MISSION STATEMENT

It is the mission of the Bureau of Land Managment to sustain the health, diversity, 

and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and 

future generations.

BLM/WY/PL-07/031+1320
August 22, 2007

Abstract 

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

EAGLE BUTTE WEST LBA TRACT 

CAMPBELL COUNTY, WYOMING

Lead Agency: USDI Bureau of Land Management, Casper Field Office, 

Casper, WY 

Cooperating Agencies: USDI Office of Surface Mining Reclamation & Enforcement 

Western Region, Denver, CO 

 Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality 

 Land Quality & Air Quality Divisions, Cheyenne, WY 

 Wyoming State Planning Office, Cheyenne, WY 

 Wyoming Department of Transportation, Sheridan & 

Cheyenne, WY 

 Campbell County Board of Commissioners, Gillette, WY 

Abstract: This Final Environment Impact Statement (EIS) assesses the environmental 

consequences of decisions to hold a competitive, sealed-bid sale and issue a lease for a tract of 

federal coal located adjacent to an existing surface coal mine in Campbell County, Wyoming, 

subject to standard and special lease stipulations. The Eagle Butte West Lease by Application 

(LBA) Tract, as applied for by Foundation Coal West, includes approximately 1,397.64 acres 

containing approximately 238 million tons of in-place Federal coal. Foundation Coal West, the 

operator of the adjacent Eagle Butte Mine, proposes to mine the tract as a maintenance lease for 

the existing mine, if a lease sale is held and they acquire the lease. 

This Final EIS describes the physical, biological, cultural, historic, and socioeconomic resources in 

and around the existing mine and the LBA tract. The alternatives in the Final EIS consider the 

impacts of leasing the tract as it was applied for; leasing a reconfigured tract in order to avoid 

bypassing Federal coal or to increase competitive interest in the tract, and not leasing the tract. 

The focus for the impact analysis was based upon resource issues and concerns identified during 

previous coal leasing analyses and public scoping conducted for this lease application. Potential 

concerns related to development include impacts to groundwater, air quality, wildlife, and nearby 

roads, occupied residences, a school and an airport. Cumulative impacts related to ongoing 

surface coal mining and other proposed development in the Powder River Basin of Wyoming are 

also of potential concern. 

This Final EIS, in compliance with Section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (as amended), 

identifies any endangered or threatened species which are likely to be affected by the Proposed 

Action. 

The Final EIS is open for a 30-day review period beginning on the date that the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency publishes the Notice of Availability in the Federal Register. Comments that are 

postmarked or received on or before the end of the 30-day review period will be considered in the 

preparation of the Record of Decision. 

For Further Information Contact: 

Nancy Doelger 

Bureau of Land Management, Casper Field Office 

2987 Prospector Drive 

Casper, WY 82604 

(307) 261-7627 

 Email: casper_wymail@blm.gov (Nancy Doelger in the subject line) 
EAGLE BUTTE WEST COAL LEASE APPLICATION 

FINAL ENVIROMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

Prepared by 

WWC Engineering 

Sheridan, Wyoming

Under the Direction of 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Bureau of Land Management 

Casper Field Office 

Casper, Wyoming

and 

Cooperating Agencies 

U.S. Department of Interior 

Office of Surface Mining 

Reclamation and Enforcement 

Denver, Colorado

Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality 

Land Quality Division & 

Air Quality Division 

Cheyenne, Wyoming

Wyoming State Planning Office 

Cheyenne, Wyoming

Wyoming Department of Transportation 

Sheridan & Cheyenne, Wyoming 

Campbell County Board of Commissioners 

Gillette, Wyoming 

August 2007 
Executive Summary 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application ES-1 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

On December 28, 2001, RAG1 filed an application with the BLM for federal coal 

reserves in a tract located west of and immediately adjacent to the Eagle Butte 

Mine in Campbell County, Wyoming, approximately three miles north of 

Gillette, Wyoming (Figures ES-1 and ES-2). The application, which was 

assigned case file number WYW155132, is referred to as the Eagle Butte West 

coal lease application. RAG submitted a modification to the application to the 

BLM, effective October 20, 2003, which decreased the size of the lease 

application area and increased the coal volume. As currently applied for, the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract includes approximately 1,397.64 acres and FCW 

estimates that it includes 238 million tons of mineable federal coal reserves. 

In August 2004, RAG finalized the sale of the Eagle Butte Mine to FCW, a 

directly held subsidiary of Foundation Coal Corporation. In this EIS, the 

applicant for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is referred to as FCW. 

This lease application was reviewed by Division of Mineral and Lands at the 

BLM Wyoming State Office, who determined that the application and the lands 

involved met the requirements of the regulations governing coal leasing on 

application at 43 CFR 3425.1. The PRRCT reviewed this lease application at 

public meetings held on May 30, 2002, in Casper, Wyoming and on April 27, 

2005, in Gillette, Wyoming. At those meetings, the PRRCT recommended that 

the BLM continue to process the lease application. 

In order to process an LBA, the BLM must evaluate the quantity, quality, 

maximum economic recovery, and fair market value of the federal coal and 

fulfill the requirements of the NEPA by evaluating the environmental 

consequences of leasing the federal coal. 

To evaluate the environmental impacts of leasing the coal, the BLM must 

prepare an EA or an EIS to evaluate the site-specific and cumulative 

environmental and socioeconomic impacts of leasing and developing the federal 

coal in the application area. The BLM made a decision to prepare an EIS for 

this lease application. BLM does not authorize mining by issuing a lease for 

federal coal, but the impacts of mining the coal are considered in this EIS 

because it is a logical consequence of issuing a maintenance lease to an 

existing mine. 

The EPA published a notice announcing the availability of the Draft EIS in the 

Federal Register on October 20, 2006. BLM published a Notice of Availability 

and Notice of Public Hearing in the Federal Register, also on October 20, 2006. 

The 60-day comment period on the Draft EIS ended on December 19, 2006. 

The public hearing was held on November 14, 2006, in Gillette, Wyoming. The 

applicant and one member of the public made statements during the hearing 

and eight written comments were received on the Draft EIS. The written 

comments are included, with agency responses, as Appendix I of the Final EIS.

1 Refer to page xv for a list of abbreviations and acronyms used in this document. 
Maysdorf

EAGLE BUTTE WEST

WRIGHT

JUNCTION

Converse County

Campbell County Weston County

Niobrara County

To Douglas 46 Miles

RENO

 LEGEND

GILLETTE

Weston County Crook County

ROZET

Campbell County

MOORCROFT

Johnson CountyCampbell County

To Buffalo 38 Miles

North Antelope Rochelle Mine

To Newcastle 29 Miles

Belle Ayr North

Belle Ayr Mine

Dry Fork Mine

Wyodak Mine

Rawhide Mine

Caballo Mine

Cordero Rojo Mine

Caballo Rojo Mine

Cordero Mine

Coal Creek Mine

Buckskin Mine

Eagle Butte Mine

Antelope Mine

Black Thunder Mine

Jacobs Ranch Mine

West Antelope II

Caballo West

SCALE: 1"= 10 MILES

West Coal Creek

West

Jacobs

Ranch

Hay Creek II

Maysdorf II

Hilight Field

West Hilight

Porcupine

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

Executive Summary

ES-2 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application
T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

16

1

2 1

11

3

10

4

9

5

8

6

7

12

13

24

25

36

11

14

23

26

35

10

15

22

27

34

9

21

28

33

8

17

20

29

32

7

18

19

30

31

12

13

24

25

36

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

U.S. Highway 14-16

U.S. Highway 14-16

State Highway 59

LEGEND

0 2500 5000 10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Eagle Butte Mine Permit Boundary

Existing Eagle Butte Mine Federal Coal Leases

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as Applied for

Additional Area Evaluated Under Alternative 1

City of Gillette Buffer Zone

Figure ES-2. Eagle Butte West LBA Tract Alternatives.

Executive Summary

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application ES-3
Executive Summary 

ES-4 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

The BLM and EPA will each publish a notice of availability of the Final EIS in 

the Federal Register. After a 30-day availability period, the BLM will make a 

decision to hold or not to hold a competitive sealed-bid lease sale for the tract. 

The LBA sale process is, by law and regulation, an open, public, competitive 

sealed-bid process. Bidding at a potential sale would be open to any qualified 

bidder. If a lease sale is held for this LBA tract, the applicant (FCW) may not 

be the successful high bidder. If a lease sale is held, a federal coal lease would 

be issued to the highest bidder at the sale if a federal sale panel determines 

that the high bid at that sale meets or exceeds the fair market value of the coal 

as determined by BLM’s economic evaluation, and if the U.S. Department of 

Justice determines that there are no antitrust violations if a lease is issued to 

the high bidder at the sale. 

Cooperating agencies in the preparation of this EIS include OSM, WDEQ/LQD, 

WDEQ/AQD, WYDOT, the Campbell County Board of Commissioners, and the 

Wyoming State Policy Office. Other agencies, including OSM, will also use this 

analysis to make decisions related to leasing and mining the federal coal in this 

tract. 

Not all of the coal included in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for is 

currently considered to be mineable. Some of the coal included in the tract is 

overlain by U.S. Highway 14-16. SMCRA prohibits mining within 100 ft of the 

outside ROW line of any public road unless the appropriate public road 

authority allows the road to be relocated or closed after public notice, an 

opportunity for a public hearing, and a finding that the interests of the affected 

public and landowners will be protected [30 CFR 761.11(d)]. As a result, the 

federal coal underlying U.S. Highway 14-16, its ROW, and the associated 100 

foot buffer zone has been determined to be unsuitable for mining. FCW and 

WYDOT, the authorized agency, are working on a plan to relocate the highway. 

If the road relocation is approved, the unsuitability determination for the coal 

underlying U.S. Highway 14-16, the ROW, and the associated buffer zone could 

be reconsidered. The coal underlying the highway is included in the tract being 

considered for leasing because it could be mined if WYDOT determines that the 

road could be moved [43 CFR 3461.5(c)(2)(iii)]. If the highway is not moved, 

including these lands in the tract would allow recovery of all the mineable coal 

adjacent to and outside of the highway buffer zone and would comply with the 

coal leasing regulations, which do not allow leasing in less than 10-acre aliquot 

parts. 

A Proposed Action and two alternatives to that action are analyzed in detail in 

this EIS. 

• Proposed Action - The Proposed Action is to offer the Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract as applied for (see Figure ES-2) at a sealed-bid competitive 

coal lease sale and issue a maintenance lease to the successful bidder. 

The lease would be subject to the standard and special lease stipulations 

developed for the PRB that are listed in Appendix D of the Final EIS.
Executive Summary 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application ES-5 

The tract as applied for includes approximately 1,397.64 acres. If U.S. 

Highway 14-16 is moved, FCW estimates that the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract as applied for includes approximately 238 million tons of mineable 

coal. If Highway 14-16 is not moved, FCW estimates that the tract as 

applied for includes approximately 211 million tons of mineable coal. 

Under the Proposed Action, FCW currently estimates that average 

annual production would be 25 million tons per year. The life of the 

existing mine would be extended by eight to nine years, depending on if 

Highway 14-16 is or is not moved. Employment would be about 223 

persons. The surface of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for is 

owned by FCW. 

• Alternative 1 - Under Alternative 1, BLM would reconfigure the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract, hold a competitive coal lease sale for the lands 

included in the reconfigured tract, and issue a lease to the successful 

bidder. Alternative 1, holding a competitive coal sale for a modified tract, 

is the BLM’s Preferred Alternative. 

BLM identified a study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract in order 

to evaluate the potential that an alternate configuration of the tract 

would provide for more efficient recovery of the federal coal, increase 

competitive interest in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, and/or reduce 

the potential that some of the remaining unleased federal coal in this 

area would be bypassed in the future. The BLM study area, shown in 

Figure ES-2, includes the tract as applied for and unleased federal coal 

adjacent to the northern and southern edges of the tract as applied for. 

In accordance with the Leasing on Application regulation at 43 CFR 

3425.1-9, BLM could increase or decrease the size of the tract as applied 

for under Alternative 1. 

The BLM’s preferred tract configuration is to add approximately 30 

acres, shown in Figure ES-3, to the northeast corner of the tract as 

applied for. As shown in Figure ES-4, there are occupied residences and 

an elementary school located in the BLM study area in the north half of 

Section 20, T.51N., R.72W. Most of the coal included in BLM’s proposed 

addition to the tract would not be recoverable due to setback distances 

from the occupied dwellings and school that are required by WDEQ/LQD 

for conducting blasting operations. However, including this coal in the 

tract would potentially allow more efficient recovery of the coal up to the 

required setback distances. 

The modified tract under the BLM’s preferred tract configuration 

includes approximately 1,427.77 acres. If U.S. Highway 14-16 is moved, 

FCW estimates that the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract under the BLM’s 

preferred tract configuration includes approximately 241 million tons of 

mineable coal. If Highway 14-16 is not moved, FCW estimates that the 
T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

16

1

2 1

11

3

10

4

9

5

8

6

7

12

13

24

25

36

11

14

23

26

35

10

15

22

27

34

9

21

28

33

8

17

20

29

32

7

18

19

30

31

12

13

24

25

36

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

U.S. Highway 14-16

U.S. Highway 14-16

State Highway 59

LEGEND

0 2500 5000 10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Eagle Butte Mine Permit Boundary

Existing Eagle Butte Mine Federal Coal Leases

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as Applied for

Area Added Under BLM's Preferred

Tract Delineation for Alternative 1

City of Gillette Buffer Zone

Figure ES-3. Eagle Butte West LBA Preferred Alternative Tract Configuration.

Executive Summary

ES-6 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application
1

12 7

12

13

24

25

36

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

1

12

6

12

13

24

25

36

23

29 28 27 26

7

18

19

30

31

State Highway 59

BNSF Railroad

RAWHIDE SCHOOL

GILLETTE -

CAMPBELL

COUNTY

AIRPORT

2

11

3

4 5

35 33 34 32

16

11

14

10

15

22

9

21

8

17

20

U.S. Highway 14-16

EAGLE BUTTE

MINE OFFICE

8

9 10

U.S. Highway 14-16

State Highway 59

LEGEND

0 2500 5000 10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Eagle Butte Mine Permit Boundary

Existing Eagle Butte Mine Federal Coal Leases

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as Applied for

Single Occupied Residence

School Bus Stop

Multiple Occupied Residences, Businesses,

and Roads Exist Within this Area

(Boundaries are Approximate)

Additional Area Evaluated Under Alternative 1

Area Added Under BLM's Preferred

Tract Delineation for Alternative 1

Figure ES-4. Residences, School Bus Stops, Public Roads, and other Publicly Accessible Facilities Within

and Adjacent to the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract.

Executive Summary

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application ES-7
Executive Summary 

ES-8 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

tract under the BLM’s preferred tract configuration includes 

approximately 214 million tons of mineable coal. 

Under this alternative, the modified tract would be subject to the 

standard and special lease stipulations developed for the PRB and for 

this tract (Appendix D in the FEIS). The projected rate of production and 

employment would be similar to the Proposed Action. The life of the 

existing mine would be extended by eight to nine years, depending on if 

Highway 14-16 is or is not moved. 

