8.6 m)

25.7 ft

(7.83 m)

23.1 ft

(7.04 m)

Calculations were also performed indicating that continuous pumping of Burgett “B” State well 

at 1,000 gpm (approximately 4,000 lpm) for 20 years could result in an additional 30 ft 

(approximately 9 m) drawdown at the AmeriCulture State 1 well. The construction of the 

AmeriCulture State 1 well is adequate to tolerate the additional drawdown. Similarly, the 

construction of the existing nearby production wells in the Lightning Dock KGRA appear 

adequate to tolerate the drawdowns that would result from withdrawal of geothermal waters at 

AmeriCulture. Therefore, it appears that the portion of the Lightning Dock KGRA in the 

vicinity of the AmeriCulture facility would likely be able to supply power to the AmeriCulture 

facility without substantially degrading the capacity of the resource in the long term.

As discussed in Section 2.3.2, cooling tower blowdown water would be mixed with the spent 

geothermal water and reinjected into the geothermal aquifer approximately 3,440 ft (1,050 m) 

north-northwest of the AmeriCulture State 1 well, where the groundwater temperature would 

match that of the 140°F (60°C) geothermal water/blowdown water mixture. The approximate 

well position was selected to avoid thermal breakthrough at any of the existing wells in the area. 

Chemical additives to the cooling water would be minimal due to expected low corrosion, low 

bio-fouling, and low scaling potentials. This is due to the low average temperature of the water 

at this site, the near neutral pH level of the water, and the use of stainless steel plates in the 

condenser. Mixing cooling tower blowdown water with spent geothermal water is a typical 

design for geothermal power plants utilizing cooling towers. The cooling tower chemical

treatment program would be developed and monitored by a specialty company. The treatment 

program would be custom tailored and adjusted, as required, for the specific conditions at the 

site. These programs are designed to protect the cooling tower and water system, and to meet all 

environmental regulations. Impacts to the temperature and quality of the water in the Lightning 

Dock KGRA resulting from injection are therefore anticipated to be negligible.

Implementing the proposed power plant component without the direct-use application

component would result in the withdrawal of the same amount of heat and geothermal fluid as 

discussed above for implementing both components. Impacts to the temperature and quality of 

the water in the Lightning Dock KGRA resulting from injection are therefore anticipated to be 

negligible.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final Draft 4-4 August 2002

Implementing just the direct-use application would result in the withdrawal of less geothermal 

fluid than discussed above for implementing both components. The amount of geothermal water 

used would be dependent upon the future size of the operation, which has not been projected; 

however, it appears likely that future withdrawals would be less than or equal to those that would 

occur if the power plant were constructed. Therefore, the impact of implementing only the 

direct-use application component would be similar to that which would occur for the power plant 

component, and are anticipated to be negligible.

4.1.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, DOE would not provide funds for either the proposed power 

plant or the direct-use application. Neither the proposed power plant nor the direct-use 

application would be built as part of a Federal Action. No changes attributed to direct Federal 

financial assistance under this program would occur at the AmeriCulture site. The disturbance of 

approximately 9.3 acres (3.8 ha) of previously disturbed land associated with the Proposed 

Action would not occur. There would be no changes anticipated and therefore no potential for 

impacts to the geology and soils. 

Hatchery activities would be expected to continue as they do presently. The use of the

geothermal resource would remain the same. AmeriCulture would continue to use the downhole 

heat exchanger. There would be no additional impacts to the geothermal resource.

While the partial funding from DOE would not be granted, it is possible that other sources of 

funding, including private funds, could be obtained by AmeriCulture to build either, or both, of 

these projects. In that case, the projects and their impacts could occur anyway. Future facility 

expansion could occur with the potential for impacts to geology and soils. The timing and nature 

of any expansion would be dependent on financial factors and the aquaculture market.

4.2 WATER RESOURCES

4.2.1 Proposed Action

Surface Hydrology. The existing surface water hydrology at the site consists of mainly 

sheetwash (in a generally east-to-west direction) and man-made drainage ditches. The new 

freshwater well and new freshwater pipeline would be constructed alongside of the existing well 

and pipeline. The drainage patterns would not be changed from their current configuration. The 

proposed power plant and cooling tower would be constructed in a flat, previously disturbed 

area. The new pipeline to the new injection well would cross over the shallow dry wash to the 

north of the project site. The injection water pipeline would be built on blocks or post to allow 

for thermal expansion and contraction of the pipe. Therefore, no trenching would be required. 

Some vehicle crossing of the dry wash would occur during construction. After construction, 

maintenance activities could also require some vehicle crossing of the wash. Since the area is so 

flat and the wash becomes indistinguishable from sheetflow features just to the west, the small 

amount of temporary effects to the wash during vehicle crossings would be minor.

The containment pond west of the greenhouse would be unaffected by the Proposed Action. The 

path of the freshwater pipeline does not cross the containment pond and the Proposed Action 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final Draft 4-5 August 2002

would not increase or decrease the amount of water pumped to the containment pond from the 

hatchery tanks. 

Implementing the proposed power plant component without the direct-use application

component would result in the same impacts to surface water as discussed above for

implementing both components. Impacts to the surface water features and flows would be 

temporary and minor.

Implementing the direct-use application alone would result in the same impacts to surface water 

as discussed above for implementing both components. Impacts to the surface water features 

and flows would be temporary and minor. 

Groundwater Hydrology. The AmeriCulture facilities currently use 50 gpm (190 lpm) of 

freshwater piped from a well located 8,500 ft (2,600 m) to the west (see Figure 2-2). The 

wastewater from the hatchery is discharged to a containment pond west of the hatchery

buildings. The amount of freshwater flowing through the hatchery would not change under the 

Proposed Action.

The cooling towers for the proposed power plant would require up to 100 gpm (approximately 

380 lpm) of fresh water to cool the working fluid for the turbine. The amount of water used 

would vary in accordance with seasonal temperatures. In order to supply this increased demand, 

a second freshwater well would be drilled just east of the existing freshwater well. A new 

pipeline would be constructed adjacent to the existing pipeline in the existing easement. The 

existing pipeline would remain in use. The total use of freshwater with the operation of the 

hatchery and the proposed power plant and cooling towers would be 150 gpm (570 lpm). Since 

the water rights in the Animas Valley were set at a level that would be sustainable with minimal 

impact to the aquifer, and since the water use in the valley has declined substantially since the 

water rights were set, the current withdrawal of groundwater in the region has a negligible effect 

on the aquifer. The Proposed Action is within AmeriCulture’s water rights. The withdrawal of 

the amount of water planned for the Proposed Action would have negligible impact on the 

aquifer. The water used in the cooling towers would be blended with the spent geothermal fluid 

and piped northwest for reinjection.

Implementing the proposed power plant component without the direct-use application

component would result in the same impacts to groundwater hydrology as discussed above for 

implementing both components. The new freshwater well would be constructed, and same 

amount of freshwater would be used. The withdrawal of the amount of water planned for the 

power plant component would have negligible impact on the aquifer.

Implementing the direct-use application alone would result in less impact to groundwater

hydrology as discussed above for implementing both components. Since the cooling tower would 

not be built, there would be no increase in freshwater use. While the second freshwater well 

would still be drilled, it would be constructed more for reliability considerations. The level of 

freshwater use would remain the same as the current level.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final Draft 4-6 August 2002

4.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, DOE would not provide funds for either the proposed power 

plant or the direct-use application. Neither the proposed power plant nor the direct-use 

application would be built as part of a Federal Action. No changes attributed to direct Federal 

financial assistance under this program would occur at the AmeriCulture site. The approximately 

100 gpm (approximately 380 lpm) of additional freshwater required for the Proposed Action 

would not be used. There would be no changes in the surface and groundwater hydrology as a 

result of Federal funding. Hatchery activities would be expected to continue as they do

presently. The water use at the AmeriCulture hatchery would remain at the current level of 50 

gpm (190 lpm). AmeriCulture would continue to use the current freshwater well.

While the partial funding from DOE would not be granted, it is possible that other sources of 

funding, including private funds, could be obtained by AmeriCulture to build either, or both, of 

these projects. In that case, the projects and their impacts could occur anyway. Future facility 

expansion could occur with the potential for impacts to surface and groundwater hydrology. The 

timing and nature of any expansion would be dependent on financial factors and the aquaculture 

market.

4.3 CLIMATE/AIR RESOURCES

4.3.1 Proposed Action

The air quality would be slightly affected by the Proposed Action. Exhaust emissions would 

increase temporarily during construction. The operations of the power plant would involve 

intermittent emissions of ammonia from the turbines. In addition, some ammonia emissions 

would occur during deliveries of ammonia to fill the holding tank. 

The amount of ammonia to be emitted would be calculated during the preparation of the detailed 

design for the plant. The plant would be designed so that the emissions would be less than the 

thresholds above which an operating permit would be required. These thresholds are 1.20 lbs/hr 

(0.54 kg/hr) at 0 ft (0 m) to less than 32.8 ft (10 m) release height, or 6.00 lbs/hr (2.7 kg/hr) at 

32.8 ft (10 m) to less than 65.6 ft (20 m) release height. If the design should reveal that more than 

1.20 lbs/hr (0.54 kg/hr) would be released, the stack height would be increased to 32.8 ft (10 m).

It is possible that the reinjection well would have occasional minor releases of gasses associated 

with the geothermal fluid. These gasses could include sulfur dioxide or carbon dioxide. The 

small amounts of these emissions are not regarded by the State of New Mexico as requiring 

permits. Any releases would be downwind of any nearby receptors.

Implementing the proposed power plant component without the direct-use application

component would result in the same level of impacts to climate and air resources as discussed 

above for implementing both components. The ammonia emissions and possible emissions from 

the reinjection well would be the same. The air quality would only be slightly affected by 

implementing the power plant component.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final Draft 4-7 August 2002

Implementing just the direct-use application would have less impact to air quality than

implementing the power plant component. The direct-use application would not involve

emissions of ammonia. However occasional minor releases of gasses at the reinjection well 

associated with the geothermal fluid could still occur. Due to the use of less geothermal fluid by 

the direct-use application, the amount of these reinjection well emissions would be less than that 

associated with the power plant component. The air quality would only be slightly affected by 

implementing the power plant component.