 Alternative 2 - Under this alternative, the LBA tract would not be 

leased, but the existing leases at the adjacent Eagle Butte Mine would be 

developed according to the existing approved mining plan. Under the No 

Action Alternative, the Eagle Butte Mine would mine its remaining leased 

coal reserves in approximately 14 years at an average annual production 

rate of 25 million tons per year and average employment would be 223 

persons. Rejection of the lease application would not preclude an 

application to lease the tract in the future. 

The analysis in this EIS assumes that FCW would be the successful bidder on 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract if a sale is held, and that it would be mined as 

a maintenance tract for the Eagle Butte Mine. 

Tables ES-1 and ES-2 summarize estimated coal production, surface 

disturbance, and mine life for the Eagle Butte Mine. Table ES-1 summarizes 

the situation if Highway 14-16 is moved and Table ES-2 assumes that the 

highway is not moved. The environmental impacts of mining the LBA tract 

would be similar under the Proposed Action and under the BLM’s preferred 

tract configuration for Alternative 1. The following discussion assumes that 

Highway 14-16 is not moved.

Other alternatives that were considered but not analyzed in detail include 

holding a competitive coal lease sale and issuing a lease to the successful 

bidder (not the applicant) for the purpose of developing a new stand-alone 

mine, and delaying the sale of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for to 

increase the benefit to the public afforded by higher coal prices and/or to allow 

more complete recovery of the potential CBNG resources in the tract prior to 

mining. 

Critical elements of the human environment (BLM 1988) that could be affected 

by the proposed project include air quality, cultural resources, Native American 

religious concerns, T&E plant and animal species, migratory birds, hazardous 

or solid waste, water quality, wetlands/riparian zones, environmental justice, 

and invasive nonnative species. Five critical elements (areas of critical 

environmental concern, prime and unique farmland, floodplains, wild and 

scenic rivers, and wilderness) are not present in the project area and are not 

addressed further. In addition to the critical elements that are potentially 

present in the project area, the EIS discusses the status and potential effects of 
Executive Summary 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application ES-9 

Table ES-1. Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract and Eagle Butte Mine – Assuming Highway 14-16 is Moved and the Underlying Coal is Recovered.

Item 

No Action Alternative

(Existing Eagle Butte 

Mine) 

Added by 

Proposed Action 

Added by Alternative 1 

(Preferred Tract 

Configuration) 

In-Place Coal (as of 1/1/06) 374.0 mmt 238.0 mmt 243.7 mmt Mineable Coal (as of 1/1/06) 354.0 mmt 238.0 mmt 241.2 mmt Recoverable Coal (as of 1/1/06)1 340.0 mmt 228.0 mmt 231.1 mmt Coal Mined Through 2005 420.4 mmt -- -- Lease Area2 4,884.0 ac 1,397.6 ac 1,427.8 ac Total Area To Be Disturbed2 6,076.0 ac 2,460.0 ac 2,460.0 ac Permit Area2 7,471.0 ac 2,460.0 ac 2,460.0 ac Average Annual Post-2005 Coal Production 25.0 mmt 0 mmt 0 mmt Remaining Life of Mine (post-2005) 13.6 yrs 9.1 yrs 9.2 yrs Average Number of Employees 223 0 0 Total Projected State Revenues (post-2005)3 $ 384.4 million $ 293.5 – $ 373.2 million $ 297.4 – $ 378.2 million 

Total Projected Federal Revenues (post-2005)4 $ 261.6 million $ 211.1 – $ 290.9 million $ 214.0 – $ 294.8 million 

1 Assumes 96 percent recovery of mineable coal. The estimated tons of recoverable coal added under the Proposed Action and Alternative 1 are based on the assumptions that the 

coal beneath the north half of Section 20 (under Alternative 1) would not be mined, and that the coal beneath U.S. Highway 14-16 ROW and associated buffer zone would be mined.

2 The lease area includes federal coal leases only and does not include state coal within the permit boundary. The disturbed area exceeds the leased area (total federal and state) 

because of the need for highwall reduction, topsoil removal, and other mine support activities outside the lease boundaries. The permit area is larger than the leased or disturbed area to assure that all disturbed lands are within the permit boundary and to allow an easily defined legal land description.

3 Revenues to the State of Wyoming include income from severance tax, property and production taxes, sales and use taxes, and Wyoming’s share of federal royalty payments, bonus 

bids, and AML fees. State revenues are based on $5.80 per ton (projected for 8,400-Btu coal) price × amount of recoverable coal × federal royalty of 12.5 percent minus federal’s 50 percent share, plus $0.35 per ton for AML fees × amount of recoverable coal minus federal’s 50 percent share, plus bonus payment on LBA leased coal of $0.30 to $0.97 per ton (based on the range of bonus payments for the last 6 LBAs sold in 2004 and 2005) × amount of mineable coal minus federal’s 50 percent share, plus $0.023 per ton estimate for sales and use taxes × amount of recoverable coal, plus $0.26 per ton estimate for Ad Valorem taxes × amount of recoverable coal, plus $0.31 per ton estimate for severance taxes ×

amount of recoverable coal. 

4 Federal revenues are based on $5.80 per ton (projected for 8,400-Btu coal) price × amount of recoverable coal × federal royalty of 12.5 percent minus state’s 50 percent share, plus 

$0.35 per ton for AML fees × amount of recoverable coal minus state’s 50 percent share, plus $5.80 per ton (for 8,400-Btu coal) price × amount of recoverable coal × black lung tax of 4.0 percent, plus bonus payment on LBA leased coal of $0.30 to $0.97 per ton (based on the range of bonus payments for the last 6 LBAs sold in 2004 and 2005) × amount of mineable coal minus state’s 50 percent share.
Executive Summary 

 ES-10 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Table ES-2. Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract and Eagle Butte Mine – Assuming Highway 14-16 is Not Moved and the Underlying Coal is Not Recovered. 

Item 

No Action Alternative

(Existing Eagle Butte 

Mine) 

Added by 

Proposed Action 

Added by Alternative 1 

(Preferred Tract 

Configuration) 

In-Place Coal (as of 1/1/06) 374.0 mmt 238.0 mmt 243.7 mmt Mineable Coal (as of 1/1/06) 354.0 mmt 211.0 mmt 214.2 mmt Recoverable Coal (as of 1/1/06)1 340.0 mmt 203.0 mmt 206.1 mmt Coal Mined Through 2005 420.4 mmt -- -- Lease Area2 4,884.0 ac 1,397.6 ac 1,427.8 ac Total Area To Be Disturbed2 6,076.0 ac 2,395.0 ac 2,415.0 ac Permit Area2 7,471.0 ac 2,460.0 ac 2,460.0 ac Average Annual Post-2005 Coal Production 25.0 mmt 0 mmt 0 mmt Remaining Life of Mine (post-2005) 13.6 yrs 8.1 yrs 8.2 yrs Average Number of Employees 223 0 0 Total Projected State Revenues (post-2005)3 $ 384.4 million $ 261.1 - $ 331.8 million $ 264.2 - $ 336.0 million 

Total Projected Federal Revenues (post-2005)4 $ 261.6 million $ 187.9 - $ 258.5 million $ 190.7 - $ 262.5 million 

1 Assumes 96 percent recovery of mineable coal. The estimated tons of recoverable coal added under the Proposed Action and Alternative 1 are based on the assumptions that the 

north half of Section 20 (under Alternative 1) would not be mined, and the coal beneath the U.S. Highway 14-16 ROW and associated buffer zone would not be mined. 

2 The lease area includes federal coal leases only and does not include state coal within the permit boundary. The disturbed area exceeds the leased area (total federal and state) 

because of the need for highwall reduction, topsoil removal, and other mine support activities outside the lease boundaries. The permit area is larger than the leased or disturbed area to assure that all disturbed lands are within the permit boundary and to allow an easily defined legal land description.

3 Revenues to the State of Wyoming include income from severance tax, property and production taxes, sales and use taxes, and Wyoming’s share of federal royalty payments, 

bonus bids, and AML fees. State revenues are based on $5.80 per ton (projected for 8,400-Btu coal) price × amount of recoverable coal × federal royalty of 12.5 percent minus federal’s 50 percent share, plus $0.35 per ton for AML fees × amount of recoverable coal minus federal’s 50 percent share, plus bonus payment on LBA leased coal of $0.30 to $0.97 per ton (based on the range of bonus payments for the last 6 LBAs sold in 2004 and 2005) × amount of mineable coal minus federal’s 50 percent share, plus $0.023 per ton estimate for sales and use taxes × amount of recoverable coal, plus $0.26 per ton estimate for Ad Valorem taxes × amount of recoverable coal, plus $0.31 per ton estimate for severance taxes × amount of recoverable coal. 

4 Federal revenues are based on $5.80 per ton (projected for 8,400-Btu coal) price × amount of recoverable coal × federal royalty of 12.5 percent minus state’s 50 percent share, plus 

$0.35 per ton for AML fees × amount of recoverable coal minus state’s 50 percent share, plus $5.80 per ton (for 8,400-Btu coal) price × amount of recoverable coal × black lung tax of 4.0 percent, plus bonus payment on LBA leased coal of $0.30 to $0.97 per ton (based the range of bonus payments for the last 6 LBAs sold in 2004 and 2005) × amount of mineable coal minus state’s 50 percent share.
 Executive Summary 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application ES-11 

the project on topography and physiography, geology, mineral resources, soils, 

water availability and quality, AVFs, vegetation, wildlife, land use and 

recreation, paleontological resources, visual resources, noise, transportation 

resources, and socioeconomics. 

The project area is located in the PRB, a part of the Northern Great Plains that 

includes most of northeastern Wyoming. The Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is 

located in the eastern part of the PRB, in an area consisting primarily of a 

dissected rolling upland plain with low relief, broken by low red-capped buttes, 

mesas, hills, and ridges. Elevations range from about 4,240 ft to 4,560 ft 

above sea level, slopes range from flat to around 40 percent, and 73 percent of 

the surface has a slope of five percent or less. 

At the Eagle Butte Mine, there are two mineable coal seams, which are locally 

referred to as the Roland (upper seam) and Smith (lower seam). The two seams 

are separated by a shale parting of variable thickness. The mineable coal 

seams are referred to as the Anderson and Canyon, Wyodak-Anderson, and 

Wyodak coal beds at other mines in the eastern PRB. Mining would remove an 

average of 325 feet of overburden, eight feet of interburden, and 110 feet of coal 

under the Proposed Action and the BLM’s preferred tract configuration for

Alternative 1. 

The existing topography on the LBA tract would be substantially changed 

during mining. A highwall with a vertical height equal to overburden plus coal 

thickness would exist in the active pits. Following reclamation, the average 

surface elevation would be lower due to removal of the coal. The reclaimed 

land surface would approximate premining contours and the basic drainage 

network would be retained; however, the reclaimed surface would contain fewer 

and gentler topographic features. This could contribute to reduced habitat 

diversity and wildlife carrying capacity on the LBA tract. These topographic 

changes would not conflict with regional land use, and the postmining 

topography would adequately support anticipated postmining land use. 

The geology from the base of the coal to the land surface would be subject to 

considerable permanent change on the LBA tract under the Proposed Action or 

the BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1. The coal would be 

permanently removed and the replaced overburden would be a relatively 

homogeneous mixture compared to the premining layered overburden. 

Development of other minerals potentially present on the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract could not occur during mining, but could occur after mining. 

There are currently no producing conventional oil wells on the tract as applied 

for or the BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1. If any 

conventional wells are drilled prior to mining, they would have to be plugged 

and abandoned during mining but could be recompleted after mining if the 

remaining reserves justify the expense of the recompletion. 
Executive Summary 

ES-12 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Extensive development of CBNG in the Roland-Smith/Wyodak-Anderson coal 

zone has occurred in the vicinity of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, beginning 

in the late 1980s. WOGCC records show that as of May 19, 2006, 68 wells had 

been drilled for CBNG production and 19 wells were capable of producing from 

the main coal beds in the BLM study area (the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as 

applied for and the additional area evaluated under Alternative 1) (WOGCC 

2006). Extensive CBNG development has also occurred immediately north, 

west, and south of the LBA tract. There has been little recent interest in 

drilling additional wells in this area. CBNG resources that are not recovered 

prior to mining would be vented to the atmosphere and irretrievably lost when 

the coal is removed. BLM’s policy is to optimize recovery of both resources, 

ensure the public receives a reasonable return, and encourage agreements 

between lessees or use BLM authority to minimize loss of publicly owned 

resources. 

No significant or unique paleontological resources have been recorded in the 

general analysis area. 

Moderately adverse short-term impacts to air quality would be extended onto 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract during the time it is mined if a lease is issued. 

Modeling for the current Eagle Butte Mine permit predicted no exceedances of 

the annual PM10 NAAQS at a 35-mmtpy production rate and there have been 

no exceedances of the 24-hour and annual PM10 NAAQS. Figure ES-5 shows 

the maximum modeled PM10 and NOx concentrations at the Eagle Butte Mine 

for 2006. If the Eagle Butte Mine acquires and mines the Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract, the mine estimates that the average annual rate of production 

would be 25 mmtpy, and that mine life would be extended for about eight to 

nine additional years. There would be an increase in overburden thickness but 

fugitive dust emissions would be expected to remain within daily and annual 

NAAQS limits. 

Low-lying, gaseous orange clouds containing NOx that can be transported by 

wind sometimes form from overburden blasting prior to coal removal. 

Exposure to NOx can cause adverse health effects. EPA has expressed 

concerns that NOx levels in some blasting clouds may be sufficiently high at 

times to cause human health effects. 

Prior to 2001, WDEQ received reports of public exposure to blasting clouds 

from blasts at the Eagle Butte Mine from residents in the area of the mine 

(Emme 2007). Nearby residents brought concerns about blasting practices at 

the Eagle Butte Mine to the EQC several times, which resulted in the inclusion 

of conditions regulating blasting operations in the mine’s WDEQ/LQD mine 

permit. Control measures to limit public exposure to NO2 from blasting are in 

place and being implemented at the Eagle Butte Mine. Since these control 

measures were implemented, WDEQ/LQD has received one report of an 

orange-tinged blasting cloud at the mine, but no visible NOx fumes left the 

mine permit area during that incident (Emme 2007). 
T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

16

1

2

4 3 6 5 6

7

18

19

30

31

12

13

24

25

36

11

14

23

26

35

10

15

22

27

34

9

21

28

33

8

17

20

29

32

7

18

19

30

31

R. 72 W.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

U.S. Highway 14-16

U.S. Highway 14-16

State Highway 59

BNSF Railroad

PM10=34.9 μg/m3

NOx=35.3 μg/m3

R. 72 W.

LEGEND

2500 5000 10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Existing Eagle Butte Mine

Federal Coal Leases

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract

as Applied for

Receptor Location

Area Source

Ambient Air Boundary

Haul Roads

0

Additional Area Evaluated Under Alternative 1

Area Added Under BLM's Preferred

Tract Delineation for Alternative 1

Figure ES-5. Maximum Modeled PM10 and NOX

 Concentrations at the Eagle Butte Mine Ambient Air

Boundary for the Year 2006.