4.3.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, DOE would not provide funds for either the proposed power 

plant or the direct-use application. Neither the proposed power plant nor the direct-use 

application would be built as part of a Federal Action. No changes attributed to direct Federal 

financial assistance under this program would occur at the AmeriCulture site. Intermittent 

releases of small amounts of ammonia, sulfur dioxide, and carbon dioxide associated with the 

Proposed Action would not occur. There would be no changes in the impacts to air quality as a 

result of Federal funding. Hatchery activities would be expected to continue as they do

presently. 

While the partial funding from DOE would not be granted, it is possible that other sources of 

funding, including private funds, could be obtained by AmeriCulture to build either, or both, of 

these projects. In that case, the projects and their impacts could occur anyway. Future facility 

expansion could occur with the potential for impacts to air quality. The timing and nature of any 

expansion would be dependent on financial factors and the aquaculture market.

4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4.1 Proposed Action

Based on the Proposed Action described in Chapter 2 and the conditions observed in Chapter 3, 

impacts to biological resources would be minor and not expected to adversely affect any plant or 

animal populations or communities. No impacts are projected for any individual or population 

of state- or federally-listed threatened or endangered plant or animal species. 

Vegetation. Up to 9.3 acres (3.8 ha) of land at the site would be disturbed by Proposed Actionrelated tasks. The construction of the new freshwater well, the new freshwater pipeline, and the 

proposed power plant would all take place on approximately 6.6 acres (2.67 ha) of previously 

disturbed land. The new spent geothermal fluid pipeline and reinjection well would involve 

disturbing 2.7 acres (1.1 ha) of land that have been disturbed only by grazing activities. The new 

spent geothermal pipeline would not be buried. It would be supported on posts or blocks above 

ground to allow for expansion of the pipe. This would result in less intensive disturbance along 

the path of the pipeline than those associated with burial. Some loss of vegetation would result 

from construction related activities. All of the plant species observed (e.g., creosotebush, 

fourwing saltbush, purple prickly pear, and honey mesquite) are common throughout a wide 

geographic region and plant populations would not be adversely affected by the Proposed 

Action. 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final Draft 4-8 August 2002

Implementing the proposed power plant component without the direct-use application

component would result in the same impacts as those discussed above for the Proposed Action. 

Up to 9.3 acres (3.8 ha) of land would be disturbed, 2.7 acres (1.1 ha) of which is land that has 

only been previously disturbed by grazing activities. Some loss of vegetation would result from 

construction related activities. No impacts are projected for plant species.

Implementing just the direct-use application component would result in disturbance of 8.7 acres 

(3.2 ha) of land would be disturbed, 2.7 acres (1.1 ha) of which is land that has only been 

previously disturbed by grazing activities. The 0.6 acres (approximately 0.2 ha) of previously 

disturbed land where the proposed power plant would have been located would not be disturbed 

for the direct-use application. Some loss of vegetation would result from construction related 

activities. No impacts are projected for plant species.

Wetlands. A second freshwater pipeline would be required for the project. If constructed, it 

would avoid the marshy area on the periphery of the containment pond and thus eliminate 

adverse impacts to this area. The pond does not drain into waters of the United States and has 

not been designated a jurisdictional wetland. It does not appear to be under U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers jurisdiction as a result of the U.S. Supreme Court findings in the case of Solid Waste 

Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (No. 99-1178) 

(http://originalintent.phc.edu/Library/99-1178_S.asp, (Pratt 2002)). In the SWANCC case, the 

U.S. Supreme Court determined that isolated wetlands are exempt from U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers oversight. No impacts to the marshy area are anticipated.

Implementing the proposed power plant component alone would result in the same level of 

impacts to the marshy area as discussed above for implementing both components. No impacts to 

the marshy area are anticipated.

Implementing just the direct-use application would also result in the same level of impacts to the 

marshy area as discussed above for implementing both components. No impacts to the marshy 

area are anticipated.

Wildlife. It is anticipated that the Proposed Action would not have an adverse impact on

wildlife populations. Individuals of small, or less mobile, animal species tend to hide rather than 

flee during threat situations. Although some individuals of a given animal species may be killed 

during the proposed construction activities, no adverse impacts on the population of that species 

is anticipated due to the presence of other members of the species that would avoid disturbance 

areas or be present in the abundant surrounding habitat. Most wildlife species would be expected 

to avoid adverse impacts by movement out of disturbance areas until construction activities have 

been completed. No impacts to wildlife are anticipated to result from operations from the 

Proposed Action.

Implementing the proposed power plant component without the direct-use application

component would result in the same level of disturbance as discussed above for implementing 

both components. The 2.7 acres (1.1 ha) of land where the new spent geothermal fluid pipeline 

and reinjection well would be constructed would result in impacts to wildlife living in this area 

that are unable to flee as described above. 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final Draft 4-9 August 2002

Implementing just the direct-use application would result in no disturbance of the 0.6 acres 

(approximately 0.2 ha) of previously disturbed land where the proposed power plant would have 

been located, therefore no wildlife would be affected in this area. The 2.7 acres (1.1 ha) of land 

where the new spent geothermal fluid pipeline and reinjection well would be constructed would 

result in impacts to wildlife living in this area that are unable to flee as described above. 

Protected and Sensitive Species. Most of the construction activities (new freshwater well, new 

freshwater pipeline, and proposed power plant) would occur in previously disturbed areas

characterized by parking lots, buildings, and bare ground. The reinjection well and associated 

pipeline construction would occur in habitat suitable for, although of marginal or low quality, for 

1 state-listed plant, 2 state-listed amphibia, 1 state-listed snake, 3 state-listed birds. No state or 

federally protected species were observed during the pedestrian survey. Therefore, no impacts to 

these species are anticipated from the Proposed Action.

Implementing the proposed power plant component alone would result in the same level of 

disturbance to protected and sensitive species as discussed above for implementing both

components. No impacts to protected or sensitive species are anticipated.

Implementing just the direct-use application would result in less disturbance than for the power 

plant component. The 0.6 acres (approximately 0.2 ha) of previously disturbed land where the 

proposed power plant would have been located would not be disturbed by the direct-use 

application component. No impacts to protected or sensitive species are anticipated.

4.4.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, DOE would not provide funds for either the proposed power 

plant or the direct-use application. Neither the proposed power plant nor the direct-use 

application would be built as part of a Federal Action. No changes attributed to direct Federal 

financial assistance under this program would occur at the AmeriCulture site. The disturbance of 

approximately 9.3 acres (3.8 ha) of previously disturbed land associated with the Proposed 

Action would not occur. Hatchery activities would be expected to continue as they do presently. 

There would be no changes anticipated and therefore no potential for impacts to vegetation, 

wetlands, wildlife, or protected or sensitive species. 

While the partial funding from DOE would not be granted, it is possible that other sources of 

funding, including private funds, could be obtained by AmeriCulture to build either, or both, of 

these projects. In that case, the projects and their impacts could occur anyway. The timing and 

nature of any expansion would be dependent on financial factors and the aquaculture market.

4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5.1 Proposed Action

Potential impacts to historic properties are assessed by applying the Criteria of Adverse Effect as 

defined in 36 CFR 800.5a. “An adverse effect is found when an action may alter the

characteristics of a historic property that qualify it for inclusion in the NRHP in a manner that 

would diminish the integrity of the property’s location, design, setting, workmanship, feeling, or 

association. Adverse effects may include reasonably foreseeable effects caused by the action 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final Draft 4-10 August 2002

that may occur later in time, be farther removed in distance, or be cumulative.” The Criteria of 

Adverse Effect provide a general framework for identifying and determining the context and 

intensity of potential impacts to other categories of cultural resources, as well, if these are 

present. Assessment of effects involving Native American or other traditional community, 

cultural or religious practices or resources requires focused consultation with the affected group. 

The area of potential effect for the proposed power plant, injection well, pipelines and related 

facilities would be limited to the surveyed areas, much of which have been disturbed by prior 

activities. No historic properties or other significant cultural resources are present. The project 

would not disturb LA 88047; the nearest recorded archaeological site to the project area. There 

are no historic buildings and no known Native American or other cultural sites on or near the 

proposed project area which could be impacted directly or through an alteration of setting by the 

project. The Proposed Action would have no effect on any known cultural resources, although 

there does remain the remote possibility that subsurface archaeological resources could be 

encountered during construction excavations. 

Implementing the proposed power plant component alone would result in the same level of 

disturbance as discussed above for implementing both components therefore, no effect on any 

known cultural resources are anticipated in the event that only the power plant is constructed. 

There does remain the remote possibility that subsurface archaeological resources could be 

encountered during construction excavations.

Implementing just the direct-use application would also result in slightly lesser amount of

disturbance than discussed above for implementing both components, therefore, no effect on any 

known cultural resources are anticipated in the event that only the direct-use application is 

constructed. There does remain the remote possibility that subsurface archaeological resources 

could be encountered during construction excavations.

4.5.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, DOE would not provide funds for either the proposed power 

plant or the direct-use application. Neither the proposed power plant nor the direct-use 

application would be built as part of a Federal Action. No changes attributed to direct Federal 

financial assistance under this program would occur at the AmeriCulture site. The disturbance of 

approximately 9.3 acres (3.8 ha) of previously disturbed land associated with the Proposed 

Action would not occur. Hatchery activities would be expected to continue as they do presently. 

There would be no effect on any known cultural resources. 

While the partial funding from DOE would not be granted, it is possible that other sources of 

funding, including private funds, could be obtained by AmeriCulture to build either, or both, of 

these projects. In that case, the projects and their impacts could occur anyway. The timing and 

nature of any expansion would be dependent on financial factors and the aquaculture market.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final Draft 4-11 August 2002

4.6 INFRASTRUCTURE

4.6.1 Proposed Action

The Proposed Action would involve a 200 percent increase in the use of freshwater by

AmeriCulture. The current level of use for the hatchery operations and employee use is around 

50 gpm (190 lpm). The cooling unit for the proposed power plant would require an additional 

100 gpm (380 lpm) of freshwater. This increase would be supplied from an additional

freshwater well drilled approximately 8,650 ft (2,640 m) to the west. This increase is within 

AmeriCulture’s water rights. The water rights in the region have been set at a level that would 

result in minimal impact to the aquifer.

The wastewater from the AmeriCulture operations that is discharged to the containment pond 

would not change in quantity or character. Since the power plant would not require additional 

employees, the sanitary discharge would not change either. The wastewater from the power 

plant cooling tower skid would be blended with the spent geothermal fluid and piped to the 

reinjection well.

The inexpensive electrical power generated by the proposed power plant would be sold to 

AmeriCulture, Inc. by the generating entity (see Section 2.3.1). The use of the more expensive 

power from Columbus Electric (the local utility) consumed by AmeriCulture would be reduced 

to zero. While the power generated by the proposed power plant would be in excess of 

AmeriCulture’s current power needs, AmeriCulture anticipates that implementation of their 

current expansion plans would result in their utilizing all of the power generated. 

Until these plans are implemented, the generating entity could sell any excess power to 

Columbus Electric, if power surpluses, utility regulations, and economic considerations permit. 

The costs for any required safety, switching, transformer, or quality of service equipment and the 

amount of time between the capability to generate the power and the time AmeriCulture would 

need all of the generated power will affect the decision on whether to sell power to Columbus 

Electric. While the types and specifications of the needed equipment have not been detailed, any 

equipment that would be needed would be located next to the proposed power plant, just to the 

west of the turbines.

The power lines connected to the AmeriCulture site may not need any upgrades to accommodate 

the transmission of the generated power, should any be sold to Columbus Electric. Should 

upgrades to the existing power lines be needed, the upgrades could include replacement of the 

existing lines or addition of a new line. It is anticipated that the replacement line or additional 

line would be strung on the existing poles. The impacts of upgrading the lines on the exiting 

poles would be minor.

Implementing the proposed power plant component alone would result in the same level of 

impacts to infrastructure as discussed above for implementing both components. The additional 

100 gpm (380 lpm) of freshwater would still be required for the cooling towers. The power 

generation and sale issues would be the same as discussed above.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final Draft 4-12 August 2002

Implementing just the direct-use application would result in no need for AmeriCulture to

withdraw an additional 100 gpm (380 lpm) of freshwater. The withdrawal of freshwater would 

remain at 50 gpm (190 lpm). There would be no generation of electrical power. AmeriCulture 

would continue to use power from the local supplier. The potential upgrades for interconnection 

with Columbus Electric would not be necessary. Therefore, there would be no changes in 

infrastructure at AmeriCulture and no changes in infrastructure impacts. 

4.6.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, DOE would not provide funds for either the proposed power 

plant or the direct-use application. Neither the proposed power plant nor the direct-use 

application would be built as part of a Federal Action. No changes attributed to direct Federal 

financial assistance under this program would occur at the AmeriCulture site. Hatchery activities 

would be expected to continue as they do presently. AmeriCulture would continue to use power 

from the local supplier. There would be no changes in infrastructure at AmeriCulture and no 

changes in infrastructure impacts. 

While the partial funding from DOE would not be granted, it is possible that other sources of 

funding, including private funds, could be obtained by AmeriCulture to build either, or both, of 

these projects. In that case, the projects and their impacts could occur anyway. The timing and 

nature of any expansion would be dependent on financial factors and the aquaculture market.

4.7 ACOUSTIC NOISE

4.7.1 Proposed Action

The prediction of the noise effects of the Proposed Action includes those generated during

construction and normal facility operation over the existing background noise. Other than

workers at AmeriCulture, the primary receptor for noise would be the neighboring residence. 

There would be short-term noise from the construction activities. These would exceed the 

background noise levels in the area and would be noticeable at the residence. However, this 

noise would be temporary and the overall impact would be minor. 

The turbine and cooling fans at the proposed power plant would be the largest source of longterm noise. The nearest offsite human receptor (person who would hear the noise) would be 

approximately 375 ft (114 m) from the turbines. Turbines and cooling tower fans can generate 

as much as 85 dB of noise at 3 to 5 ft (1 to 2 m) from the turbines (Exergy 2002). Workers at 

AmeriCulture would experience an increase in noise from around 60 dBA, to noise levels as high 

as 75 to 85 dBA, equivalent to the level of a noisy urban daytime environment. The neighboring 

residence could experience noise levels as high as 70 to 80 dBA. This receptor would also 

experience the rise in noise to an equivalent of a noisy urban daytime environment. 

The determination as to whether an impact is significant with respect to noise is a qualitative 

assessment of the increase in noise level above background as experienced by those receptors 

near the source. A subjective response to changes in sound levels based upon judgements of 

sound presented within a short timespan indicate that a change of +/- 5 dBA may be quite 

noticeable, although changes that take place over a long period of time of this magnitude or 

greater may be “barely perceptible.” Changes in sound levels of +/- 10 dBA within a short 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final Draft 4-13 August 2002

timespan may be perceived as “dramatic” and changes in sound levels of +/- 20 dBA within a 

short timespan may be perceived as “striking”. A qualitative assessment of dramatic and striking 

changes in sound level could be considered a significant impact.

While the noise from the turbine would not be short-term, and thus, the “noticeability” would be 

slightly reduced, the one nearby human receptor, which is at the residence that is approximately 

375 ft (114 m) from the turbines, is likely to experience the increase in noise from around 50 

dBA to around 75 dBA as “dramatic” or “striking”. However, the noise would not be of a new 

type. The Burgett turbine power generator to the southeast already produces similar noise.

Implementing the proposed power plant component without the direct-use application 

component would result in the same level of noise impacts as discussed above for implementing 

both components. The neighboring residence could experience noise levels as high as 70 to 80 

dBA.

If just the direct-use application were to be implemented, the turbine generator and cooling tower 

fans would not be built and would not be a source of noise. The direct-use application does not 

involve any large sources of noise. The noise level of current operations (around 60 dBA) would 

continue but would not increase. The noise level from AmeriCulture hatchery and Burgett 

greenhouse operations would remain at about 50 dBA at the nearby residence.

4.7.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, DOE would not provide funds for either the proposed power 

plant or the direct-use application. Neither the proposed power plant nor the direct-use 

application would be built as part of a Federal Action. No changes attributed to direct Federal 

financial assistance under this program would occur at the AmeriCulture site. Hatchery activities 

would be expected to continue as they do presently. The current level of noise (around 60dBA) 

would continue. The noise level from AmeriCulture hatchery and Burgett greenhouse operations 

would remain at about 50 dBA at the nearby residence. There would be no changes in noise 

impacts from AmeriCulture operations. 

While the partial funding from DOE would not be granted, it is possible that other sources of 

funding, including private funds, could be obtained by AmeriCulture to build either, or both, of 

these projects. In that case, the projects and their impacts could occur anyway. The timing and 

nature of any expansion would be dependent on financial factors and the aquaculture market.

4.8 VISUAL RESOURCES

4.8.1 Proposed Action

The existing visual resources were discussed from two viewpoints, the neighboring residence 

and NM 338. The visual impacts of the proposed power plant facilities from the neighboring 

residence would include direct sight of the turbine generator and cooling tower skids in the 

foreground, as well as the steam plume in the foreground and midground. With a possible height 

of 33 ft (10 m) the stack would be the most visible equipment. The cooling towers at 25 ft (7.6 

m) would also be visible. While there is an existing steam plume from the Burgett geothermal 

operations, the AmeriCulture steam plume would be closer, and therefore, more visible.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final Draft 4-14 August 2002

From the viewpoint of NM 338, the impacts to the mid-ground view of the proposed facilities 

would not be much of an addition to the impacts from the existing facilities. The addition of a 

second steam plume close to the first one would result in very minor impact to visual resources 

from this viewpoint.

Implementing the proposed power plant component alone would still include the turbine

generator, stack, and cooling towers. The second steam plume would still be produced. The 

same level of impacts to visual resources would occur as discussed above for implementing both 

components. 

Implementing just the direct-use application would not include the turbine generator, stack, or 

cooling towers. The second steam plume would not be produced. Also, the temporary visual 

resource impacts associated with construction dust would be reduced. The visual impacts would 

be the same as for current operations.

4.8.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, DOE would not provide funds for either the proposed power 

plant or the direct-use application. Neither the proposed power plant nor the direct-use 

application would be built as part of a Federal Action. No changes attributed to direct Federal 

financial assistance under this program would occur at the AmeriCulture site. Hatchery activities 

would be expected to continue as they do presently. The power plant stack and cooling towers 

associated would not be built. There would be no additional facilities added to the visual

foreground at AmeriCulture. There would be no second steam plume. Only the current steam 

plume from the Burgett greenhouse operations would be visible. There would be no changes in 

impacts to visual resources. 

While the partial funding from DOE would not be granted, it is possible that other sources of 

funding, including private funds, could be obtained by AmeriCulture to build either, or both, of 

these projects. In that case, the projects and their impacts could occur anyway. The timing and 

nature of any expansion would be dependent on financial factors and the aquaculture market.

4.9 LAND USE

4.9.1 Proposed Action

The current land use around the AmeriCulture site is a mix of grazing, commercial/light

industrial, and residential. Regardless of whether both components of the Proposed Action (the 

power plant and direct-use application) are built, just the power plant component, or just the 

direct-use application component, the site would still be used for commercial/industrial purposes. 

The land use in the surrounding area would not change in any of these cases. Therefore, the 

construction of the power plant or the direct-use application would not affect land use in the 

AmeriCulture area.