Executive Summary

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application ES-13
Executive Summary 

ES-14 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Public exposure to emissions caused by surface mining operations is most 

likely to affect travelers on publicly accessible roads and highways that pass 

through and near the area of the mining operations and occupants of dwellings 

or businesses near the area of mining operations. The Eagle Butte Mine is 

three miles north of the City of Gillette, and there are occupied residences, 

school bus stops, U.S. Highway 14-16 and other public roads, Rawhide 

Elementary School, the Gillette-Campbell County Airport, and other publiclyaccessible facilities in the vicinity of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (Figure 

ES-4). The density of residences and publicly-accessible businesses increases 

to the south, toward Gillette. 

Mining would disturb the coal aquifer and the aquifers in the overburden above 

the coal within the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. The coal aquifer and any 

water-bearing strata in the overburden would be removed and replaced with 

unconsolidated backfill. The area of drawdown in the areally-continuous coal 

aquifer related to mining operations at the Eagle Butte Mine would be expected 

to increase roughly in proportion to the increase in area affected by mining. 

Figure ES-6 shows the projected life-of-mine drawdown that would result from 

currently approved mining on the existing leases with the addition of the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract. The area of drawdown in the discontinuous overburden 

aquifers would be smaller. The data available indicate that, after reclamation, 

the hydraulic properties of the backfill would be comparable to the properties 

of the premining overburden and coal aquifers. TDS levels in groundwater 

from the backfill could initially be expected to be higher than in the premining 

overburden and coal aquifers, but would be expected to meet Wyoming Class III 

standards for use as livestock water. 

Mining would not directly disturb aquifers below the coal. FCW has two water 

supply wells completed in aquifers below the coal and these wells would be 

used to supply water for a longer period of time if the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract is leased. 

Little Rawhide Creek and its tributary, Prong Draw, drain the Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract. Little Rawhide Creek is currently diverted from its natural channel 

as a result of mining within the existing Eagle Butte Mine permit area. The 

creek would also be diverted during mining of the LBA tract, but would be 

restored during reclamation. After mining and reclamation are complete, 

surface water flow, quality, and sediment discharge would approximate 

premining conditions. 

Surface water quality varies with flow and/or season. Changes in runoff 

characteristics and sediment discharges would occur during mining of the LBA 

tract, and erosion rates could reach high values on the disturbed areas as a 

result of vegetation removal. However, state and federal regulations require 

that surface runoff from mined lands be treated to meet effluent standards, so 

sediment would be deposited in ponds or other sediment-control devices within 

the mine permit area. 

Executive Summary 

ES-16 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

The reach of Little Rawhide Creek within the LBA tract has been investigated 

for the presence of AVFs and has been declared an AVF non-significant to 

farming by the WDEQ/LQD as part of the mine permitting process for the 

purpose of recovering coal in the mine’s existing leases. Approximately 83 

acres of declared AVF lie within the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for, 

and an additional 45 acres of declared AVF lie within the additional area 

evaluated under Alternative 1. 

A preliminary wetlands inventory, based on USFWS NWI mapping and 

vegetation mapping in the field, was conducted in 2004. The wetland analysis 

area includes the BLM study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (the tract 

as applied for and the additional lands evaluated under Alternative 1) and a 1⁄4-

mile disturbance buffer around the tract sufficient to mine and reclaim the 

tract as a part of the existing Eagle Butte Mine operation. Within the entire 

wetland analysis area, the preliminary inventory identified approximately 37.5 

acres of jurisdictional wetlands that occur along the watercourses of Little 

Rawhide Creek and its tributaries. Existing wetlands located in the LBA tract 

would be destroyed by mining operations. Jurisdictional wetlands that are 

disturbed by mining must be replaced during the reclamation process. 

Consequences to soil resources from mining the LBA tract would include 

changes in the physical, biological, and chemical properties. Following 

reclamation, the soils would be unlike premining soils in texture, structure, 

color, accumulation of clays, organic matter, microbial populations, and 

chemical composition. The replaced topsoil would be more uniform in type, 

thickness, and texture. It would be adequate in quantity and quality to 

support planned postmining land uses (i.e., wildlife habitat and rangeland). 

The predominant vegetation types, in terms of total acres of occurrence in the 

vegetation analysis area are agricultural pasture 1 (36.1 percent), sagebrush 

grassland (27.6 percent), and agricultural pasture 2 (11.9 percent). Common 

plant species on these types include crested wheatgrass, smooth brome, 

needleandthread, threadleaf sedge, Sandberg bluegrass, western wheatgrass, 

cheatgrass brome, silver sagebrush, and Wyoming big sagebrush. Mining 

would progressively remove this native vegetation. Reclamation and 

revegetation of mined areas would occur contemporaneously with mining on 

adjacent lands. Reestablished vegetation would be dominated by species 

mandated in the reclamation seed mixtures, which are approved by the 

WDEQ/LQD. The majority of these species would be native to the LBA tract. 

Initially, the reclaimed land would be dominated by grassland vegetation, 

which would be less diverse than the premining vegetation. Estimates for the 

time it would take to restore sagebrush to premining density levels range from 

20 to 100 years. An indirect long-term impact associated with this vegetative 

change would potentially be a decrease in available habitat for shrub 

dependent species. However, a diverse, productive, and permanent vegetative 

cover would be established on the LBA tract within about 10 years following 

reclamation, prior to release of the final reclamation bond. The decrease in 

plant diversity would not seriously affect the potential productivity of the 
 Executive Summary 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application ES-17 

reclaimed areas, and the proposed postmining land uses (wildlife habitat and 

rangeland) should be achieved even with the changes in vegetation composition 

and diversity. The reclamation plans for the LBA tract would also include steps 

to control invasion by weedy (invasive, nonnative) plant species. 

Direct impacts of surface coal mining on wildlife occur during mining and are 

short term. They include road kills by mine-related traffic, direct losses of less 

mobile wildlife species, restrictions on wildlife movement created by fences, 

spoil piles and pits, displacement of wildlife from existing habitat in areas of 

active mining (including abandonment of nests or nesting and breeding habitat 

for birds), increased competition between animals in areas adjacent to mining 

operations, and increased noise, dust, and human presence. Habitat for 

aquatic species would also be lost during mining operations. Indirect impacts 

are longer term and include alterations in topography and vegetative cover 

following reclamation, which may decrease wildlife carrying capacity and 

habitat diversity. The Eagle Butte West LBA Tract does not include any unique 

or crucial big game habitat, and habitat disturbance would be incremental, 

with reclamation progressing as new disturbance occurs. There are two sage 

grouse leks within the wildlife study area that have been active within the last 

five years. In the long term, following reclamation, carrying capacity and 

habitat diversity may be reduced due to gentler topography, less diverse 

vegetative cover, and reduction in sagebrush density. 

At this time, T&E plant and animal species that could be present on the tract 

include the Ute ladies’-tresses orchid, bald eagle, and black-footed ferret. 

However, the USFWS published a notice in the Federal Register removing the 

bald eagle in the lower 48 states from the list of endangered and threatened 

wildlife on July 9, 2007. The effective date for this action will be August 8, 

2007. The bald eagle will continue to be protected under the Bald and Golden 

Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act after delisting. 

Areas of suitable habitat for the Ute ladies’-tresses orchid within the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract and adjacent study area were surveyed by Habitat 

Management, Inc. in August and September 2004 and in August 2005, and no 

individuals were located. Bald eagles are relatively common winter residents 

and migrants in northeastern Wyoming’s PRB. During 2004, qualified 

biologists with TWC conducted searches for bald eagle winter roosts and 

potential nesting habitat within the BLM study area for the LBA tract (the tract 

as applied for and the additional area evaluated under Alternative 1) and a onemile perimeter. No bald eagles, roosts, or potential nesting habitat were 

observed at that time. Over time, individual eagles have infrequently been seen 

during winter foraging within the one-mile survey area or perched in the 

cottonwood trees on the tract. Bald eagle foraging habitat would be lost on the 

tract during mining and before final reclamation. The black-footed ferret is a 

nocturnally active mammal that depends almost entirely upon the prairie dog 

for its survival. No black-tailed prairie dog colonies are currently present on 

the BLM study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. One small town 
Executive Summary 

ES-18 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

(approximately one acre in size) is located approximately one mile north of the 

northern edge of the BLM study area. 

Active mining would preclude other land uses. Recreational and grazing use of 

the LBA tract would be severely limited during mining. Oil and gas 

development would be curtailed and CBNG that is not recovered prior to 

mining would be vented and irretrievably lost as the coal is removed. The 

surface of the tract as applied for and the BLM’s preferred tract configuration 

under Alternative 1 is owned by FCW. 

Within 10 years after initiation of each reclamation phase, rangeland and 

wildlife use would return to near premining levels. The cumulative impacts of 

energy development (coal mining, oil and gas) in the PRB are and will continue 

to contribute to a reduction in hunting opportunities for some animals 

(pronghorn, mule deer, and sage-grouse). 

The Eagle Butte West LBA Tract has been surveyed for cultural resources at 

the Class III level. A total of 17 cultural sites (nine re-recorded and eight new) 

were documented in the survey area. Twelve isolated finds were also recorded. 

Of the 17 cultural sites, nine are prehistoric, five are historic, and three are 

multi-component. All cultural sites are protected from disturbance until 

consultation with SHPO is completed and agreement regarding NRHP eligibility 

is reached. 

No sites of Native American religious or cultural importance have been 

identified on the LBA tract. If such sites or localities are identified at a later 

date, appropriate action must be taken to address concerns related to those 

sites. 

U.S. Highway 14-16 crosses the eastern portion of the tract; however, FCW and 

WYDOT are working on a plan to relocate the highway, as discussed above. It 

is likely that some mining activities on the LBA tract would be visible from this 

major travel route whether it is moved or remains in its current location. 

Mining would affect landscapes classified by BLM as VRM Class V, and the 

landscape character would not be significantly changed following reclamation. 

No unique visual resources have been identified on or near the LBA tract. 

There are occupied dwellings, businesses, the Rawhide Elementary School, and 

the airport located in the vicinity of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (Figure ES4). These facilities would experience an adverse noise impact if mining 

activities (particularly blasting) occur within 2,500 ft of them under either the 

Proposed Action or the BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1. 

Leasing the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would extend the length of time that 

coal is shipped from the permitted Eagle Butte Mine, which would extend the 

length of time that coal transportation facilities would be required under the 

Proposed Action or under the BLM’s preferred tract configuration for 

Alternative 1. Vehicular traffic to and from the mine would continue for an 
 Executive Summary 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application ES-19 

additional eight years. As discussed above, not all of the coal included in the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is mineable. U.S. Highway 14-16 overlies some of 

the coal included in the tract under both the Proposed Action and the BLM’s 

preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1. FCW and WYDOT are working 

on a plan to relocate the highway, so that the coal underlying the highway 

ROW can be recovered. Mining the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for 

would not bring FCW’s operations any closer to the Gillette-Campbell County 

Airport than they currently are; however, mining activities would continue at 

existing levels for an additional eight years. Depending upon the location of 

the final coal lease boundary that is selected by the BLM, a proposed airport 

expansion would potentially be delayed by eight or more years. Active pipelines 

and utility lines would have to be relocated in accordance with previous 

agreements, or agreements would have to be negotiated for their removal or 

relocation. 

Royalty and bonus payments for the coal in the LBA tract would be collected by 

the federal government and split with the state. Assuming an average coal 

price of $5.80 per ton recovered and a potential range of bonus payments of 30 

to 97 cents per ton, the potential additional federal revenues would range from 

approximately $188 to $263 million, depending on the alternative selected and 

the bonus price at the time the coal is leased. The potential additional revenue 

to the State of Wyoming would range from $261 to $336 million, depending on 

the alternative selected and the bonus price at the time the coal is leased. 

Mine life and employment at current levels would be extended by about eight 

years at the Eagle Butte Mine. 

With regard to Environmental Justice issues, it was determined that potentially 

adverse impacts do not disproportionately affect minorities, low-income groups 

or Native American tribes or groups. No tribal lands or Native American 

communities are included in this area, and no Native American treaty rights or 

Native American trust resources are known to exist for this area. 

Under the No Action Alternative, the coal lease application would be rejected 

and the area contained in the application would not be offered for lease at this 

time. The tract could be nominated for lease again in the future. Under the No 

Action Alternative, the impacts described in the preceding paragraphs to 

topography and physiology, geology and minerals, soils, air quality, water 

resources, AVFs, wetlands, vegetation, wildlife, T&E species, land use and 

recreation, cultural resources, Native American concerns, paleontological 

resources, visual resources, noise, transportation, and socioeconomics would 

occur on the existing Eagle Butte Mine coal leases, but these impacts would 

not be extended onto the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 

If impacts are identified during the leasing process that are not mitigated by 

existing required mitigation measures, BLM can include additional mitigation 

measures, in the form of stipulations on the new lease, within the limits of its 

regulatory authority. BLM has not identified additional special stipulations 
Executive Summary 

ES-20 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

that should be added to the BLM lease or areas where additional or increased 

monitoring measures are recommended. 

Cumulative impacts result from the incremental impacts of an action added to 

other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless of 

who is responsible for such actions. Cumulative impacts can result from 

individually minor, but collectively significant, actions occurring over time. 

Since decertification of the Powder River Federal Coal Region in 1990, 17 coal 

leases containing more than five billion tons of federal coal have been issued 

following competitive sealed-bid sales. Three exchanges of federal coal in the 

Wyoming portion of the Powder River Federal Coal Region have also been 

completed. Twelve coal lease applications, including the Eagle Butte West 

application, are currently pending. The pending LBA applications contain over 

4.4 billion tons of coal. 

Currently, BLM is completing a regional technical study, called the PRB Coal 

Review, to help evaluate the cumulative impacts of coal and other mineral 

development in the PRB. The study evaluates current conditions as of a 

baseline year (2003) and projects development levels and potential associated 

cumulative impacts related to coal and coal-related development, oil and gas 

and oil- and gas-related development, and other development through 2020. 

Due to variables associated with future coal production, two projected coal 

production scenarios (representing an upper and a lower production level) were 

developed. The projected development levels are based on projected demand 

and coal market forecasts and include production at the Eagle Butte Mine 

during the baseline year and projected production for the mine for 2010, 2015, 

and 2020. 

The Wyoming portion of the PRB is the primary focus of the PRB Coal Review, 

but the Montana portion of the PRB is included in some studies. A series of 

reports has been prepared or are being prepared to present the result of the 

PRB Coal Review studies. The results of the PRB Coal Review studies that have 

been completed are summarized in Section 4.0 of the EIS. 

Cumulative impacts vary by resource, with potential impacts to air quality, 

groundwater quantity, wildlife habitat, and socioeconomics generally being the 

greatest concerns. 

The PRB Coal Review air quality study documents the modeled air quality 

impact of existing operations during 2002 and of projected development 

activities in 2010. The model was used to evaluate impacts of existing and 

projected source emissions on several source groups, including near-field 

receptors in Wyoming and Montana, receptors in nearby federally designated 

“Class I” areas, and receptors at “Class II” sensitive areas. The EPA guideline 

CALPUFF model system was used for the modeling analysis. 
 Executive Summary 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application ES-21 

The existing regional air quality conditions are generally very good, but the 

modeling showed some substantial impacts at some receptors for both the 

baseline year 2002 and the projected development activities in 2010. Table ES3 presents the maximum modeled impacts on ambient air quality at the nearfield receptors in Wyoming and Montana for 2002 and for the 2010 upper and 

lower coal development scenarios. Table ES-4 lists the projected modeled 

visibility impacts for 2002 for all analyzed Class I and sensitive Class II areas. 