4.9.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, DOE would not provide funds for either the proposed power 

plant or the direct-use application. Neither the proposed power plant nor the direct-use 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final Draft 4-15 August 2002

application would be built as part of a Federal Action. No changes attributed to direct Federal 

financial assistance under this program would occur at the AmeriCulture site. Hatchery activities 

would be expected to continue as they do presently. No change in land use would occur 

While the partial funding from DOE would not be granted, it is possible that other sources of 

funding, including private funds, could be obtained by AmeriCulture to build either, or both, of 

these projects. In that case, the projects as discussed above would not involve a change in land 

use.

4.10 Socioeconomic Resources

4.10.1 Proposed Action

Potential impacts to socioeconomic resources are assessed by determining whether the action 

would substantially alter the location and distribution of populations, change populations at a rate 

that exceeds historic rates, decrease jobs so as to raise the regional unemployment rates or reduce 

income generation, substantially affect the local housing market, preclude the use of resources 

for other economically viable enterprises, result in the need to construct new schools or medical 

facilities or would affect the delivery of emergency and other community services. 

The Federal involvement in partial funding of the proposed power plant, injection well, pipelines 

and related facilities would not result in any major socioeconomic changes. AmeriCulture is a 

family-run enterprise that currently has one regular outside employee, although additional

temporary workers are sometimes used (Seawright 2002). Some temporary employment and 

additional goods and services from local vendors could be required during construction, but these 

minor inputs into the local economy would be temporary. Operation of the new facilities, as 

proposed, would not require permanent additions to the current workforce. The Proposed Action 

would therefore have little or no direct effect on population, demographics, employment, or 

availability of housing or community services. The geothermal resource in the area can support 

a limited amount of electrical generation or other uses near the source, but not a large-scale 

generation project. This action would not impact other viable uses of the resource in the area. 

AmeriCulture has future plans to expand the aquaculture operations at the site. The timing and 

nature of any expansion would be dependent on permitting, the availability of water rights, the 

price of power, product markets, and other economic factors. To the extent that these factors can 

be projected, the Proposed Action may affect the timing and economic viability of these plans 

by, for example, lowering power costs or freeing other capital for the expansion. These 

expansion plans are not dependent on the Proposed Action. There could be substantial

socioeconomic effects if a large expansion is undertaken, but these plans are not ripe for analysis 

here.

Implementing the proposed power plant component alone would result in the same level of 

impacts to socioeconomic resources as discussed above for implementing both components. 

Operation of the proposed power plant would not require permanent additions to the current 

workforce, and therefore, would have little or no direct effect on population, demographics, 

employment, or availability of housing or community services.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final Draft 4-16 August 2002

Implementing just the direct-use application would result in less temporary and minor

involvement in the local economy for construction and materials than as described for the 

Proposed Action as a whole. Operation of the direct-use application would not require permanent 

additions to the current workforce, and therefore, would have little or no direct effect on

population, demographics, employment, or availability of housing or community services. 

4.10.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, DOE would not provide funds for either the proposed power 

plant or the direct-use application. Neither the proposed power plant nor the direct-use 

application would be built as part of a Federal Action. No changes attributed to direct Federal 

financial assistance under this program would occur at the AmeriCulture site. Hatchery activities 

would be expected to continue as they do presently. No change in the current workforce, and 

therefore, no direct effect on population, demographics, employment, or availability of housing 

or community services would occur. 

While the partial funding from DOE would not be granted, it is possible that other sources of 

funding, including private funds, could be obtained by AmeriCulture to build either, or both, of 

these projects. In that case, the projects and their impacts could occur anyway. The timing and 

nature of any expansion would be dependent on financial factors and the aquaculture market.

4.11 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

4.11.1 Proposed Action

Environmental justice impacts occur if there are any disproportionately high and adverse human 

health or environmental effects on minority or low-income populations.

No significant impacts are expected from the Proposed Action or if either component were to be 

implemented alone. Therefore, no disproportionately high and adverse human health or

environmental effects would be anticipated to the minority or low-income populations in the 

project study area. 

4.11.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, DOE would not provide funds for either the proposed power 

plant or the direct-use application. Neither the proposed power plant nor the direct-use 

application would be built as part of a Federal Action. No changes attributed to direct Federal 

financial assistance under this program would occur at the AmeriCulture site. Hatchery activities 

would be expected to continue as they do presently. There would be no changes anticipated and 

therefore no potential for disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 

effects to the minority or low-income populations in the project study area.

While the partial funding from DOE would not be granted, it is possible that other sources of 

funding, including private funds, could be obtained by AmeriCulture to build either, or both, of 

these projects. In that case, the projects and their impacts could occur anyway. The timing and 

nature of any expansion would be dependent on financial factors and the aquaculture market. 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 5-1 August 2002

5.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

Impacts from Proposed Action. The Proposed Action would add a new approximately 1 MW 

geothermal power plant and a direct-use application to heat water for fish tanks at the

AmeriCulture fish hatchery. The AmeriCulture site currently uses a downhole heat exchanger in 

a geothermal well to heat freshwater for the hatchery operations. The addition of the proposed 

power plant and direct-use application would allow AmeriCulture to operate with less energy 

(electricity) costs. 

The impacts of the Proposed Action include disturbance of 9.3 acres (3.8 ha) of land, 2.7 acres 

(1.1 ha) of which is land disturbed only by grazing activities. The new pipeline to the new 

injection well would cross over the shallow dry wash to the north of the project site. The 

injection water pipeline would be built on blocks or post to allow for thermal expansion and 

contraction of the pipe. Since the area is so flat and the wash becomes indistinguishable from 

sheetflow features just to the west, the small amount of temporary effects to the wash during 

vehicle crossings would be minor. The impacts to biological resources would be minor and not 

expected to adversely affect any plant or animal populations or communities. No historic 

properties or other significant cultural resources are present in the areas that would be disturbed. 

The current land use around the AmeriCulture site, a mix of grazing, commercial/light industrial, 

and residential, would not change.

The air quality would be slightly affected by the Proposed Action by exhaust emissions during 

construction; minor intermittent emissions of ammonia from the turbines and during deliveries; 

and small amounts of hydrogen sulfide and carbon dioxide released from the injection well. The 

turbine and cooling fans at the proposed power plant would be the largest source of long-term 

noise. The nearest human receptor would experience an increase in noise levels from around 50 

dBA to a level as high as 70 to 80 dBA. The visual impacts of the proposed power plant 

facilities from the neighboring residence would include direct sight of the turbine-generator and 

cooling tower skids and the steam plume. From the viewpoint of NM 338, the addition of a 

second steam plume close to the first one would result in very minor impact to visual resources 

from this viewpoint.

The AmeriCulture facilities currently use 50 gpm (190 lpm) of freshwater. The Proposed Action 

would involve a 300 percent increase in the use of freshwater by AmeriCulture. This increase 

would be supplied from an additional freshwater well.

The Proposed Action would involve pumping approximately 1,000 to 1,200 gpm (approximately 

3,800 to 4,500 lpm) of 232°F (111°C) geothermal fluid from the subsurface geothermal resource. 

The drawdown at the well was calculated to be approximately 60 ft (18 m) after 20 years of 

continuous pumping. Continuous pumping of Burgett “B” State well at 1,000 gpm

(approximately 4,000 lpm) for 20 years could result in an additional 30 ft (approximately 9 m) 

drawdown at the AmeriCulture State 1 well. The construction of the AmeriCulture State 1 well 

and the existing nearby production wells appear adequate to tolerate the drawdowns that would 

result from withdrawal of geothermal waters at AmeriCulture. Therefore, it appears that the 

portion of the Lightning Dock KGRA in the vicinity of the AmeriCulture facility would likely be 

able to supply power to the AmeriCulture facility without substantially degrading the capacity of 

the resource in the long term.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 5-2 August 2002

The cooling tower blowdown water would be mixed with the spent geothermal water and 

reinjected into the geothermal aquifer where the groundwater temperature would match that of 

the geothermal water/blowdown water mixture. Impacts to the temperature and quality of the 

water in the Lightning Dock KGRA resulting from injection are therefore anticipated to be 

negligible.

The electrical power from the proposed power plant would be used by AmeriCulture. The 

amount of power from Columbus Electric (the local utility) consumed by AmeriCulture would 

be reduced to zero. It is anticipated that the power generated by the proposed power plant would 

be in excess of AmeriCulture’s current power needs. Current plans are to sell the excess power 

to Columbus Electric, a member of Tri-State.

The Federal involvement in partial funding of the proposed power plant, injection well, pipelines 

and related facilities would result in some temporary employment but would not require

permanent additions to the current workforce. The Proposed Action would not result in any 

major socioeconomic changes.

Other Projects in the Area. The largest single greenhouse operation in the United States is a 

neighbor to the proposed project. Burgett Geothermal Greenhouses, Inc., grows cut roses using 

the heat and power generated from the Lightning Dock geothermal resource. The Burgett 

greenhouse operation was included in the assessment of the existing environment.

Other DOE offices have provided initial partial funding for two other projects in the Lightning 

Dock KGRA. The first action involves drilling wells into the deep part of the geothermal

resource where limited fluid is present, injecting water inot one well, and collecting heated fluid 

at a nearby well (See Appendix C). If this project proves successful, DOE would consider 

providing additional unding for construction of a power plant using that geothermal resource, 

which is deeper than the resource that would be utilized by the Exergy/AmeriCulture project. 

The proposed system would involve limited removal of fluid from the deeper reservoir.

The second action proposes to develop a 6 MW “combined technologies project” where two 

geothermal systems would be used to provide heated fluid to generate power. A typical

intermediate-depth geothermal system at a depth of 1,200 to 3,000 ft (360 to 900 meters) and a 

deeper system at 3,000 to 4,000 ft (900 to 1,200 meters) where water would be injected into the 

hot rock to be heated and extracted at a nearby well. Initial phases of work on these project are 

being conducted to determine their technical feasibility. DOE will consider providing additional 

funding for these projects pending the outcome of the feasibility determination.

Two electrical power plants are planned for development in the region of the Proposed Action. 