For the upper and lower coal production scenarios, it shows the number of 

additional days that the impacts were projected to be greater than 1.0 dv (10 

percent in extinction) for each site in 2010. 

The PRB Coal Review groundwater and surface water studies are in progress, 

but a number of modeling analyses have previously been conducted to help 

predict the impacts of surface coal mining on groundwater resources in the 

PRB. In addition, each mine must monitor groundwater levels in the coal and 

underlying and overlying aquifers and assess the probable hydrologic 

consequences of mining as part of the mine permitting process. The 

monitoring programs track the extent of groundwater drawdown propagation to 

the west and the extent of recharge and quality of the water in the backfill 

areas of the mines. The monitoring data indicate that recharge is occurring in 

the backfill and that water from the backfill will generally be acceptable for 

premining uses, which is primarily livestock watering. Modeling and 

monitoring indicate that the groundwater drawdown impacts of coal mining 

and CBNG development are overlapping. 

The PRB Coal Review studies include an evaluation of the impacts to wildlife 

and aquatic species as of 2003 and an evaluation of the projected levels of 

disturbance in the PRB in 2010, 2015, and 2020, based on the projected 

development levels in those years. As discussed above, impacts to wildlife and 

fisheries can be classified as short-term and long-term. Short-term impacts 

are related to habitat disturbance during project development and operation. 

Long-term impacts result from changes in habitat after reclamation is 

completed. Habitat fragmentation can result from activities such as roads, well 

pads, mines, pipelines, and electrical power lines, as well as increased noise, 

elevated human presence, dispersal of noxious and invasive weed species, and 

dust from unpaved road traffic. 

The PRB Coal Review used the REMI Policy Insight regional economic model to 

project cumulative employment and population levels and associated impacts 

in the PRB for the upper and lower coal production scenarios in 2010, 2015, 

and 2020. Table ES-5 presents the recent and projected population levels for 

the counties included in the PRB Coal Review socioeconomic analysis. 

This EIS presents the BLM’s analysis of environmental impacts under authority 

of the NEPA and associated rules and guidelines. The BLM will use this 

analysis to make a leasing decision. The decision to lease these lands is a 

necessary requisite for mining, but is not in itself the enabling action that will 

allow mining. The most detailed analysis prior to mine development would 
Executive Summary 

 ES-22 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Table ES-3. Projected Maximum Potential Near-field Impacts (μg/m3). 

Pollutant 

Averaging 

Time 

Base 

Year 

(2002) 

Impacts

2010 Lower 

Development 

Scenario 

Impacts 

2010 Upper 

Development 

Scenario 

Impacts NAAQS

Wyoming 

AAQS 

Montana 

AAQS 

PSD 

Class II 

Increments2 

Wyoming Near-field

NO2 Annual 37.3 42.4 49.0 100 100 --1 25 

SO2 Annual 3.9 4.8 5.6 80 60 --1 20 

 24-hour 14.5 33.5 34.8 365 260 --1 91  3-hour 37.9 148.0 154.2 1,300 1300 --1 512 

PM10 Annual 42.7 49.0 56.6 --3 50 --1 17 

 24-hour 335.5 378.8 439.9 150 150 --1 30 

Montana Near-field

NO2 Annual 8.85 11.3 11.8 100 --1 100 25 

 1-hour 365.8 415.9 519.5 -- --1 564 -- 

SO2 Annual 1.3 2.3 2.7 80 --1 80 20 

 24-hour 18.9 19.5 20.4 365 --1 365 91 

 3-hour 74.7 76.4 79.8 1,300 --1 1,300 512 

 1-hour 240.7 246.4 257.3 -- --1 1,300 -- 

PM10 Annual 19.6 22.5 27.7 --3 --1 50 17 

 24-hour 175.8 200.0 247.7 150 --1 150 30 

1 No standard or increment. 2 All NEPA analysis comparisons to the PSD increments are intended to evaluate a threshold of concern and do not represent a regulatory 

 PSD Increment Consumption Analysis. 

3 On September 21, 2006, the EPA announced final revisions to the NAAQS for particulate matter, which took effect December 18, 2006. The 

 revision revoked the annual PM10 standard of 50 μg/m3. The revisions retained the 24-hour PM10 standard. The State of Wyoming will 

 enter into rulemaking to revise the Wyoming Ambient Air Quality Standards. See additional discussion in Chapter 3, Section 3.4.2.1. 

Bold values indicate projected exceedances of AAQS. Source: PRB Coal Review Task 3A Report (BLM 2006b)
 Executive Summary 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application ES-23 

Table ES-4. Modeled Change in Visibility Impacts at Class I and Sensitive 

Class II Areas. 

 2002 

2010 Lower 

Development 

Scenario 

2010 Upper 

Development 

Scenario 

Location 

No. of 

Days 

>10% 

Change in 

No. of Days 

> 10% 

Change in 

No. of Days 

> 10% 

Federally and Tribally Designated Class I Areas

Badlands National Park1 238 19 26 

Bob Marshall WA 12 2 4 

Bridger WA 47 4 7 

Fitzpatrick WA 42 3 5 

Fort Peck Indian Reservation 69 8 9 

Gates of the Mountain WA 14 6 7 

Grand Teton National Park 26 2 5 

North Absaroka WA 47 6 6 

North Cheyenne Indian Reservation 305 5 10 

Red Rock Lakes 16 3 5 

Scapegoat WA 14 4 4 

Teton WA 40 4 5 

Theodore Roosevelt National Park 98 15 22 

UL Bend WA 49 4 5 

Washakie WA 53 2 3 

Wind Cave National Park 261 11 15 

Yellowstone National Park 42 7 8 

Sensitive Class II Areas 

Absaroka Beartooth WA 53 3 5 

Agate Fossil Beds National Monument 199 26 30 

Big Horn Canyon National Rec. Area 108 7 8 

Black Elk WA 263 16 22 

Cloud Peak WA 137 8 8 

Crow Indian Reservation 284 10 15 

Devils Tower National Monument 279 15 21 

Fort Belknap Indian Reservation 46 3 4 

Fort Laramie National Historic Site 153 27 30 

Jedediah Smith WA 23 1 2 

Jewel Cave National Monument 267 14 18 

Lee Metcalf WA 25 2 4 

Mount Naomi WA 8 6 8 

Mount Rushmore National Monument 248 19 25 

Popo Agie WA 47 7 8 

Soldier Creek WA 223 23 29 

Wellsville Mountain WA 6 5 7 

Wind River Indian Reservation 66 12 15 1 The U.S. Congress designated the Wilderness Area portion of Badlands National Park as a mandatory 

Federal PSD Class I area. The remainder of Badlands National Park is a PSD Class II area. 

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 3A Report (BLM 2006a) 
Executive Summary 

ES-24 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Table ES-5. Recent and Projected PRB Population. 

Year 

Campbell 

County 

Converse 

County 

Crook 

County

Johnson 

County 

Sheridan 

County 

Weston 

County 

Total 

Study 

Area 

Census 

2000 33,698 12,104 5,895 7,108 26,606 6,642 92,053 

2003 36,438 12,314 5,986 7,554 27,115 6,671 96,078 

Lower Coal Production Scenario 

2010 45,925 13,103 6,542 8,389 28,459 7,108 109,526 

2015 48,905 13,671 6,759 8,867 30,016 7,174 115,392 

2020 50,995 14,193 6,989 9,326 31,467 7,208 120,178 

Upper Coal Production Scenario 

2010 47,662 13,160 6,570 8,424 28,579 7,137 111,532 

2015 51,558 13,763 6,802 8,924 30,214 7,219 118,480 

2020 54,943 14,313 7,045 9,403 31,733 7,266 124,703 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2005 (2000 and 2003 data) 

occur after the lease is issued, when the lessee files an application for a surface 

mining permit and mining plan approval, supported by extensive proposed 

mining and reclamation plans, to the WDEQ/LQD. 
 Table of Contents 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

EXECUTIVE SUMARY ................................................................................ES-1 

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

1.1 Background...............................................................................1-1 

1.2 Purpose and Need for Action......................................................1-9 

1.3 Regulatory Authority and Responsibility ..................................1-11 

1.4 Relationship to BLM Policies, Plans, and Programs..................1-12 

1.5 Conformance with Existing Land Use Plans .............................1-12 

1.6 Consultation and Coordination................................................1-18 

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

2.1 Proposed Action.........................................................................2-4 

2.1.1 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring.......2-8 

2.1.2 Hazardous and Solid Waste..........................................2-9 

2.2 Alternative 1............................................................................2-16 

2.3 Alternative 2............................................................................2-21 

2.4 Alternative 3............................................................................2-21 

2.5 Alternative 4............................................................................2-23 

2.6 Summary of Alternatives and Environmental Consequences ....2-25 

2.6.1 Background ...............................................................2-25 

2.6.2 Summary of Alternatives ............................................2-25 

3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL 

 CONSEQUENCES...............................................................................3-1 

3.1 General Setting .........................................................................3-5 

3.1.1 Climate and Meteorology ..............................................3-5 

3.2 Topography and Physiography...................................................3-6 

3.2.1 Affected Environment ...................................................3-6 

3.2.2 Environmental Consequences.......................................3-7 

3.2.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1 .................3-7 

3.2.2.2 No Action Alternative.....................................3-8 

3.2.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring.......3-9 

3.2.4 Residual Impacts..........................................................3-9 

3.3 Geology, Mineral Resources, and Paleontology ...........................3-9 

3.3.1 General Geology and Coal Resources............................3-9 

3.3.1.1 Affected Environment ....................................3-9 

3.3.1.2 Environmental Consequences......................3-11 

3.3.1.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 ............................3-11 

3.3.1.2.2 No Action Alternative................3-12 

3.3.1.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and 

Monitoring...................................................3-12 

3.3.1.4 Residual Impacts.........................................3-13 

3.3.2 Other Mineral Resources ............................................3-13 

3.3.2.1 Affected Environment ..................................3-13 

3.3.2.1.1 Conventional Oil and Gas.........3-13 
Table of Contents 

ii Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 

3.3.2.1.2 Coal Bed Natural Gas (CBNG) ..3-13 

3.3.2.1.3 Other Minerals.........................3-16 

3.3.2.2 Environmental Consequences......................3-16 

3.3.2.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 ............................3-16 

3.3.2.2.2 No Action Alternative................3-18 

3.3.2.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and 

Monitoring...................................................3-18 

3.3.2.4 Residual Impacts.........................................3-19 

3.3.3 Paleontology...............................................................3-19 

3.3.3.1 Affected Environment ..................................3-19 

3.3.3.2 Environmental Consequences......................3-21 

3.3.3.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 ............................3-21 

3.3.3.2.2 No Action Alternative................3-21 

3.3.3.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and 

Monitoring...................................................3-21 

3.3.3.4 Residual Impacts.........................................3-22 

3.4 Air Quality...............................................................................3-22 

3.4.1 Background ...............................................................3-22 

3.4.1.1 Regulatory Framework ................................3-22 

3.4.1.1.1 Surface Coal Mine 

 Regulatory Framework .............3-28 

3.4.1.2 Emission Sources........................................3-30 

3.4.2 Particulate Emissions.................................................3-31 

3.4.2.1 Affected Environment for Particulate 

Emissions ...................................................3-31 

3.4.2.1.1 Regional Particulate 

Emissions ................................3-31 

3.4.2.1.2 Site Specific Particulate 

Emissions ................................3-36 

3.4.2.2 Environmental Consequences Related to 

Particulate Emissions..................................3-36 

3.4.2.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 ............................3-36 

3.4.2.2.2 No Action Alternative................3-46 

3.4.2.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation, and 

Monitoring for Particulate Emissions ...........3-46 

3.4.3 Emissions of Nitrogen Oxides .....................................3-51 

3.4.3.1 Affected Environment for NOx Emissions .....3-51 

3.4.3.1.1 Regional NOx Emissions ...........3-51 

3.4.3.1.2 Site Specific NOx Emissions......3-52 

3.4.3.2 Environmental Consequences Related to 

 NOx Emissions ............................................3-52 

3.4.3.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 ............................3-54 
 Table of Contents 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application iii 

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 

3.4.3.2.2 No Action Alternative................3-57 

3.4.3.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation, and 

Monitoring for NOx Emissions......................3-58 

3.4.4 Visibility.....................................................................3-62 

3.4.4.1 Affected Environment for Visibility...............3-62 

3.4.4.2 Environmental Consequences for Visibility ..3-64 

3.4.4.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 ............................3-64 

3.4.4.2.2 No Action Alternative................3-65 

3.4.4.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation, and 

Monitoring for Visibility Impacts..................3-65 

3.4.5 Acidification of Lakes..................................................3-66 

3.4.5.1 Affected Environment ..................................3-66 

3.4.5.2 Environmental Consequences......................3-67 

3.4.5.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 ............................3-67 

3.4.5.2.2 No Action Alternative................3-67 

3.4.5.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation, and 

Monitoring...................................................3-68 

3.4.6 Residual Impacts to Air Quality ..................................3-68 

3.5 Water Resources......................................................................3-68 

3.5.1 Groundwater..............................................................3-68 

3.5.1.1 Affected Environment ..................................3-68 

3.5.1.1.1 Recent Alluvium.......................3-68 

3.5.1.1.2 Wasatch Formation..................3-70 

3.5.1.1.3 Roland-Smith/Wyodak- 

 Anderson Coal .........................3-75 

3.5.1.1.4 Subcoal Fort Union 

 Formation ................................3-77 

3.5.1.2 Environmental Consequences......................3-78 

3.5.1.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 ............................3-78 

3.5.1.2.2 No Action Alternative................3-84 

3.5.1.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and 

Monitoring...................................................3-84 

3.5.2 Surface Water ............................................................3-86 

3.5.2.1 Affected Environment ..................................3-86 

3.5.2.2 Environmental Consequences......................3-91 

3.5.2.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 ............................3-91 

3.5.2.2.2 No Action Alternative................3-92 

3.5.2.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and 

Monitoring...................................................3-92 

3.5.3 Water Rights ..............................................................3-93 

3.5.3.1 Affected Environment ..................................3-93 

3.5.3.2 Environmental Consequences......................3-95 
Table of Contents 

iv Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 

3.5.3.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 ............................3-95 

3.5.3.2.2 No Action Alternative................3-95 

3.5.3.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and 

Monitoring...................................................3-96 

3.5.4 Residual Impacts........................................................3-96 

3.6 Alluvial Valley Floors ...............................................................3-97 

3.6.1 Affected Environment .................................................3-97 

3.6.2 Environmental Consequences.....................................3-98 

3.6.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1 ...............3-98 

3.6.2.2 No Action Alternative...................................3-99 

3.6.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring.....3-99 

3.6.4 Residual Impacts...................................................... 3-100 

3.7 Wetlands............................................................................... 3-100 

3.7.1 Affected Environment ............................................... 3-100 

3.7.2 Environmental Consequences................................... 3-102 

3.7.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1 ............. 3-102 

3.7.2.2 No Action Alternative................................. 3-103 

3.7.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring... 3-103 

3.7.4 Residual Impacts...................................................... 3-103 

3.8 Soils...................................................................................... 3-104 

3.8.1 Affected Environment ............................................... 3-104 

3.8.2 Environmental Consequences................................... 3-105 

3.8.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1 ............. 3-105 

3.8.2.2 No Action Alternative................................. 3-106 

3.8.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring... 3-106 

3.8.4 Residual Impacts...................................................... 3-107 

3.9 Vegetation ............................................................................. 3-107 

3.9.1 Affected Environment ............................................... 3-107 

3.9.2 Environmental Consequences................................... 3-108 

3.9.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1 ............. 3-108 

3.9.2.2 No Action Alternative................................. 3-111 

3.9.3 Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate 

 Plant Species, and BLM Sensitive Species................. 3-111 

3.9.4 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring... 3-111 

3.9.5 Residual Impacts...................................................... 3-112 

3.10 Wildlife.................................................................................. 3-112 

3.10.1 General Setting ........................................................ 3-112 

3.10.1.1 Affected Environment ................................ 3-112 

3.10.1.2 Environmental Consequences.................... 3-114 

3.10.1.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 .......................... 3-114 

3.10.1.2.2 No Action Alternative.............. 3-115 

3.10.2 Big Game ................................................................. 3-115 

3.10.2.1 Affected Environment ................................ 3-115 

3.10.2.2 Environmental Consequences.................... 3-116 
 Table of Contents 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application v 

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 

3.10.2.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 .......................... 3-116 

3.10.2.2.2 No Action Alternative.............. 3-117 

3.10.3 Other Mammals ....................................................... 3-117 

3.10.3.1 Affected Environment ................................ 3-117 

3.10.3.2 Environmental Consequences.................... 3-118 

3.10.3.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 .......................... 3-118 

3.10.3.2.2 No Action Alternatives............ 3-120 

3.10.4 Raptors .................................................................... 3-120 

3.10.4.1 Affected Environment ................................ 3-120 

3.10.4.2 Environmental Consequences.................... 3-121 

3.10.4.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 .......................... 3-121 

3.10.4.2.2 No Action Alternative.............. 3-121 

3.10.5 Upland Game Birds.................................................. 3-122 

3.10.5.1 Affected Environment ................................ 3-122 

3.10.5.2 Environmental Consequences.................... 3-125 

3.10.5.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 .......................... 3-125 

3.10.5.2.2 No Action Alternative.............. 3-129 

3.10.6 Other Birds .............................................................. 3-129 

3.10.6.1 Affected Environment ................................ 3-129 

3.10.6.2 Environmental Consequences.................... 3-131 

3.10.6.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 .......................... 3-131 

3.10.6.2.2 No Action Alternative.............. 3-132 

3.10.7 Amphibians, Reptiles, and Aquatic Species............... 3-132 

3.10.7.1 Affected Environment ................................ 3-132 

3.10.7.2 Environmental Consequences.................... 3-133 

3.10.7.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 .......................... 3-133 

3.10.7.2.2 No Action Alternative.............. 3-133 

3.10.8 Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate 

 Animal Species, and BLM Sensitive Species.............. 3-134 

3.10.9 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring... 3-134 

3.10.10 Residual Impacts...................................................... 3-136 

3.11 Land Use and Recreation....................................................... 3-137 

3.11.1 Affected Environment ............................................... 3-137 

3.11.2 Environmental Consequences................................... 3-144 

3.11.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1 ............. 3-144 

3.11.2.2 No Action Alternative................................. 3-146 

3.11.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring... 3-146 

3.11.4 Residual Impacts...................................................... 3-146 

3.12 Cultural Resources................................................................ 3-147 

3.12.1 Affected Environment ............................................... 3-147 
Table of Contents 

vi Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 

3.12.2 Environmental Consequences................................... 3-150 

3.12.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1 ............. 3-150 

3.12.2.2 No Action Alternative................................. 3-150 

3.12.3 Native American Consultation .................................. 3-151 

3.12.4 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring... 3-151 

3.12.5 Residual Impacts...................................................... 3-152 

3.13 Visual Resources................................................................... 3-152 

3.13.1 Affected Environment ............................................... 3-152 

3.13.2 Environmental Consequences................................... 3-153 

3.13.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1 ............. 3-153 

3.13.2.2 No Action Alternative................................. 3-154 

3.13.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring... 3-154 

3.13.4 Residual Impacts...................................................... 3-154 

3.14 Noise..................................................................................... 3-154 

3.14.1 Affected Environment ............................................... 3-154 

3.14.2 Environmental Consequences................................... 3-155 

3.14.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1 ............. 3-155 

3.14.2.2 No Action Alternative................................. 3-157 

3.14.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring... 3-158 

3.14.4 Residual Impacts...................................................... 3-158 

3.15 Transportation ...................................................................... 3-158 

3.15.1 Affected Environment ............................................... 3-158 

3.15.2 Environmental Consequences................................... 3-161 

3.15.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1 ............. 3-161 

3.15.2.2 No Action Alternative................................. 3-165 

3.15.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring... 3-165 

3.15.4 Residual Impacts...................................................... 3-166 

3.16 Hazardous and Solid Waste ................................................... 3-166 

3.16.1 Affected Environment ............................................... 3-166 

3.16.2 Environmental Consequences................................... 3-166 

3.16.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1 ............. 3-166 

3.16.2.2 No Action Alternative................................. 3-167 

3.16.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring... 3-167 

3.16.4 Residual Impacts...................................................... 3-167 

3.17 Socioeconomics ..................................................................... 3-167 

3.17.1 Local Economy......................................................... 3-167 

3.17.1.1 Affected Environment ................................ 3-167 

3.17.1.2 Environmental Consequences.................... 3-169 

3.17.1.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 .......................... 3-169 

3.17.1.2.2 No Action Alternative.............. 3-171 

3.17.2 Population................................................................ 3-171 

3.17.2.1 Affected Environment ................................ 3-171 

3.17.2.2 Environmental Consequences.................... 3-172 

3.17.2.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 .......................... 3-172 
 Table of Contents 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application vii 

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 

3.17.2.2.2 No Action Alternative.............. 3-172 

3.17.3 Employment............................................................. 3-173 

3.17.3.1 Affected Environment ................................ 3-173 

3.17.3.2 Environmental Consequences.................... 3-173 

3.17.3.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 .......................... 3-173 

3.17.3.2.2 No Action Alternative.............. 3-173 

3.17.4 Housing ................................................................... 3-174 

3.17.4.1 Affected Environment ................................ 3-174 

3.17.4.2 Environmental Consequences.................... 3-176 

3.17.4.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 .......................... 3-176 

3.17.4.2.2 No Action Alternative.............. 3-176 

3.17.5 Local Government Facilities and Services ................. 3-176 

3.17.5.1 Affected Environment ................................ 3-176 

3.17.5.2 Environmental Consequences.................... 3-178 

3.17.5.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 .......................... 3-178 

3.17.5.2.2 No Action Alternative.............. 3-178 

3.17.6 Environmental Justice ............................................. 3-178 

3.17.6.1 Affected Environment ................................ 3-178 

3.17.6.2 Environmental Consequences.................... 3-179 

3.17.6.2.1 Proposed Action and 

 Alternative 1 .......................... 3-179 

3.17.6.2.2 No Action Alternative.............. 3-179 

3.17.7 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring... 3-179 

3.17.8 Residual Effects ....................................................... 3-180 

3.18 The Relationship Between Local Short-term Uses of Man’s 

 Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement of 

 Long-term Productivity .......................................................... 3-180 

3.19 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources....... 3-183 

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

4.1 Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Development ...........4-2 

4.1.1 Coal Development ........................................................4-4 

4.1.1.1 Coal Mine Development .................................4-4 

4.1.1.2 Coal-Related Development...........................4-12 

4.1.1.2.1 Coal Transportation .................4-12 

4.1.1.2.2 Electric Power Generation ........4-13 

4.1.1.2.3 Transmission Lines ..................4-14 

4.1.1.2.4 Coal Conversion Technology.....4-15 

4.1.2 Oil and Gas Development ...........................................4-17 

4.1.2.1 Conventional Oil and Gas............................4-17 

4.1.2.2 CBNG Development.....................................4-17 

4.1.2.3 Oil and Gas Related Development................4-19 

4.1.2.3.1 Pipelines ..................................4-19 
Table of Contents 

viii Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 

4.1.2.3.2 Refineries.................................4-21 

4.1.3 Other Development Activity ........................................4-21 

4.1.3.1 Other Mining...............................................4-21 

4.1.3.2 Industrial Manufacturing ............................4-22 

4.1.3.3 Reservoirs ...................................................4-23 

4.1.3.4 Other Non-Energy Development...................4-23 

4.2 Cumulative Environmental Consequences ...............................4-24 

4.2.1 Topography and Physiography....................................4-27 

4.2.2 Geology, Mineral Resources, and Paleontology............4-28 

4.2.2.1 Coal ............................................................4-28 

4.2.2.2 Oil and Gas .................................................4-28 

4.2.2.3 Other Mineral Resources .............................4-29 

4.2.2.4 Paleontology ................................................4-29 

4.2.3 Air Quality .................................................................4-30 

4.2.4 Water Resources ........................................................4-40 

4.2.4.1 Groundwater...............................................4-40 

4.2.4.2 Surface Water..............................................4-50 

4.2.5 Alluvial Valley Floors..................................................4-53 

4.2.6 Soils...........................................................................4-53 

4.2.7 Vegetation, Wetlands and Riparian Areas ...................4-54 

4.2.7.1 Vegetation ...................................................4-55 

4.2.7.2 Special Status Plant Species........................4-55 

4.2.7.3 Noxious and Invasive Weed Species .............4-56 

4.2.7.4 Wetland and Riparian Species .....................4-57 

4.2.8 Wildlife and Fisheries .................................................4-58 

4.2.8.1 Game Species..............................................4-58 

4.2.8.2 Nongame Species.........................................4-61 

4.2.8.3 Fisheries .....................................................4-62 

4.2.8.4 Special Status Species.................................4-64 

4.2.9 Land Use and Recreation............................................4-67 

4.2.9.1 Grazing and Agriculture ..............................4-68 

4.2.9.2 Urban Use...................................................4-69 

4.2.9.3 Recreation...................................................4-70 

4.2.10 Cultural Resources and Native American Concerns ....4-71 

4.2.10.1 Prehistoric Sites ..........................................4-72 

4.2.10.2 Historic Sites...............................................4-72 

4.2.10.3 Native American Traditional Cultural 

 Places .........................................................4-74 

4.2.10.4 Site Protection.............................................4-74 

4.2.11 Transportation and Utilities........................................4-74 

4.2.12 Socioeconomics..........................................................4-77 

4.2.12.1 Employment and the Economic Base...........4-78 

4.2.12.2 Labor Market Conditions .............................4-80 

4.2.12.3 Personal Income..........................................4-81 

4.2.12.4 Population and Demographics .....................4-81 

4.2.12.5 Housing ......................................................4-84 
 Table of Contents 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application ix 

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 

4.2.12.6 Public Education.........................................4-87 

4.2.12.7 Facilities and Services .................................4-89 

4.2.12.8 Fiscal Conditions.........................................4-90 

4.2.12.9 Social Setting ..............................................4-93 

5.0 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION...............................................5-1 

6.0 REFERENCES CITED .........................................................................6-1 

7.0 GLOSSARY .........................................................................................7-1 

8.0 INDEX ................................................................................................8-1 

LIST OF TABLES 

Table ES-1. Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface 

 Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for Eagle Butte West 

 LBA Tract and Eagle Butte Mine – Assuming Highway 14-16 

 is Moved and the Underlying Coal is Recovered........................ES-9 

Table ES-2. Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface 

 Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for Eagle Butte West 

 LBA Tract and Eagle Butte Mine – Assuming Highway 14-16 

 is Not Moved and the Underlying Coal is Not Recovered .........ES-10 

Table ES-3. Projected Maximum Potential Near-field Impacts ...................ES-22 

Table ES-4. Modeled Change in Visibility Impacts at Class I and 

 Sensitive Class II Areas .........................................................ES-23 

Table ES-5. Recent and Projected PRB Population ....................................ES-24 

Table 1-1. Leases Issued and Exchanges Completed Since Decertification, 

Powder River Basin, Wyoming ...................................................1-5 

Table 1-2. Pending LBAs and Exchanges, Powder River Basin, Wyoming....1-7 

Table 2-1. Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring Measures 

 for Surface Coal Mining Operations Required by SMCRA and 

 State Law for all Alternatives ...................................................2-10 

Table 2-2. Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface 

 Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for Eagle Butte West 

 LBA Tract and Eagle Butte Mine – Highway is Moved...............2-27 

Table 2-3. Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface 

 Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for Eagle Butte West 

 LBA Tract and Eagle Butte Mine – Highway is Not Moved.........2-28 

Table 2-4. Summary Comparison of Magnitude and Duration of Direct 

 and Indirect Impacts for the Proposed Action, Alternative 1, 

 and the No Action Alternative for the Eagle Butte West LBA 

 Tract .......................................................................................2-29 
Table of Contents 

x Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 

Table 2-5. Summary Comparison of Magnitude and Duration of 

 Cumulative Impacts ................................................................2-36 

Table 3-1. Comparison of Existing and Proposed Eagle Butte Mine 

Disturbance Area and Mining Operations – Highway is Not 

 Moved........................................................................................3-4 

Table 3-2. Comparison of Average Overburden and Coal Thicknesses 

 and Approximate Postmining Surface Elevation Changes 

 Under the No Action and Action Alternatives .............................3-8 

Table 3-3. Assumed Background Air Pollutant Concentrations, Applicable 

AAQS, and PSD Increment Values ...........................................3-24 

Table 3-4. Approximate Distances and Directions from the Eagle Butte 

 West Tract General Analysis Area to PSD Class I and Class II 

 Sensitive Receptor Areas..........................................................3-26 

Table 3-5. Summary of WDEQ/AQD Reports on Air Quality Monitoring 

 in Wyoming’s PRB, 1980-2004.................................................3-34 

Table 3-6. Annual Ambient NO2 Concentration Data ................................3-61 

Table 3-7. 2001 Through 2005 Annual Mean NO2 Concentration Data.....3-61 

Table 3-8. Existing Acid Neutralizing Capacity in Sensitive Lakes.............3-67 

Table 3-9. Vegetation Types Identified and Mapped Within the Eagle 

 Butte West LBA Tract Vegetation Analysis Area ..................... 3-108 

Table 3-10. Eagle Butte West LBA Tract Oil and Gas Ownership .............. 3-142 

Table 3-11. Projected Socioeconomic Impacts from Leasing the Eagle Butte 

 West LBA Tract Under the Proposed Action or Alternative 1... 3-171 

Table 4-1. Status and Ownership of Wyoming PRB Coal Mines...................4-6 

Table 4-2. Current and Projected Wyoming PRB Coal Mine Development, 

Lower Production Scenario ......................................................4-10 

Table 4-3. Current and Projected Wyoming PRB Coal Mine Development, 

Upper Production Scenario......................................................4-11 

Table 4-4. Current and Projected Wyoming PRB Coal-Related 

 Development Scenario .............................................................4-12 

Table 4-5. Past, Present, and Projected Wyoming PRB Coal Mine and 

 Coal-Related Development Scenario.........................................4-16 

Table 4-6. Current and Projected Wyoming PRB Conventional Oil and 

 Gas Development Scenario ......................................................4-18 