Neither of these power plants is planned to use geothermal resources. Tri-State plans to build a 

142 MW gas-fired peaking power plant near Lordsburg. Construction is expected to start in 

2002, with operations beginning in 2003. Construction would require 175 jobs, while operation 

would require up to 4 full time employees.

The Public Service Company of New Mexico plans to increase its generating capacity in

southern New Mexico by building an 80-MW gas-fired power plant near Lordsburg. 

Construction is set to begin in January 2002 and operations to begin in July 2002. The capacity 

would be used to meet the needs of the Public Service Company of New Mexico customers and 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 5-3 August 2002

excess would be sold on the wholesale market (Journal 2002). An estimated 200 to 300 

construction jobs would be involved, but only 6 full time employees.

Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources. This section describes the major 

irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources that can be identified at the level of 

analysis conducted for this EA. A commitment of resources is irreversible when its primary or 

secondary impacts limit the future options for a resource or limit those factors that are renewable 

only over long periods of time. Examples of nonrenewable resources are minerals, including 

petroleum, and cultural resources.

An irretrievable commitment of resources refers to the use or consumption of a resource that is 

neither renewable nor recoverable for use by future generations. Examples of irretrievable 

resources are the loss of production, harvest, or recreational use of an area. While an action may 

result in the loss of a resource that is irretrievable, the action may be reversible. For instance 

paving over farmland results in the irretrievable loss of harve sts from that land. However, the 

parking lot could be removed and crops grown again. Hence, the action is reversible.

The construction and operations of the proposed power plant and the direct use application at 

AmeriCulture would require the irreversible and irretrievable commitment of building materials.

The cooling water used by the proposed power plant would be a minor irretrievable consumption 

of water. Up to 100 gpm (approximately 380 lpm) of freshwater would be used in the cooling 

tower. Some would be reinjected, however, the remainder would be lost through evaporation. 

The use of the geothermal water and heat represent a larger irretrievable impact to the

geothermal resource. However, the same amount of geothermal fluid used will be reinjected and 

the resource’s heat production potential greatly exceeds the proposed use. Both the geothermal 

fluid and heat would likely recover soon after the proposed use by AmeriCulture ceased.

Relationship Between Short-Term Uses of the Environment and the Maintenance and 

Enhancement of Long-Term Productivity. The actual construction of the proposed power 

plant and direct use application at AmeriCulture would result in the short term disturbance of the 

ground immediately surrounding the location of the wells, pipelines, and power plant skid. The 

operation of the power plant and direct use require short-term use of freshwater, geothermal 

fluid, and heat. The power provided by the proposed action would cause overall enhancements 

of the long-term productivity of the AmeriCulture operations. While causing some short-term 

disruption and use of resources, the information gained from the operation of the power plant 

would provide for long-term improvement of knowledge of the geothermal resource and the 

feasibility of small-scale low-temperature geothermal power plants.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 5-4 August 2002
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 6-1 August 2002

6.0 AGENCY CONTACTS

Below is a list of agencies that have been contacted for information in support of the 

environmental assessment.

6.1 FEDERAL AGENCIES

• New Mexico Ecological Field Office

U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service

• Albuquerque District

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

• El Paso Field Office 

Albuquerque District

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

6.2 STATE AGENCIES

• New Mexico Department of Game & Fish

• New Mexico Oil Conservation Division

• New Mexico State Land Office

• Museum of New Mexico, Archaeological Records Management System

• New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 6-2 August 2002
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 7-1 August 2002

7.0 REFERENCES

16 USC 470 National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, 16 United States Code, Section 470.

10 CFR 1021 “National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA): Implementing Procedures”; 

Title 10, Energy; Chapter X, Department of Energy (General Provisions); 

Code of Federal Regulations; National Archives and Records 

Administration, Washington, D.C.; January 1, 1998.

36 CFR 800. Protection of Historic Properties, Regulations of the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation Governing the Section 106 Review Process, Advisory 

Council on Historic Preservation, December 2001.

Ackerly 1992 Ackerly, Neal W. An Archaeological Survey of a Proposed Road Right-ofWay in Hidalgo County, New Mexico. Prepared for Office of the County 

Manager, Hidalgo County. Prepared by Center for Anthropological 

Research, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New Mexico.

ADE 2001 Applied Development Economics. Hidalgo County Economic Adjustment 

Strategy Final Report 2 . Prepared for the County of Hidalgo and City of 

Lordsburg, New Mexico and the US Economic Development 

Administration. Prepared by Applied Development Economics, Berkeley 

and Sacramento, California. March 2001.

BBER 1997 New Mexico Population Projections, by County. Bureau of Business and 

Economic Research, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New 

Mexico. April 1997 

Information posted on http://www.unm.edu/~bber/demo/poproj.htm. 

Information accessed on 01/28/02 
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 7-2 August 2002

BBER 2000a Anglo/Non- Anglo Population Composition and Change, New Mexico 

Counties: 1980-1997. In Racial Trends and Comparisons in New Mexico 

During the Late 20th Century: What the Census Tells Us. Bureau of 

Business and Economic Research, University of New Mexico, 

Albuquerque, New Mexico. January 2000

BBER 2000b Net International Migration, New Mexico County Population Estimates, 

1990-1999. Bureau of Business and Economic Research, University of 

New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico. March 2000. 

Information posted on http://www.unm.edu/~bber/demo/coint99.htm. 

Information accessed on 01/28/02 

BBER 2000c REIS BEARFACTS Hidalgo County New Mexico 1998-1999. Regional 

Economic Information System, Bureau of Business and Economic 

Research, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico. May 

2000. Information posted on http://www.unm.edu/~bber/reis95/35023-

bf.htm. Information accessed on 01/28/02

BBER 2001 2000 Civilian Labor Force, by County (Annual Averages) Bureau of 

Business and Economic Research, University of New Mexico, 

Albuquerque, New Mexico. Information posted on 

http://www.unm.edu/~bber/co-uer00.htm. Information accessed on 01/28/02 

Brown 1982 Brown, Dave E., Desert Plants: Biotic Communities of the American 

Southwest – United States and Mexico. University of Arizona Press.

Callender 1985 Evaluation of Geothermal Potential of Rio Grande Rift and Basin and 

Range Province, New Mexico, New Mexico Energy Research and 

Development Institute, Santa Fe, New Mexico.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 7-3 August 2002

Census 2001 State and County QuickFacts. Data derived from: Population Estimates, 

2000 Census of Population and Housing, 1990 Census of Population and 

Housing, Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates, County Business 

Patterns, 1997 Economic Census, Minority- and Women-Owned Business, 

Building Permits, Consolidated Federal Funds Report, 1997 Census of 

Governments. US Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics 

Administration, Bureau of the Census, Washington, DC. November 2001. 

Information posted on http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/. Information 

accessed on 01/28/02.

EIA 1997 Energy Information Administration, 1997 Residential Energy Consumption 

Survey. Information accessed at http://www. eia. doe.gov/emeu/recs. 

Information referenced on February 4, 2002.

Exergy 2002 Telephone conversation between Henry A. Mlcak of Exergy, Inc. and 

Mr. Cliff Jarman of Tetra Tech, Inc. on 20/01/02

Journal 2002 Rayburn, Rosalie, Albuquerque Journal, PNM Plans Lordsburg-Area 

Power Plant. Albuquerque Journal Press, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 

January 11.

McCraw 1985 McCraw, D.J., A Phytogeographic History of Larrea in Southwestern New 

Mexico Illustrating the Historical Expansion of the Chihuahuan Desert. 

Unpublished Master’s theses, Department of Geography, University of New 

Mexico. 137 p.

NCES 2002 National Center for Education Statistics, National Public School District 

Locator. Office of Educational Research & Improvement, National Center 

for Education Statistics, Washington, DC. Information posted on: 

http://nces.ed.gov/globallocator/, Information accessed on 01/28/02.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 7-4 August 2002

NMBJ 2002 O’Hara, Debby. Economic Profile: Lordsburg, Proliferating Power Plants. 

New Mexico Business Journal, Volume 27, Issue 1 January/February 2002, 

Albuquerque, New Mexico. 

NMDA 1996 New Mexico Department of Agriculture, Farm Numbers and Land in 

Farms by County. Prepared by the State of New Mexico, Department of 

Agriculture, Las Cruces, NM. Information posted on: 

http://nmdaweb.nmsu.edu/MD/Agstat96/Livestock/Farmnum.htm, 

Information accessed on 01/28/02.

NMDA 2001 New Mexico Department of Agriculture, Cash Receipts: All Farm 

Commodities by County. State of New Mexico, Department of Agriculture, 

Las Cruces, NM. Information posted on: 

http://www.nass.usda.gov/nm/nmbulletin/CRCNTY.pdf, Information 

accessed on 01/28/02.

NMDE 2002 New Mexico Department of Education, New Mexico School Locator. State 

of New Mexico, Department of Education, Santa Fe, NM. Information 

posted on: http://sde.state.nm.us/districts/, Information accessed on 

01/28/02.

NMDGF 2000 New Mexico Department of Game & Fish, New Mexican Wildlife of 

Concern, Status and Distribution. November 16. Biota Information System 

of New Mexico (BISON-M) Database. Information accessed at 

http://www.fw.vt.edu/fishex/states/nm.htm. Information referenced on 

January 30, 2002.

NMDL 2001 New Mexico Department of Labor. Large Employers in New Mexico. 

Prepared by the Economic Research and Analysis Bureau., Department of 

Labor, State of New Mexico Santa Fe, New Mexico.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 7-5 August 2002

NMDL 2002 New Mexico Department of Labor. Civilian Labor Force Employment, 

Unemployment, and Unemployment Rate, 2000-1. State of New Mexico, 

Department of Labor, Santa Fe, New Mexico. Information posted on: 

http://www3.state.nm.us/dol/dol_clfe.html. Information accessed on 

02/04/02.

NMEI 1980 New Mexico Energy Institute at New Mexico State University, Geothermal 

Resources of New Mexico, Map produced by National Geophysical and 

Solar-Terrestrial Data Center, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration for the Division of Geothermal Energy, Department of 

Energy, 1980

NMRPTC 2000 New Mexico Rare Plant Technical Council, Agency Status of NM Rare 

Plants. Information accessed at http://nmrareplants.unm.edu. Information 

referenced on January 30, 2002.

NMWRRI 2000 New Mexico Water Resources Research Institute, Trans-International 

Boundary Aquifers in Southwestern New Mexico. Prepared for United 

States Environmental Protection Agency. Prepared by New Mexico Water 

Resources Research Institute, New Mexico State University, California 

State University, Los Angeles, March.

OIT 2001 Oregon Institute of Technology, Burgett Floral Greenhouses. Information 

accessed at http://geoheat.oit.edu/directuse/all/ dug0144.htm. Information 

referenced on February 4, 2002.

Pratt 2002 Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC) v. U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers (No. 99-1178). Information accessed at 

http://originalintent.phc.edu/Library/99-1178_S.asp. Information 

referenced on January 31, 2002.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 7-6 August 2002

Roxlau 2002 Roxlau, Katherine, Cultural Resource Survey of a Proposed Geothermal 

Development near Cotton City, Hidalgo County, New Mexico. Prepared for 

U.S. Department of Energy, Golden Colorado Field Office and National 

Renewable Energy Lab. Prepared by Tetra Tech NUS, Inc., Albuquerque, 

New Mexico.

Seawright 2002 Phone conversation between Mr. Damon Seawright of AmeriCulture, Inc. 

and Mr. Cliff Jarman of Tetra Tech, Inc. on March 6, 2000 concerning 

additional technical details on the proposed geothermal power plant

Stebbins 1985 R. C. Stebbins, A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians. 

Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, Massachusetts.

Stokes 1996 Donald and Lillian Stokes, Stokes Field Guide to Birds, Western Region. 

First Edition. Little, Brown and Company, Boston, New York, London.

Stuart and 

Gauthier 1981

Stuart, David E., and Rory P. Gauthier, Prehistoric New Mexico, 

Background for Survey. With contributions by Thomas W. Merlan. 

University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

UA 2001 University of Arizona. Illegal Immigrants in U.S./Mexico Border Counties, 

The Costs of Law Enforcement, Criminal Justice, and Emergency Medical 

Services. Prepared for the United States/Mexico Border Counties Coalition. 

Prepared by the University of Arizona, Institute for Local Government, 

School of Public Policy, Eller College of Business and Public 

Administration, Tucson, Arizona. February 2001.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 7-7 August 2002

USDA 1973 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Survey of Hidalgo County, 

New Mexico. Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service, In cooperation 

with New Mexico Agricultural Experiment Station; Issued December 1973

USDA 1994 United States Department of Agriculture, Official Soil Series Descriptions 

DATA ACCES. Information accessed at 

http://www.statlab.iastate.edu/soils/osd/dat/H/HONDALE.html 

Information referenced on February 1, 2002.

USFWS 2001 United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Federal Endangered, Threatened, 

Proposed Threatened, and Candidate Species and Species of Concern in 

New Mexico-Hidalgo County. Information also accessed at 

http://ifw2es.fws.gov/EndangeredSpecies/Lists/ ListSpecies.cfm. 

Information referenced on January 30, 2002.

USGS 1998 U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Aerial Photograph 228 km West of Ciudad 

Juarez, Chihuahuan, Mexico on May 23, 1998 accessed at 

http:terraserver.homeadvisor.msn.com on 2/28/02.

Witcher 1995 Witcher, James C., Geothermal Resource Data Base, New Mexico. 

Southwest Technology Development Institute, Las Cruces, New Mexico, 

July.

Witcher 2001 Witcher, J. C., Resource Characterization Report, Phase 1 – Tasks 3 and 4.

Kalina Cycle Demonstration Plant, Americulture Geothermal Power Plant 

Project. Prepared July 19, 2001.

WRCC 2000 Western Regional Climate Center, Climate Summary List. Information 

accessed at http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliLIST.pl?nmanim+nm. 

Information referenced on January 30, 2002.
Environmental Assessment for a Small-Scale Geothermal Power Plant and Direct-Use Geothermal Application at 

AmeriCulture Inc., Cotton City, NM

Final EA 7-8 August 2002
APPENDIX A

GLOSSARY OF TERMS:

Acre-foot A unit of measurement used to describe volumes of water. 1 ac-ft is 1 foot of 

water covering a land area of 1 acre (approximately 325,000 gallons [1,230,000 

liters]).

Acre A unit of measurement used to define area. 1 acre = 0.405 hectares

Air Quality The cleanliness of the air as measured by the levels of pollutants relative to 

standards or guideline levels established to protect human health and welfare. Air 

quality is often expressed in terms of the pollutant for which concentrations are the 

highest percentage of a standard (e.g., air quality may be unacceptable if the level 

of one pollutant is 150% of its standard, even if levels of other pollutants are well 

below their respective standards).

Alkali A soluble salt or mixture thereof present in some soils of arid regions due to high 

evaporation rates.

Alluvial A process of land morphology caused by water.

Ambient Natural condition of the environment at any given time. 

Anastomosing A pattern of stream formation visibly similar to a braid.

Aquifer A body of rock or sediment that is capable of transmitting groundwater and 

yielding usable quantities of water to wells or springs.

EPA regulations define “aquifer” as follows (different regulations vary slightly in 

wording): An underground geological formation, group of formations, or part of a 

formation that is capable of yielding a significant amount of water to wells or 

springs.

Axial Extending in a direction essentially perpendicular to the plane of a cyclic structure 

(wheel spokes).

Basalt A type of igneous rock seen in lava flows.

Basin A hydrologic area that is bounded by geographic features whereby any water 

falling within its boundary will be drained internally.

Baseload Plants Electricity generating units that are operated to meet the constant or minimum 

load on the system. The cost of energy from such units is usually the lowest 

available to the system.

Benchmark A fixed point on the earth’s surface from which measurements can be made over 

great temporal separation.

Binary-Cycle Plant A geothermal electricity generating plant employing a closed-loop heat exchange 

system in which the heat of the geothermal fluid (the "primary fluid") is 

transferred to a lower-boiling-point fluid (the "secondary" or "working" fluid), 

which is thereby vaporized and used to drive a turbine/generator set. 

Bound Something that limits or restrains. Confine.

Breccia A sedimentary rock that is formed by the compaction of angular, broken particles 

into a greater mass.
Brine A geothermal solution containing appreciable amounts of sodium chloride or other 

salts.

BTU British thermal unit. The quantity of heat required to raise the temperature of one 

pound of water one degree Fahrenheit at standard conditions. (Equal to 252 

calories)

Caldera A volcanic landform created by the collapse of a composite volcanic summit into 

the evacuated magma chamber. It has the appearance of a cauldron or basin.

Capillary Action The action of mo lecules of a liquid, usually water, adhering to a media thereby 

traveling along the surface until cohesion becomes stronger than adhesion.

Cap Rocks Rocks of low permeability that overlie a geothermal reservoir.

Cascading Heat A process that uses a stream of geothermal hot water or steam to perform 

successive tasks requiring lower and lower temperatures. 

Channel A confined pathway that can carry liquids within banks across a landscape.

Clastic Made up of fragments of preexisting rocks.

Condensate Water formed by condensation of steam. 

Condenser Equipment that condenses turbine exhaust steam into condensate.

Confined Entirely bounded.

Conglomerate A sedimentary rock formed by the compaction of rounded to sub-rounded particles 

into a greater mass.

Cooling Tower A structure in which heat is removed from hot condensate.

Coprolites Preserved human feces.

Critical habitat Habitat essential to the conservation of an endangered or threatened species that 

has been designated as critical by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the 

National Marine Fisheries Service following the procedures outlined in the 

Endangered Species Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 424). 

(See endangered species and threatened species.)

The lists of Critical Habitats can be found in 50 CFR 17.95 (fish and wildlife), 50 

CFR 17.96 (plants), and 50 CFR 226 (marine species).

Crust Earth's outer layer of rock. Also called the lithosphere.

Cumulative Impacts Impacts on the environment that result when the incremental impact of a proposed 

action is added to the impacts from other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person 

undertakes the other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually 

minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time.

Decibel A unit for expressing the relative intensity of sounds on a logarithmic scale from 

zero for the average least perceptible sound to about 130 for the average level at 

which sound causes pain to humans. For traffic and industrial noise measurements, 

the A-weighted decibel (dBA), a frequency-weighted noise unit, is widely used. 
The A-weighted decibel scale corresponds approximately to the frequency 

response of the human ear and thus correlates well with loudness.

Detritus Loose material that results directly from disintegration.

Direct Use Use of geothermal heat without first converting it to electricity, such as for space 

heating and cooling, food preparation, industrial processes, etc.

District Heating A type of direct use in which a utility system supplies multiple users with hot 

water or steam from a central plant or well field.

Downtime The period of time in which a facility would not be operational.

Drawdown The result of well pumping which removes water at the pump head faster than it 

can migrate to the area resulting in a cone of depression.

Drilling Boring into the earth to access geothermal resources, usually with oil and gas 

drilling equipment that has been modified to meet geothermal requirements. 

Dry Steam Very hot steam that doesn't occur with liquid. 

Duripan A subsurface soil horizon that is cemented by illuvial silica, usually opal or 

microcrystalline forms of silica, to the degree that less than 50 percent of the 

volume of air-dry fragments will slake in water or HCl. 

Efficiency The ratio of the useful energy output of a machine or other energy-converting 

plant to the energy input. 

Endangered Species Plants or animals that are in danger of extinction through all or a significant 

portion of their ranges and that have been listed as endangered by the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service following the 

procedures outlined in the Endangered Species Act and its implementing 

regulations (50 CFR 424). (See threatened species.)

The lists of endangered species can be found in 50 CFR 17.11 (wildlife), 50 CFR 

17.12 (plants), and 50 CFR 222.23(a) (marine organisms). 