Table 4-7. Current and Projected CBNG Development Scenario for the 

Wyoming PRB..........................................................................4-19 

Table 4-8. Wyoming PRB Conventional Oil and Gas, CBNG, and Related 

Development Disturbance and Water Production .....................4-20 

Table 4-9. Current and Projected Wyoming PRB Total Development 

 Scenario – Task 3 Study Area ..................................................4-27 

Table 4-10. Projected Maximum Potential Near-field Impacts .....................4-33 

Table 4-11. Maximum Predicted PSD Class I and Sensitive Class II Area 

Impacts...................................................................................4-35 
 Table of Contents 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application xi 

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 

Table 4-12. Modeled Change in Visibility Impacts at Class I and Sensitive 

 Class II Areas ..........................................................................4-37 

Table 4-13. Predicted Total Cumulative Change in Acid Neutralizing 

 Capacity of Sensitive Lakes......................................................4-38 

Table 4-14. Recoverable Groundwater in the Wasatch/Fort Union Aquifer 

System ....................................................................................4-41 

Table 4-15. Water Use as of 2002 in the Powder/Tongue River Basin.........4-50 

Table 4-16. Surface Water Availability in the Powder/Tongue River Basin ..4-50 

Table 4-17. Water Use as of 2002 in the Northeast Wyoming River Basins .4-51 

Table 4-18. Surface Water Availability in the Northeast Wyoming River 

 Basins.....................................................................................4-51 

Table 4-19. Potential Cumulative Disturbance to Pronghorn Ranges from 

Development Activities—Lower and Upper Coal Production 

Scenarios ................................................................................4-59 

Table 4-20. Potential Cumulative Disturbance to White-tailed Deer Ranges 

from Development Activities—Lower and Upper Coal Production 

Scenarios ................................................................................4-60 

Table 4-21. Potential Cumulative Disturbance to Mule Deer Ranges from 

Development Activities—Lower and Upper Coal Production 

Scenarios ................................................................................4-60 

Table 4-22. Potential Cumulative Disturbance to Elk Ranges from 

 Development Activities—Lower and Upper Coal Production 

 Scenarios ................................................................................4-60 

Table 4-23. Potential Cumulative Impacts to Greater Sage-Grouse Leks 

 from Coal Mine Development—Upper and Lower Coal 

 Production Development Scenarios..........................................4-67 

Table 4-24. Land Use by Surface Ownership..............................................4-68 

Table 4-25. AUMs and Acres of Cropland Estimated Unavailable on 

 Lands Disturbed and Not Yet Reclaimed as a Result of 

 Development Activities.............................................................4-69 

Table 4-26. Square Miles of Projected Cumulative Disturbance and 

 Number of Potentially Affected Cultural Resource Sites in 

 the PRB Coal Review Task 3 Study Area – Lower and Upper 

 Coal Production Scenarios.......................................................4-73 

Table 4-27. PRB Rail Lines Coal Hauling Capacity and Projected Use.........4-76 

Table 4-28. Recent and Projected PRB Population ......................................4-83 

Table 4-29. Demographic Characteristics...................................................4-84 

Table 4-30. Total Housing Stock in 2000....................................................4-85 

Table 4-31. Monthly Housing Rents in 2003 in the PRB Study Area ...........4-85 

Table 4-32. Summary of Mineral Development Tax Revenues Associated 

 with Energy Resource Production Under the Lower Production 

 Scenario..................................................................................4-91 

Table 4-33. Summary of Mineral Development Tax Revenues Associated 

 with Energy Resource Production Under the Upper Production 

 Scenario..................................................................................4-92 
Table of Contents 

xii Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 

Table 5-1 Federal, State, Tribal, and Local Governmental Agencies ...........5-3 

Table 5-2. List of Contributors and Reviewers ............................................5-4 

Table 5-3. List of Preparers ........................................................................5-6 

Table 5-4a. BLM Distribution List for Coal Leasing ......................................5-7 

Table 5-4b. Eagle Butte Mine Distribution List for Final EIS, Eagle Butte 

 West Coal Lease Application ......................................................5-9 

LIST OF FIGURES 

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

 LBA Tracts ..........................................................................ES-2 

Figure ES-2. Eagle Butte West LBA Tract Alternatives .............................ES-3 

Figure ES-3. Eagle Butte West LBA Preferred Alternative Tract 

 Configuration......................................................................ES-6 

Figure ES-4. Residences, School Bus Stops, Public Roads, and other 

 Publicly Accessible Facilities Within and Adjacent to the 

 Eagle Butte West LBA Tract ................................................ES-7 

Figure ES-5. Maximum Modeled PM10 and NOx Concentrations at 

 the Eagle Butte Mine Ambient Air Boundary for the 

 Year 2006 .........................................................................ES-13 

Figure ES-6. Life of Mine Drawdown Map, Resulting from Currently 

 Approved Mining With Addition of the Eagle Butte West 

 LBA Tract..........................................................................ES-15 

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

 LBA Tracts ............................................................................1-2 

Figure 1-2. Eagle Butte Mine Federal Coal Leases and Eagle Butte West 

 LBA Tract as Applied for........................................................1-8 

Figure 1-3. City of Gillette Buffer Zone ..................................................1-16 

Figure 2-1. Eagle Butte West LBA Tract Alternatives ...............................2-2 

Figure 2-2. Eagle Butte West LBA Preferred Alternative Tract 

 Configuration......................................................................2-18 

Figure 3-1. General Analysis Area ...........................................................3-3 

Figure 3-2. Stratigraphic Relationships and Hydrologic Characteristics 

 of Upper Cretaceous, Lower Tertiary, and Recent Geologic 

 Units, PRB, Wyoming ..........................................................3-10 

Figure 3-3. Active Particulate Monitoring Stations in Northeastern 

 Wyoming.............................................................................3-32 

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

 Eagle Butte Mine.................................................................3-37 

Figure 3–5. Annual Coal Production and Overburden Removal vs. 

 Ambient Particulates for Eagle Butte Mine (1996 

 through 2005).....................................................................3-38 
 Table of Contents 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application xiii 

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 

Figure 3-6. Maximum Modeled PM10 and NOx Concentrations at the 

 Eagle Butte Mine Ambient Air Boundary for the Year 

 2005 ...................................................................................3-40 

Figure 3-7. Maximum Modeled PM10 and NOx Concentrations at 

 the Eagle Butte Mine Ambient Air Boundary for the 

 Year 2006 ...........................................................................3-41 

Figure 3-8. Residences, School Bus Stops, Public Roads, and other 

 Publicly Accessible Facilities Within and Adjacent to the 

 Eagle Butte West LBA Tract ................................................3-45 

Figure 3-9. Visibility in the Badlands and Bridger Wilderness Area........3-63 

Figure 3-10. Locations of Currently Active Groundwater Monitoring 

 and Water Supply Wells at the Eagle Butte Mine .................3-72 

Figure 3-11. Geologic Cross Section of the Wasatch Formation 

 Overburden in the Area of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract..3-73 

Figure 3-12. Life of Mine Drawdown Map, Resulting from Currently 

 Approved Mining With Addition of the Eagle Butte West 

 LBA Tract............................................................................3-81 

Figure 3-13. Surface Water Features Within and Adjacent to the 

 Eagle Butte West LBA Tract ................................................3-87 

Figure 3-14. Raptor Nest Sites, Sage Grouse Leks, and Prairie Dog Towns 

Within and Adjacent to the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract .... 3-119 

Figure 3-15. Average Male Sage-Grouse Lek Attendance Within the 

 Northeast Wyoming Local Working Group Area 

 (1967-2005) ...................................................................... 3-126 

Figure 3-16. Average Male Sage-Grouse Lek Attendance Statewide, 

 Within the Northeast Wyoming Local Working Group Area, 

 and Within the Thunder Basin National Grasslands 

 (1996-2005) ...................................................................... 3-127 

Figure 3-17. Surface Ownership Within the Eagle Butte West LBA 

 Tract ................................................................................. 3-138 

Figure 3-18. Surface Ownership Detail of Echo Subdivision Area........... 3-139 

Figure 3-19. Oil and Gas Wells and Oil and Gas Ownership Within the 

 Eagle Butte West LBA Tract............................................... 3-141 

Figure 3-20. Relationship Between A-Scale Decibel Readings and 

 Sounds of Daily Life........................................................... 3-156 

Figure 3-21. Transportation Facilities Within and Adjacent to the 

 Eagle Butte West LBA Tract............................................... 3-159 

Figure 3-22. Oil and Gas Pipelines Within and Adjacent to the 

 Eagle Butte West LBA Tract............................................... 3-160 

Figure 3-23. U.S. Highway 14-16 Proposed Alternative Relocation 

 Routes............................................................................... 3-163 

Figure 3-24. Estimated Wyoming and Federal Revenues from 2005 

 Coal Production in Campbell County ................................. 3-170 

Figure 4-1. Wyoming Study Area for PRB Coal Review Studies 

 Evaluating Current and Projected Levels of Development .......4-3 
Table of Contents 

xiv Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 

Figure 4-2. Tons of Federal Coal Leased Versus Tons of Coal Mined 

 Since 1990 ............................................................................4-5 

Figure 4-3. Projected Total Coal Production from Campbell and 

 Converse Counties Under the Lower and Upper Production 

Scenarios ..............................................................................4-9 

Figure 4-4. Wyoming Task 3 Study Area for PRB Coal Review Studies 

Evaluating Projected Environmental Consequences.............4-26 

Figure 4-5. Extrapolated Extent of Cumulative Drawdown Within the 

Wyodak Coal Aquifer in the Coal Mine Subregion 1 .............4-45 

Figure 4-6. Projected Campbell County Population and Employment 

 to 2020................................................................................4-83 

Figure 4-7. Projected Housing Demand in the PRB Study Area Under 

 the Lower Production Scenario.............................................4-86 

Figure 4-8. Projected School Enrollment Trends to 2020 Under the 

 Lower Production Scenario ..................................................4-88 

LIST OF APPENDICES 

Appendix A. Federal and State Agencies and Permitting Requirements 

Appendix B. Unsuitability Criteria for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

Appendix C. Coal Lease-By-Application Flow Chart 

Appendix D. Bureau of Land Management Special Coal Lease Stipulations 

and Form 3400-12 Coal Lease 

Appendix E. Biological Assessment for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract EIS 

Appendix F. BLM Sensitive Species Evaluation for the Eagle Butte West Coal 

Lease Application EIS 

Appendix G. CBNG Wells Capable of Production on or in Sections Adjacent to 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

Appendix H. Airport Issues 

Appendix I. Comment Letters on the Final EIS and Responses 
 Abbreviations and Acronyms 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application xv 

Abbreviations and Acronyms Used in this Report

AAQS Ambient Air Quality Standards 

Ac acre(s) 

ACC Antelope Coal Company 

ac-ft acre-foot, acre-feet 

ac-ft/yr acre-foot per year, acre-feet per year 

AIRS Aerometric Information and Retrieval System 

ALC Ark Land Company 

AML Abandoned Mine Land 

ANC acidification neutralization capacity 

ANFO ammonium nitrate fuel oil 

APLIC Avian Power Line Interaction Committee 

AQD Air Quality Division 

AQRV air quality related values 

ARCO Atlantic Richfield Company 

AREV SEO water rights database and program 

ARS Air Resource Specialists, Inc. 

AUM animal unit month 

AVF alluvial valley floor 

BACM best available control measures 

BACT best available control technology 

bcf billion cubic feet 

bcy bank cubic yards 

BLM Bureau of Land Management 

BNSF Burlington Northern Santa Fe 

BNSF-UP, BNSF&UP Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Union Pacific 

BN-UP, BN&UP Burlington Northern-Union Pacific 

BOE barrels of oil equivalent 

B.P. before present 

Btu British thermal units 

Btu/lb British thermal units per pound 

CAA Clean Air Act 

CAAA Clean Air Act Amendments 

CAGR compounded annual growth rate 

CANDO Converse Area New Development Organization 

CBNG coal bed natural gas 

CCBC Campbell County Board of Commissioners 

CCEDC Campbell County Economic Development Corporation 

CCSD Campbell County School District 

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 

Liability Act of 1980 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

cfs cubic feet per second 

CHIA Cumulative Hydrologic Impact Assessment 

CO carbon monoxide 

CO2 carbon dioxide 

COE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

CREG Consensus Revenue Estimating Group 

CRI Caballo Rojo, Inc. 

CWA Clean Water Act 

cy cubic yards 

dBA A-weighted decibels 
Abbreviations and Acronyms 

xvi Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Abbreviations and Acronyms Used in this Report

DEIS Final Environmental Impact Statement 

DM&E Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad Corporation 

DOI Department of the Interior 

dv deciview, a measure of view impairment 

EA Environmental Assessment 

EC elemental carbon particles (re: air quality) 

EIS Environmental Impact Statement 

ENCOAL Encoal Corporation 

EOR enhanced oil recovery 

EPA Environmental Protection Agency 

EQC Environmental Quality Council 

ESA Endangered Species Act 

EUR estimated ultimate recovery 

EVG Erathem-Vanir Geological, PLLC 

F Fahrenheit 

FAA Federal Aviation Administration 

FCLAA Federal Coal Leasing Act Amendments of 1976 

FCW Foundation Coal West, Inc. 

FDM Fugitive Dust Model 

FEA Final Environmental Assessment 

FEIS Final Environmental Impact Statement 

FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

FLM Federal Land Management 

FLPMA Federal Land Policy Management Act of 1976 

FR Federal Register 

ft feet, foot 

ft/day feet per day 

ft/mile feet per mile 

ft3 cubic feet 

FY fiscal year 

g Gram 

GAO General Accounting Office 

GAGMO Gillette Area Ground Water Monitoring Organization 

GDP Gross Domestic Product 

gpm gallons per minute 

GSP Gross State Product 

HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant 

hp horsepower 

hr hour 

IBLA Interior Board of Land Appeals 

IMPROVE Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments 

IWAQM Interagency Workgroup on Air Quality Monitoring 

JRCC Jacobs Ranch Coal Company 

km kilometers 

KMCC Kerr-McGee Coal Corporation 

kV kilovolts 

LAC limits of acceptable change (re: air quality) 

LBA lease by application 

lbs/mmBtu pounds per million British thermal units 

LFC liquids from coal 

LNCM Lands Necessary to Conduct Mining 
 Abbreviations and Acronyms 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application xvii 

Abbreviations and Acronyms Used in this Report

LOC level of concern 

LOP life of project 

LRMP Land and Resource Management Plan 

LW Lower Wyodak coal seam 

MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology 

MBHFI migratory birds of high federal interest 

μeq/L microequivalents per liter 

μg/m3 micrograms per cubic meter 

μmhos/cm micromhos per centimeter 

mcf thousand cubic feet 

MDEQ Montana Department of Environmental Quality 

MDEQ/AWM Montana Department of Environmental Quality/Air and Waste 

Management Bureau 

MEI maximally exposed individual 

mg/L milligrams per liter 

MLA Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 

MLE most likely exposure 

mm million 

mmbcy million bank cubic yards 

mmbo million barrels of oil 

mmcf million cubic feet 

mmcfpd million cubic feet of gas per day 

mmgpy million gallons per year 

mmt million tons 

mmtpy million tons per year 

mph miles per hour 

MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area 

MSHA Mine Safety and Health Administration 

MW megawatts 

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

NADP National Atmospheric Deposition Program 

NAPG North American Power Group 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

NIOSH National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health 

NO nitrogen oxide 

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

NO2 nitrogen dioxide 

NOx nitrogen oxides 

NPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination System 

NPS National Park Service 

NRCS Natural Resource Conservation Service 

NRHP National Register of Historic Places 

NSPS National Source Performance Standards 

NWI National Wetlands Inventory 

NWLWG Northeast Wyoming Local Sage-Grouse Working Group 

O3 photochemical oxidants 

OC organic carbon particles 

ORV Off road vehicle 

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration 

OSM Office of Surface Mining Reclamation & Enforcement 

PECs passive enclosure control systems 
Abbreviations and Acronyms 

xviii Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Abbreviations and Acronyms Used in this Report

PFYC Probable Fossil Yield Classification 

P.M. Prime Meridian 

PM2.5 particulates finer than 2.5 microns in effective diameter 

PM10 particulates finer than 10 microns in effective diameter 

PMT postmining topography 

PP&L Pacific Power and Light Company 

ppm parts per million 

PRB Powder River Basin 

PRBRC Powder River Basin Resource Council 

PRCC Powder River Coal Company 

PRRCT Powder River Regional Coal Team 

PSD Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

R2P2 Resource Recovery and Protection Plan 

RAG RAG Coal West, Inc. 

RH relative humidity 

RMP Resource Management Plan 

ROD Record of Decision 

ROW Right-of-Way 

RV recreational vehicle 

SAR sodium absorption ratio 

SARA Superfund Amendment & Reauthorization Act of 1986 

scf/ton standard cubic feet per ton 

SCSD Sheridan County School District 

SEIS Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 

SEO State Engineer’s Office 

SHPO State Historic Preservation Office 

SIP State Implementation Plan 

SLAMS State and Local Air Monitoring Stations 

SMCRA Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 

SO2 sulfur dioxide 

SPRB South Powder River Basin 

STB Surface Transportation Board 

T&E threatened and endangered 

TBCC Thunder Basin Coal Company, LLC 

TBNG Thunder Basin National Grassland 

TCC Triton Coal Company, LLC 

TCO temporary cessation of operations 

TDS total dissolved solids 

TEOM Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance 

TPY tons per year 

TSP total suspended particulates 

TSS total suspended solids 

TWC Thunderbird Wildlife Consulting, Inc. 

UP Union Pacific 

U.S. United States 

USC, U.S.C. United States Code 

USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture 

USDA-FS U.S. Department of Agriculture - Forest Service 

USDI U.S. Department of the Interior 

USGS U.S. Geological Survey 

USFS U.S. Forest Service 
 Abbreviations and Acronyms 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application xix 

Abbreviations and Acronyms Used in this Report

USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

UW Upper Wyodak coal seam 

VMT vehicle miles traveled 

VOCs volatile organic compounds 

VRM visual resource management 

WA Wilderness Area 

WAAQS Wyoming Ambient Air Quality Standards 

WAQSR Wyoming Air Quality Standards and Regulations 

WARMS Wyoming Air Resources Monitoring System 

WCIC Wyoming Coal Information Committee 

WDEQ Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality 

WDEQ/AQD Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality/Air Quality 

Division 

WDEQ/LQD Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality/Land Quality 

Division 

WFA Western Fuels Association 

WGFD Wyoming Game and Fish Department 

WMA Wyoming Mining Association 

WOC Wyoming Outdoor Council 

WOGCC Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission 

WRCC Western Regional Climate Center 

WRRI Water Resources Research Institute 

WSBLC Wyoming State Board of Land Commissioners 

WSFC Wyoming School Facilities Commission 

WSGS Wyoming State Geological Survey 

WSO-RMG Wyoming State Office Reservoir Management Group (BLM) 

WYDOT Wyoming Department of Transportation 
1.0 Introduction 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 1-1 

1.0 INTRODUCTION 

This EIS1 analyzes the environmental impacts of leasing a tract of federal coal 

reserves adjacent to the Eagle Butte Mine, an operating surface coal mine in 

the eastern PRB of Wyoming. The operator of the Eagle Butte Mine filed an 

application to lease the federal coal included in a maintenance coal tract under 

the regulations at 43 CFR 3425, Leasing On Application. The Division of 

Minerals and Lands at the BLM Wyoming State Office reviewed the application 

and determined that the lease application meets the regulatory requirements 

for a lease by application, or LBA. The tract is referred to as the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract. Figure 1-1 shows the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, other 

currently pending LBA tracts, and the existing federal leases, including 

previously leased LBA tracts, in the Wyoming PRB. 

A separate document, entitled Supplementary Information on the Affected 

Environment in the General Analysis Area for the Eagle Butte West Coal Lease 

Application EIS, has been prepared to provide more detailed information on the 

affected environment in the general analysis area. Copies of the supplementary 

information document are available on request and can be viewed at the BLM 

offices in Casper and Cheyenne. 

1.1 Background 

On December 28, 2001, RAG Coal West, Inc. filed an application with the BLM 

for federal coal reserves in a tract located west of and immediately adjacent to 

the Eagle Butte Mine in Campbell County, Wyoming, approximately three miles 

north of Gillette, Wyoming (Figure 1-1). The tract, which was originally referred 

to as the Eagle Butte Mine West Extension LBA Tract, was assigned case file 

number WYW155132. The federal coal reserves were applied for as a 

maintenance tract for the Eagle Butte Mine. BLM subsequently renamed the 

tract the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract and RAG submitted a modification to the 

application to the BLM, effective October 20, 2003, which decreased the size of 

the lease application area and increased the coal volume. BLM reviewed the 

proposed tract modification and notified the company by letter, dated March 8, 

2005, that their application had been revised. 

In August 2004, RAG finalized the sale of the Eagle Butte Mine to Foundation 

Coal West, Inc. (FCW), a directly held subsidiary of Foundation Coal Holdings, 

Inc. In this EIS, the applicant for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract will be 

referred to as FCW. 

These federal coal lands are located within the Powder River Federal Coal 

Region, which was decertified in January 1990. Although the Powder River 

Federal Coal Region is decertified, the PRRCT, a federal/state advisory board 

established to develop recommendations concerning management of federal 

coal in the region, has continued to meet regularly and review all federal lease 

 

1 Refer to page xv for a list of abbreviations and acronyms used in this document. 
Maysdorf

EAGLE BUTTE WEST

WRIGHT

JUNCTION

Converse County

Campbell County Weston County

Niobrara County

To Douglas 46 Miles

RENO

 LEGEND

GILLETTE

Weston County Crook County

ROZET

Campbell County

MOORCROFT

Johnson CountyCampbell County

To Buffalo 38 Miles

North Antelope Rochelle Mine

To Newcastle 29 Miles

Belle Ayr North

Belle Ayr Mine

Dry Fork Mine

Wyodak Mine

Rawhide Mine

Caballo Mine

Cordero Rojo Mine

Caballo Rojo Mine

Cordero Mine

Coal Creek Mine

Buckskin Mine

Eagle Butte Mine

Antelope Mine

Black Thunder Mine

Jacobs Ranch Mine

West Antelope II

Caballo West

SCALE: 1"= 10 MILES

West Coal Creek

West

Jacobs

Ranch

Hay Creek II

Maysdorf II

Hilight Field

West Hilight

Porcupine

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

1.0 Introduction

1-2 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application
1.0 Introduction 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 1-3 

applications in the region. The PRRCT reviewed this maintenance coal lease 

application at public meetings held on May 30, 2002, in Casper, Wyoming and 

on April 27, 2005, in Gillette, Wyoming. The PRRCT recommended that the 

BLM continue to process the Eagle Butte West lease application at both 

meetings. 

In order to process an LBA, the BLM must evaluate the quantity, quality, 

maximum economic recovery, and fair market value of the federal coal and 

fulfill the requirements of NEPA by evaluating the environmental impacts of 

leasing the federal coal. BLM does not authorize mining by issuing a lease for 

federal coal, but the impacts of mining the coal are considered in this EIS 

because it is a logical consequence of issuing a maintenance lease to an 

existing mine. This EIS has been prepared to evaluate the site-specific and 

cumulative environmental impacts of leasing and developing the federal coal 

included in the Eagle Butte West application area. BLM will use the analysis in 

this EIS to decide whether to hold a competitive, sealed-bid lease sale for the 

tract as applied for, hold a competitive, sealed-bid lease sale for a modified 

tract, or reject the lease application and not offer the tract for sale at this time. 

A Record of Decision will be issued and, if the decision is to offer the tract for 

lease, a sale will be held. If a sale is held, the bidding at the sale would be 

open to any qualified bidder; it would not be limited to the applicant. 

If the lease sale is held, a lease would be issued to the highest bidder at the 

sale if a federal sale panel determines that the high bid meets or exceeds the 

fair market value of the coal as determined by BLM’s economic evaluation and 

if the U.S. Department of Justice determines that there would be no antitrust 

violations if a lease is issued to the high bidder. 

In return for receiving a lease, a lessee must pay the federal government a 

bonus equal to the amount it bids at the time the lease sale is held (the bonus 

can be paid in five yearly installments), make annual rental payments to the 

federal government, and make royalty payments to the federal government 

when the coal is mined. Federal bonus, rental, and royalty payments are 

equally divided with the state in which the lease is located. 

Federal, state, and local agencies may qualify as cooperating agencies because 

of “jurisdiction by law or special expertise” (40 CFR 1501.6, 1508.5). BLM 

invited the participation of potentially qualified agencies as cooperating 

agencies in the preparation of the Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application EIS. 

In response, one federal agency (OSM), four state agencies (WDEQ/LQD, 

WDEQ/AQD, WYDOT, and the Wyoming State Planning Office), and one county 

agency (the Campbell County Board of Commissioners) requested cooperating 

agency status. OSM has primary responsibility to administer Federal programs 

that regulate surface coal mining operations. WDEQ has entered into a 

cooperative agreement with the Secretary of the Interior to regulate surface coal 

mining operations on federal and non-federal lands within the State of 

Wyoming. WYDOT's responsibilities include planning and supervising road 

improvement work, maintaining roads, and supporting airports and aviation in 
1.0 Introduction 

1-4 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

the state. The responsibilities of the Campbell County Board of Commissioners 

include, but are not limited to, management and oversight of county roads and 

facilities and planning and zoning rules in the county. 

Since decertification of the Powder River Federal Coal Region, 17 federal coal 

leases have been sold at competitive sealed-bid sales and three exchanges of 

federal coal in the Wyoming portion of the Powder River Federal Coal Region 

have been completed (Table 1-1). A lease for a tract adjacent to the Eagle Butte 

Mine was issued to RAG on August 1, 1995, after they submitted the 

successful bid for a maintenance tract at a competitive sealed-bid coal lease 

sale (Figure 1-1 and Table 1-1). 

Table 1-2 summarizes the twelve lease applications that are currently pending. 

The Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for and the existing federal coal 

leases in the adjacent Eagle Butte Mine are shown in Figure 1-2. As applied 

for, the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract consists of a single block of federal coal 

and includes approximately 1,397.64 acres and an estimated 238 million tons 

of in-place coal reserves. Not all of the coal included in the Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract is currently considered to be mineable. U.S. Highway 14-16 overlies 

some of the coal included in the tract. SMCRA prohibits mining within 100 ft 

on either side of the ROW of any public road unless the appropriate public road 

authority allows the road to be relocated or closed after public notice, an 

opportunity for a public hearing, and a finding that the interests of the affected 

public and landowners will be protected [30 CFR 761.11(d)]. The coal 

underlying Highway 14-16, its ROW, and the 100 ft buffer zone is included in 

the tract being considered for leasing because that coal could be mined if 

WYDOT, the authorized agency, determines that the road can be moved [43 

CFR 3461.5(c)(2)(iii)]. If the highway is not moved, including the coal 

underlying the highway in the lease would allow maximum recovery of all the 

mineable coal adjacent to the 100 ft buffer zone on either side of the highway 

ROW. FCW estimates that approximately 27 million tons of mineable coal are 

included within the ROW and associated buffer zone. Excluding the federal 

coal reserves within the highway ROW and buffer zone, FCW estimates that 

approximately 211 million tons of coal reserves are mineable and that 

approximately 203 million tons of coal would be recovered from the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract as applied for. 

The Eagle Butte Mine, as currently permitted, includes 7,471 acres and 

originally contained approximately 707.9 million tons of mineable coal 

reserves. The mine produced approximately 25.3 million tons of coal in 2006. 

As of January 1, 2006, an estimated 374 million tons of in-place coal reserves 

remained at the Eagle Butte Mine. FCW estimates that approximately 340 

million tons of those remaining reserves are recoverable and that those 

recoverable reserves will be depleted in approximately 13.6 years, based on the 

assumption that the average production rate remains at approximately 25 

million tons per year. Eagle Butte Mine’s currently approved (by WDEQ/AQD 

on October 24, 2005) air quality permit (MD-1251) allows up to 35 million tons 
1.0 Introduction 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 1-5 

Table 1-1. Leases Issued and Exchanges Completed Since Decertification, 

Powder River Basin, Wyoming. 

Leases Issued 

LBA Name (Lease Number) 

Applicant Mine 

Current Lessee 

Effective Date 

Acres 

Leased1

Mineable Tons 

of Coal1

Successful 

Bid 

Jacobs Ranch (WYW117924) 

Jacobs Ranch Mine 

Jacobs Ranch Coal Co. 

10/1/1992 

1,708.620 147,423,560 $20,114,930.00 

West Black Thunder (WYW118907) 

Black Thunder Mine 

Thunder Basin Coal Co. 

10/1/1992 

3,492.495 429,048,216 $71,909,282.69 

North Antelope/Rochelle (WYW119554) 

North Antelope & Rochelle Mines 

Powder River Coal Co. 

10/1/1992 

3,064.040 403,500,000 $86,987,765.00 

West Rocky Butte (WYW122586) 

No Existing Mine2

Caballo Coal Co. 

1/1/1993 

463.205 56,700,000 $16,500,000.00 

Eagle Butte (WYW124783) 

Eagle Butte Mine 

Foundation Wyoming Land Co. 

8/1/1995 

1,059.180 166,400,000 $18,470,400.00 

Antelope (WYW128322) 

Antelope Mine 

Antelope Coal Co. 

2/1/1997 

617.200 60,364,000 $9,054,600.00 

North Rochelle (WYW127221) 

North Rochelle Mine 

Ark Land Co. 

1/1/1998 

1,481.930 157,610,000 $30,576,340.00 

Powder River (WYW136142) 

North Antelope Rochelle Mine 

Powder River Coal Co. 

9/1/1998 

4,224.225 532,000,000 $109,596,500.00 

Thundercloud (WYW136458) 

Jacobs Ranch Mine 

Thunder Basin Coal Co., LLC 

1/1/1999 

3,545.503 412,000,000 $158,000,008.50 

Horse Creek (WYW141435) 

Antelope Mine 

Antelope Coal Co. 

12/1/2000 

2,818.695 275,577,000 $91,220,120.70 

North Jacobs Ranch (WYW146744) 

Jacobs Ranch Mine 

Jacobs Ranch Coal Co. 