Note: Some states also list species as endangered. Thus, in certain cases a state 

definition would also be appropriate.

Enhanced 

Geothermal Systems

Rock fracturing, water injection, and water circulation technologies to sweep heat 

from the unproductive areas of existing geothermal fields or new fields lacking 

sufficient production capacity. 

Environmental 

Assessment (EA)

A concise public document that a Federal agency prepares under the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to provide sufficient evidence and analysis to 

determine whether a proposed agency action would require preparation of an 

environmental impact statement (EIS) or a finding of no significant impact. 

A Federal agency may also prepare an EA to aid its compliance with NEPA when 

no EIS is necessary or to facilitate preparation of an EIS when one is necessary.

An EA must include brief discussions of the need for the proposal, alternatives, 

environmental impacts of the proposed action and alternatives, and a list of 

agencies and persons consulted. [See finding of no significant impact, 

environmental impact statement, and National Environmental Policy Act.]

Environmental 

Justice

The fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, 

color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, 
and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. Fair treatment 

means that no group of people, including racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic groups, 

should bear a disproportionate share of the negative environmental consequences 

resulting from industrial, municipal, and commercial operations or the execution 

of Federal, state, local, and tribal programs and policies. 

Executive Order 12898 directs federal agencies to make achieving environmental 

justice part of their missions by identifying and addressing disproportionately high 

and adverse effects of agency programs, policies, and activities on minority and 

low-income populations. (See minority population and low-income population.)

Ephemeral Lasting a very short time. Often used to define a short lived stream.

Epicenter The location at the earth’s surface which is centrally located above the seismic 

center of an earthquake movement.

Evaporate The phase change of a liquid to a gas whereby the volume of liquid is reduced due 

to loss to the atmosphere.

Evapotranspiration The combined loss of water from a given area, and during a specified period of 

time, by evaporation from the soil surface and by transpiration from plants.

Facies A part of rock or group of rocks that differs from the whole formation (as in 

composition, age, or fossil content).

Fault A fracture or fracture zone in the Earth's crust along which slippage of adjacent 

Earth material has occurred at some time. 

Flash Stream Steam produced when the pressure on a geothermal liquid is reduced. Also called 

flashing. 

Fluvial The deposition of material by moving water.

Square-Foot An English unit of measurement used to define area. 1 ft 2 = 0.093 m2.

Fumarole A vent or hole in the Earth's surface, usually in a volcanic region, from which 

steam, gaseous vapors, or hot gases issue. 

Geothermal Of or relating to the Earth's interior heat. 

Geothermal Energy The Earth's interior heat made available to man by extracting it from hot water or 

rocks.

Geothermal Fluid Fluid pumped from the ground to be used in an application where potable water is 

not achievable. Often there are high total dissolved solids in geothermal fluid.

Geothermal 

Gradient

The rate of temperature increase in the Earth as a function of depth. Temperature 

increases an average of 1° Fahrenheit for every 75 feet in descent. 

Geothermal Heat 

Pumps

Devices that take advantage of the relatively constant temperature of the Earth's 

interior, using it as a source and sink of heat for both heating and cooling. When 

cooling, heat is extracted from the space and dissipated into the Earth; when 

heating, heat is extracted from the Earth and pumped into the space. 

Geyser A spring that shoots jets of hot water and steam into the air. 
Geysers, The A large geothermal steam field located north of San Francisco. 

Graben A block of the earth’s crust separated by faults from adjacent relatively lifted 

blocks (horsts).

Groundwater Water below the ground surface in a zone of saturation.

Heat Flow Movement of heat from within the Earth to the surface, where it is dissipated into 

the atmosphere, surface water, and space by radiation. 

Hectare A measure of area equal to 10,000 square meters or 2.47 acres.

Horst A block of the earth’s crust separated by faults from adjacent relatively depressed 

blocks (grabens).

Hydrothermal 

Resources

Underground systems of hot water and/or steam.

Igneous A type of rock that is formed from by the solidification of intrusive or extrusive 

magma.

Indurated The process of hardening.

Inholdings Ownership of land partially or completely contained within a land area owned or 

managed by another.

Injection The process of returning spent geothermal fluids to the subsurface. Sometimes 

referred to as reinjection. 

Intermittent Occurring occasionally. Not constant.

Intermontane Situated between mountains.

KGRA Known Geothermal Resource Area. A region identified by the U.S. Geological 

Survey as containing geothermal resources. 

Kilowatt A unit of electric power equal to 1,000 watts. Abbreviated kW. 

Kilowatt-Hour The energy represented by 1 kilowatt of power consumed for a period of 1 hour, 

equal to 3,413 BTU’s. Abbreviated kWh. 

Load The simultaneous demand of all customers required at any specified point in an 

electric power system.

Low-Income 

Population

Low-income populations, defined in terms of Bureau of the Census annual 

statistical poverty levels (Current Population Reports, Series P-60 on Income and 

Poverty), may consist of groups or individuals who live in geographic proximity to 

one another or who are geographically dispersed or transient (such as migrant 

workers or Native Americans), where either type of group experiences common 

conditions of environmental exposure or effect. (See environmental justice and 

minority population.)

Magma Molten rock within the Earth, from which igneous rock is formed by cooling. 
Magnitude A number representing the intrinsic or apparent intensity of an earthquake on a 

logarithmic scale.

Mantle The Earth's inner layer of molten rock, lying beneath the Earth's crust and above 

the Earth's core of liquid iron and nickel.

Megawatt A unit of electrical measurement equal to 1,000 kilowatts.

Metamorphic A type of rock formed by recrystalization of an existing rock either by heat or by 

pressure.

Meteorological Of relating to the atmosphere and weather.

Meter A unit of metric measurement used to define distance. 1 meter = 3.3 feet.

Minority Population Minority populations exist where either: (a) the minority population of the affected 

area exceeds 50 percent or (b) the minority population percentage of the affected 

area is meaningfully greater than in the general population or other appropriate 

unit of geographic analysis (such as a governing body's jurisdiction, a 

neighborhood, census tract, or other similar unit). “Minority” refers to individuals 

who are members of the following population groups: American Indian or Alaskan 

Native; Asian or Pacific Islander; Black, not of Hispanic origin; or Hispanic. 

“Minority populations” include either a single minority group or the total of all 

minority persons in the affected area. They may consist of groups of individuals 

living in geographic proximity to one another or a geographically 

dispersed/transient set of individuals (such as migrant workers or Native 

Americans), where either type of group experiences common conditions of 

environmental exposure or effect. (See environmental justice and low-income 

population.)

National 

Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA)

NEPA is the basic national charter for protection of the environment. It establishes 

policy, sets goals (in Section 101), and provides means (in Section 102) for 

carrying out the policy. Section 102(2) contains “action-forcing” provisions to 

ensure that Federal agencies follow the letter and spirit of the Act. For major 

Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, 

Section 102(2)(C) of NEPA requires Federal agencies to prepare a detailed 

statement that includes the environmental impacts of the proposed action and other 

specified information.

Normal Fault A fault in which the hanging wall has been displaced downward in relation to the 

footwall. 

Orogeny The process of mountain building involving non-uniform movement of faults and 

plates comprising the lithosphere, usually associated with plate tectonics.

Particulate Matter Any finely divided solid or liquid material, other than uncombined (i.e., pure) 

water. A subscript denotes the upper limit of the diameter of particles included. 

Thus, PM10 includes only those particles equal to or less than 10 micrometers 

(0.0004 inch) in diameter; PM2.5 includes only those particles equal to or less than 

2.5 micrometers (0.0001 inch) in diameter.

Peaking Plants Electricity generating plants that are operated to meet the peak or maximum load 

on the system. The cost of energy from such plants is usually higher than from 

baseload plants. 
Perennial Year long.

Permeability The capacity of a substance (such as rock) to transmit a fluid. The degree of 

permeability depends on the number, size, and shape of the pores and/or fractures 

in the rock and their interconnections. It is measured by the time it takes a fluid of 

standard viscosity to move a given distance. The unit of permeability is the Darcy.

pH A unit of measurement depicting the reactivity of a substance. A pH below 7.0 is 

acidic, while a pH above 7.0 is basic or alkaline. 7.0 is neutral.

Physiographic A conjunction of physical geography used to define distinct demarcations of land. 

A region all parts of which are similar in geologic structure and climate and which 

has consequently had a unified geomorphic history. A region whose pattern of 

relief features or landforms differs significantly from that of adjacent regions. 

Piedmont The eroded flank of a mountain that forms a curtain of debris at the toe slope.

Plate Tectonics A theory of global-scale dynamics involving the movement of many rigid plates of 

the Earth's crust. Tectonic activity is evident along the margins of the plates where 

buckling, grinding, faulting, and volcanism occur as the plates are propelled by the 

forces of deep-seated mantle convection currents. Geothermal resources are often 

associated with tectonic activity, since it allows groundwater to come in contact 

with deep subsurface heat sources. 

Pleistocene A period in geologic time generally associated with the ice age.

Plume The elongated volume of contaminated water or air originating at a pollutant 

source such as an outlet pipe or a smokestack. A plume eventually diffuses into a 

larger volume of less contaminated material as it is transported away from the 

source.

Plutonic Bodies A typically large mass of intrusive igneous rock.

 

Pluvial Originally a term used to describe mesic conditions; has come to be commonly 

used to describe Pleistocene lakes.

Porosity The ratio of the aggregate volume of pore spaces in rock or soil to its total volume, 

usually stated as a percent.

Pyroclastic Formed by or involving fragmentation as a result of volcanic or igneous action.

Relative Humidity The percent saturation of water vapor in a given air mass relative to what the air 

mass is capable of holding. Relative humidity is based on temperature whereby 

the warmer an air mass becomes, the greater amount of water vapor it is capable of 

storing. If an air mass cools, the percent saturation relative to the cooling air 

masses storage capacity will increase up to 100 % (dew point), then condensation 

of the vapor will occur.

Relict A relief feature or rock remaining after other parts have disappeared.

Reservoir A natural surface or underground container of liquids, such as water or steam (or, 

in the petroleum context, oil or gas). 

Salinity A measure of the quantity or concentration of dissolved salts in water.
Scoping An early and open process for determining the scope of issues to be addressed in 

an environmental impact statement (EIS or EA) and for identifying the significant 

issues related to a proposed action.

Sedimentary A type of rock that is formed by the compaction and compression of detritus.

Seismic Of, subject to, or caused by an earthquake.

Semiconfined Partially bounded.

Sheetflow The action of water flowing in a sheet-like manner rather than channelized.

Sheetwash See Sheetflow.

Subbasin A basin that is wholly encapsulated within a larger basin.

Subsidence A sinking of an area of the Earth's crust due to fluid withdrawal and pressure 

decline. 

Surface Water All bodies of water on the surface of the earth and open to the atmosphere, such as 

rivers, lakes, reservoirs, ponds, seas, and estuaries.

Surplus Excess.

TDS Total dissolved solids. Used to describe the amount of solid materials in water.

Tectonic The action of land formation due to geological and structural catalysts.

Temperature 

Inversion

The atmospheric process of warm air capping cool air below it resulting in a 

highly stable atmosphere and a lack of vertical air circulation. Often times, 

temperature inversions are associated with high levels of atmospheric pollution 

and typically are not displaced until the arrival of the next storm system.

Thermal Gradient The rate of increase or decrease in the Earth's temperature relative to depth.

Threatened Species Any plants or animals that are likely to become endangered species within the 

foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of their ranges and which 

have been listed as threatened by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the 

National Marine Fisheries Service following the procedures set out in the 

Endangered Species Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 424). (See 

endangered species.)

The lists of threatened species can be found at 50 CFR 17.11 (wildlife), 17.12 

(plants), and 227.4 (marine organisms). 

Note: Some states also list species as threatened. Thus, in certain cases a state 

definition would also be appropriate.

Topographic Relief The existence and character of land height differences from one location to 

another.

Transmission Line Structures and conductors that carry bulk supplies of electrical energy from 

power-generating units. 

Transmissivity The ability for a media to transmit a substance from one location to another.
Tuff A rock composed of the finer kinds of volcanic detritus usually fused together by 

heat.

Turbine A bladed, rotating engine activated by the reaction or impulse, or both, of a 

directed current of fluid. In electric power applications, such as geothermal plants, 

the turbine is attached to and spins a generator to produce electricity.

Unconfined Without bounds.

Unconsolidated Lacking internal strength and firmness.

Vapor -Dominated A geothermal reservoir system in which subsurface pressures are controlled by 

vapor rather than by liquid. Sometimes referred to as a dry-steam reservoir.

Well Logging Assessing the geologic, engineering, and physical properties and characteristics of 

geothermal reservoirs with instruments placed in the wellbore.

Wetlands Those areas that are inundated by surface or groundwater with a frequency 

sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do or would support, a 

prevalence of vegetative or aquatic life that requires saturated or seasonally 

saturated soil conditions for growth and reproduction. Wetlands generally include 

swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas (e.g., sloughs, potholes, wet meadows, 

river overflow areas, mudflats, natural ponds).

Jurisdictional wetlands are those wetlands protected by the Clean Water Act. 

They must have a minimum of one positive wetland indicator from each parameter

(i.e., vegetation, soil, and hydrology). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers requires 

a permit to fill or dredge jurisdictional wetlands.

APPENDIX B





APPENDIX C

Enhanced Geothermal Systems AmeriCulture, Inc.

Description of Flow Enhancement Technologies. In the petroleum industry, 

acidization is a treatment often used to increase reservoir permeability in

carbonate rocks, and/or to remove near-wellbore drilling damage. An acidic 

fluid, typically a solution of hydrochloric acid, is pumped into an isolated

portion of the wellbore to partially dissolve and open up new or existing

fractures, or to enhance the near-wellbore permeability. The acidization

work associated with the development of our EGS reservoir in carbonate 

rocks will be done by an experienced oilfield service company (Halliburton or 

equivalent) and should provide an initial indication of the potential for

increasing the natural flow of this deeper geothermal zone. It will be carried 

out in our first (characterization) wellbore at depths between 1500-2100 ft, a 

region believed to consist of porous and fractured limestone mixed with other 

rock types. Prior to conducting the acidization work (and subsequent

hydraulic fracturing), cores obtained from the continuously cored interval

from 1500 to 2100 ft will be examined to provide assurance that the rocks 

within this target interval can be developed into a suitably productive

reservoir using EGS techniques, and more specifically that the planned

acidization treatment will be successful in enhancing the formation

permeability. 

Hydraulic stimulation (fracturing) will also be employed to improve the lateral 

permeability of the reservoir interval between 1500 to 2100 feet. The

objective is to better connect the production well – through the interval of 

vuggy and fractured limestone -- to the natural system of near-vertical faults 

and fractures occurring in this region that provide the principal conduits for 

the upward flow of hot geofluid. Hydraulic fracturing has been employed to a 

limited extent in the conventional (i.e., hydrothermal) geothermal industry in 

the past, but concerns about impairing the productivity of the naturally

fractured reservoirs by creating leakage paths or direct short circuit paths 

from injection to production wells have always dominated decisions

regarding the extent to which this method of stimulation has been used. 

Prior to commencing hydraulic fracturing operations, in order to preclude

any degradation to the existing shallow geothermal system, we will carefully 

case and cement a string of surface casing through the current fractured

rhyolite producing interval at about 300 feet, and extending beyond this

interval to a final depth of 600 feet. We will then conduct hydraulic

fracturing operations at pressures higher than those typical of commercial

geothermal operations to date. Our team possesses considerable expertise in 

high-pressure hydraulic fracturing as a result of direct experience with hot 

dry rock (HDR) fracturing operations in the US and elsewhere. 

Extracted from AmeriCulture, Inc. Internal Document
Enhanced Geothermal Systems AmeriCulture, Inc.

Our overall plan is to develop a vertical EGS system with the cooled geofluid 

injected into a deeper region of competent limestone, capturing heat from the 

surrounding rock as it flows upward through the induced system of hydraulic 

fractures toward the principal reservoir interval between 1500 and 2100 feet, 

then mixing with the upwelling geofluid also flowing into this interval. This in 

not unlike the operation of the current HDR project at Soultz (the European 

Community HDR project at Soultz-sous-Forets in France), where the cooled

geofluid is returned to the reservoir to mix with the naturally occurring hot 

fluids before production at the surface under the action of a submersible pump. 

(At Soultz, the injection rate is equal to the production rate, but tracer testing

indicates that only a small portion of the reinjected fluid is returned to the

surface at any one time.).

Experience in the US, Japan and Europe, where high-pressure hydraulic

fracturing has been employed to enhance natural geofluid productivity in

conjunction with numerous HDR [or more properly, hot wet rock (HWR)

projects], indicates that the induced fracture systems almost always develop in 

near-vertical directions. For this reason, the relatively small horizontal

separation between our two wellbores should not be a disadvantage, since a 

near-vertical system of open hydraulic fractures should adequately connect the 

deep injection well to the production well through the intervening vuggy

limestone interval, with the injected fluid considerably augmented by the

natural upward flow of hot geofluid in nearby natural faults and fractures. To 

gain the fullest possible understanding of our fracture-enhanced system, we 

will utilize microseismic monitoring to follow the course of our fracturing

operations and employ tracer testing during the initial flow testing of our

completed system. 

Operation of the EGS System. During circulation, pressure will be maintained 

at levels high enough to inject all of the spent geofluid. To a degree, the

required pressure will be dependent on the specific characteristics of the

fracture system, but our experience indicates that it should be on the order of 

1,000 psi or less for a system at this depth. Experience at HDR sites around the 

world further indicates that pressure-propped fracture systems are in a

constant state of flux as circulation proceeds, with cooler pathways closing off 

and new pathways developing. We expect this to be the case for our system 

and will confirm that fact by periodic tracer testing. We thus anticipate that 

our system will be a true "heat mining" operation with our recirculated fluid

drawing thermal energy from portions of the hot rock in the reservoir that

would not be accessible to geothermal fluids under naturally existing pressure 

and flow conditions. We will further employ a downhole pump after the manner 

Extracted from AmeriCulture, Inc. Internal Document
Enhanced Geothermal Systems AmeriCulture, Inc.

of the European HDR Project currently underway at Soultz in northeastern 

France to enhance our geofluid production rate to reach the required

950,000 pounds of fluid per hour (about 1900 gpm at ambient temperatures) 

for our power plant feed. Our water will be rejected from the plant at 200°F. 

About 10% of the produced geofluid will be lost to the atmosphere via the 

cooling towers of the power plant. The remaining 90% will be used for

thermal applications in the AmeriCulture fish-rearing facility after being

rejected from the power plant and prior to reinjection into the reservoir. 

Based on previous experience with this reservoir and recent flow testing

described below, we anticipate the net water withdrawal of about 200 gpm 

will be well within the long-term sustainable limits of productivity for this 

reservoir. 

The Power Plant. The geothermal resource that is presently available at the 

AmeriCulture site is 232°F, but the goal of our EGS project is to achieve 

temperatures of 300°F. In preparing this project plant, we have therefore 

looked at power plant performance over a resource temperature range of 230 

to 300°F.

Extracted from AmeriCulture, Inc. Internal Document

300 Multiple Choices

Multiple Choices

The document name you requested (/nepa_documents/ea/EA1396/feaappendix-D.pdf) 

could not be found on this server. However, we found documents with names similar to the one you 

requested.

Available documents: 

● /nepa_documents/ea/EA1396/FEAAPPENDIX-B.pdf (mistyped character) 

● /nepa_documents/ea/EA1396/FEAAPPENDIX-C.pdf (mistyped character) 

● /nepa_documents/ea/EA1396/FEAAPPENDIX-A.pdf (mistyped character) 

http://o.nepa.energy.gov/nepa_documents/ea/EA1396/feaappendix-D.pdf8/8/2011 4:17:38 PM