5/1/2002 

4,982.240 537,542,000 $379,504,652.00 

NARO South (WYW154001)

North Antelope Rochelle Mine 

BTU Western Resources, Inc. 

9/1/2004

2,956.725 297,469,000 $274,117,684.00 
1.0 Introduction 

1-6 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Table 1-1. Leases Issued and Exchanges Completed Since Decertification, 

Powder River Basin, Wyoming (Continued). 

Leases Issued 

LBA Name (Lease Number) 

Applicant Mine 

Current Lessee 

Effective Date 

Acres 

Leased1

Mineable Tons 

of Coal1

Successful 

Bid 

West Hay Creek (WYW151634) 

Buckskin Mine 

Kiewit Mining Properties, Inc. 

1/1/2005

921.158 142,698,000 $42,809,400.00

Little Thunder (WYW150318) 

Black Thunder Mine 

Ark Land LT Co. 

3/1/2005

5,083.500 718,719,000 $610,999,949.80

West Antelope (WYW151643) 

Antelope Mine 

Antelope Coal Co. 

3/1/2005

2,809.130 194,961,000 $146,311,000.00 

NARO North (WYW150210) 

North Antelope Rochelle Mine 

BTU Western Resources, Inc. 

3/1/2005 

2,369.380 324,627,000 $299,143,785.00 

West Roundup (WYW151134) 

North Rochelle Mine 

West Roundup Resources, Inc 

5/1/2005

2,812.510 327,186,000 $317,697,610.00 

TOTALS 44,409.736 5,183,824,776 $2,683,014,027.69 

Exchanges Completed 

Exchange Name 

Case File Number 

Exchange Proponent 

Exchange Type 

Effective Date

Acres 

Exchanged

Mineable Tons 

of Coal

Federal Coal 

Exchanged for: 

EOG (Belco) I-90 Lease Exchange

WYW150152 

EOG Resources (formerly Belco)3 

I-90 Lease Exchanged for New Lease 

4/1/2000 

599.170 106,000,000 Lease Rights to 

Belco 

I-90 Lease 

(WYW0322794). 

Pittsburg & Midway Coal Exchange

WYW148816 

Pittsburg and Midway Coal Mining Co. 

Private Land Exchanged for Federal Coal 

1/27/2005 

2,045.530 84,200,000 6,065.77 acres of 

land and some 

minerals in 

Lincoln, Carbon, 

and Sheridan 

Counties, 

Wyoming. 

Gold Mine Draw Lease Exchange 

WYW0321779, WYW154001 

Powder River Coal Co. 

AVF Lease Exchanged for New Lease 

6/25/2006

623.000 47,700,000 Lease rights to 

921.60 acres of 

leased federal coal 

underlying an AVF. 

TOTALS 3,267.700 237,900,000 

1 Information from Sale Notice. 

2 The West Rocky Butte LBA was originally leased to Northwestern Resources Co. 

3 The EOG Resources Belco Exchange lease is now owned by the Buckskin Mine.
1.0 Introduction 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 1-7 

Table 1-2. Pending LBAs and Exchanges, Powder River Basin, Wyoming. 

Pending LBAs 

LBA Name 

Lease Number 

Applicant Mine 

Application 

Date 

Acres as 

Applied for 

Estimated as 

Applied for 

Coal 

(mmt) Status 

Maysdorf 

(formerly Mt. Logan)

WYW154432 

Cordero Rojo Mine 

9/20/2001 

Modified 

11/8/2004 

2,219.39 230.30 2 FEIS available 

4/13/2007 

ROD in preparation 

Eagle Butte West 

(formerly West Extension)

WYW155132 

Eagle Butte Mine 

12/28/2001 

Modified 

10/16/2003 

1,397.64 228.00 3 DEIS available 

10/20/2006 

Hearing 11/14/2006 

FEIS in preparation 

Belle Ayr North 

WYW161248 

Belle Ayr Mine

7/06/2004 1,578.76 200.00 3 Scoping period ended 

6/1/2007 

DEIS in preparation 

West Antelope II 

WYW163340 

Antelope Mine

4/06/2005 4,108.60 429.70 1 Scoping period ended 

12/1/2006 

DEIS in preparation 

Hilight Field 

WYW164812 

Black Thunder Mine

10/07/2005 4,590.19 588.20 3 PRRCT reviewed 

4/19/2006 

West Hilight Field 

WYW172388 

Black Thunder Mine 

1/17/2006 2,370.52 428.00 3 PRRCT reviewed 

4/19/2006 

West Coal Creek 

WYW172585 

Coal Creek Mine 

2/10/2006 1,151.26 57.00 3 Scoping period ended 

12/1/2006 

DEIS in preparation 

Caballo West 

WYW172657 

Caballo Mine 

3/15/2006 777.48 87.52 2 Scoping period ended 

12/1/2006 

DEIS in preparation 

West Jacobs Ranch 

WYW172685 

Jacobs Ranch Mine 

3/24/2006 5,944.37 956.00 1 PRRCT reviewed 

4/19/2006 

Hay Creek II 

WYW172684 

Buckskin Mine 

3/24/2006 1,447.00 148.00 2 PRRCT reviewed 

4/19/2006 

Maysdorf II

WYW173360 

Cordero Rojo Mine 

9/1/2006 4,653.84 483.00 3 Scoping period ended 

12/1/2006 

DEIS in preparation 

Porcupine

WYW173408 

North Antelope Rochelle 

Mine

9/29/2006 5,111.39 598.00 2 PRRCT reviewed 

1/18/2007 

TOTALS 35,350.44 4,433.72 

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

2 Estimated tons of mineable coal as reported in the lease application. 

3 Estimated tons of recoverable coal as reported by the applicant.
T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

16

2 1

11

3

10

4

9

5

8

6

7

6

7

18

19

30

31

12

13

24

25

36

11

14

23

26

35

10

15

22

27

34

9

21

28

33

8

17

20

29

32

7

18

19

30

31

R. 72 W. R. 71 W.

R. 72 W. R. 71 W.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

U.S. Highway 14-16

U.S. Highway 14-16

State Highway 59

BNSF Railroad

LEGEND

0 2500 5000 10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Eagle Butte Mine Permit Boundary

Eagle Butte Mine Federal Coal Lease WYW0313773

Eagle Butte Mine Federal Coal Lease WYW78631

Eagle Butte Mine Federal Coal Lease WYW124783

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as Applied for (WYW155132)

Figure 1-2. Eagle Butte Mine Federal Coal Leases and Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as Applied for.

1.0 Introduction

1-8 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application
1.0 Introduction 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 1-9 

of coal per year to be mined. If the average rate of production increases to the 

permitted level of 35 million tons per year, the remaining recoverable reserves 

would be depleted in about 9.7 years. 

The Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is contiguous to and west of the Eagle Butte 

Mine and a portion of the tract lies within the Eagle Butte Mine’s current 

mining permit boundary (Figure 1-2). The area applied for is substantially 

similar to the adjacent mine for which detailed site-specific environmental data 

have been collected and for which environmental analyses have previously been 

prepared to secure the existing lease and necessary mining permits. As shown 

in Figure 1-1, the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is not contiguous with any of the 

other existing mines in this area. 

The surface of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for is owned by FCW. 

Currently, the principal land uses within the LBA tract are grazing by domestic 

animals and wildlife habitat. The grazing lands include agricultural 

pasturelands and native grasslands. CBNG production is also a major land 

use within the LBA tract. 

The mining method would be truck and shovel, which is the mining method 

currently in use at the Eagle Butte Mine. The coal would be used primarily for 

electric power generation. 

After mining, the land would be reclaimed to a rangeland function suitable for 

use by livestock and wildlife, as is the current practice at the Eagle Butte Mine. 

Industrial postmining land uses, which include but are not limited to, oil and 

gas wells, pipelines, roads, and utility easements, will also be reestablished as 

required. 

1.2 Purpose and Need for Action 

BLM administers the federal coal leasing program under the Mineral Leasing 

Act of 1920. A federal coal lease grants the lessee the exclusive right to obtain 

a mining permit for, and to mine coal on, the leased tract subject to the terms 

of the lease, the mining permit, and applicable state and federal laws. Before a 

new lease can be mined, the lessee must obtain approval of a detailed permit to 

conduct mining operations. 

This EIS is being prepared in response to an application BLM received from an 

existing mine, the Eagle Butte Mine, to lease a tract of federal coal in the 

Wyoming PRB. In response to this coal lease application, the BLM must decide 

whether to hold a competitive, sealed-bid lease sale for the tract as applied for, 

hold a competitive sealed-bid lease sale for a modified tract, or reject the 

current lease application and not offer the tract for sale at this time. 

FCW has applied for the coal reserves in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract in 

order to extend the life of the Eagle Butte Mine. Mining operations at the Eagle 
1.0 Introduction 

1-10 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Butte Mine would be extended for about eight additional years if FCW acquires 

a lease for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, the coal underlying U.S. Highway 

14-16 is not mined, and the average production rate at the Eagle Butte Mine is 

25 million tons per year. If production increases to the permitted level of 35 

million tons per year, mining operations would be extended by about six years 

if FCW acquires a lease for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, assuming that the 

coal underlying the highway is not mined. If Highway 14-16 is moved and the 

underlying coal is mined, production would be extended for about one 

additional year. If the LBA tract is leased to the applicant as a maintenance 

tract, the mining and reclamation permit for the adjacent Eagle Butte Mine 

would have to be amended to include the new lease area before it could be 

disturbed. This process takes several years to complete. FCW is applying for 

federal coal reserves now so that they can negotiate new contracts and then 

complete the permitting process in time to meet anticipated new contract 

requirements. 

As discussed above, the purpose of FCW’s application is to allow the Eagle 

Butte Mine access to a continuing supply of low sulfur compliance coal, which 

it can continue to sell to power plants for the purpose of electric power 

generation. According to the Energy Information Administration, coal was 

responsible for more than 51 percent of the total generation in the electric 

power sector in 2004 and 2005 (EIA 2007). Continued leasing of PRB coal 

enables coal-fired power plants to meet CAA requirements without constructing 

new plants, revamping existing plants, or switching to existing alternative 

fuels. This helps provide a stable supply of power to meet increasing demand 

without a potentially significant increase in power costs for individuals and 

businesses. 

A primary goal of the National Energy Policy is to add energy supplies from 

diverse sources, including domestic oil, gas, and coal, as well as hydropower 

and nuclear power. BLM recognizes that the continued extraction of coal is 

essential to meet the nation’s future energy needs. As a result, private 

development of federal coal reserves is integral to the BLM coal leasing program 

under the authority of the MLA, as well as FLPMA and FCLAA. The coal 

leasing program, managed by BLM, encourages the development of domestic 

coal reserves and reduction of the U.S. dependence on foreign sources of 

energy. As a result of the leasing and subsequent mining and sale of federal 

coal resources in the PRB, the public receives lease bonus payments, lease 

royalty payments, and a reliable supply of low sulfur coal for power generation. 

This EIS analyzes the environmental impacts of issuing a federal coal lease and 

mining the federal coal in the Eagle Butte West maintenance coal lease 

application as required by NEPA and associated rules and guidelines. A 

decision to hold a competitive sale and issue a lease for the lands in this 

application is a prerequisite for mining but it is not the enabling action that 

would allow mining to begin. The BLM does not authorize mining operations 

by issuing a lease. After a lease has been issued but prior to mine 

development, the lessee must file a permit application package with the 
1.0 Introduction 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 1-11 

WDEQ/LQD and OSM for a surface mining permit and approval of the MLA 

mining plan. An analysis of a detailed site-specific mining and reclamation 

plan occurs at that time. Authorities and responsibilities of the BLM and other 

concerned regulatory agencies are described in the following sections. 

1.3 Regulatory Authority and Responsibility 

The Eagle Butte West maintenance coal lease application was submitted and 

will be processed and evaluated under the following federal authorities: 

• MLA, as amended; 

• Multiple-Use Sustained Yield Act of 1960; 

• NEPA; 

• FCLAA; 

• FLPMA; and 

• SMCRA. 

The BLM is the lead agency responsible for leasing federal coal lands under the 

MLA as amended by FCLAA and is also responsible for preparation of this EIS 

to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of issuing a coal lease. 

OSM is a cooperating agency on this EIS. After a federal coal lease is issued, 

SMCRA gives OSM primary responsibility to administer programs that regulate 

surface coal mining operations and the surface effects of underground coal 

mining operations. WDEQ is also a cooperating agency on this EIS. Pursuant 

to Section 503 of SMCRA, the WDEQ developed, and in November 1980 the 

Secretary of the Interior approved, a permanent program authorizing WDEQ to 

regulate surface coal mining operations and surface effects of underground 

mining on nonfederal lands within the State of Wyoming. In January 1987, 

pursuant to Section 523(c) of SMCRA, WDEQ entered into a cooperative 

agreement with the Secretary of the Interior authorizing WDEQ to regulate 

surface coal mining operations and surface effects of underground mining on 

federal lands within the state. 

Pursuant to the cooperative agreement, a federal coal lease holder in Wyoming 

must submit a permit application package to OSM and WDEQ/LQD for any 

proposed coal mining and reclamation operations on federal lands in the state. 

WDEQ/LQD reviews the permit application package to insure the permit 

application complies with the permitting requirements and the proposed coal 

mining operation meets the performance standards of the approved Wyoming 

program. OSM, BLM, and other federal agencies review the permit application 

package to insure it complies with the terms of the coal lease, the MLA, NEPA, 

and other federal laws and their attendant regulations. If the permit 

application package does comply, WDEQ issues the applicant a permit to 

conduct coal mining operations. OSM recommends approval, approval with 

conditions, or disapproval of the MLA mining plan to the Assistant Secretary of 

the Interior, Land and Minerals Management. Before the MLA mining plan can 

be approved, the BLM must concur with this recommendation. 
1.0 Introduction 

1-12 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

If a proposed LBA tract is leased to an existing mine, the lessee is required to 

revise its coal mining permit prior to mining the newly-leased coal, following 

the processes outlined above. As a part of that process, a detailed new plan 

would be developed showing how the newly-leased lands would be mined and 

reclaimed. The area of mining disturbance would be larger than the newlyleased area to allow for activities such as overstripping, matching reclaimed 

topography to undisturbed topography, constructing flood control and 

sediment control facilities, and related activities. Specific impacts that would 

occur during the mining and reclamation of the LBA tract would be addressed 

in the mining and reclamation plan, and specific mitigation measures for 

anticipated impacts would be described in detail at that time. 

WDEQ enforces the performance standards and permit requirements for 

reclamation during a mine’s operation and has primary authority in 

environmental emergencies. OSM retains oversight responsibility for this 

enforcement. Where federal surface or coal resources are involved, BLM has 

authority in emergency situations if WDEQ or OSM cannot act before 

environmental harm and damage occurs. In preparing this EIS, BLM also has 

a responsibility to consult with and obtain the comments and assistance of 

other state and federal agencies that have jurisdiction by law or special 

expertise with respect to potential environmental impacts. 

Appendix A presents other federal and state permitting requirements that must 

be satisfied to mine this LBA tract. 

1.4 Relationship to BLM Policies, Plans, and Programs 

In addition to the federal acts listed under Section 1.3, guidance and 

regulations for managing and administering public lands, including the federal 

coal lands in the FCW application, are set forth in 40 CFR 1500 (Protection of 

Environment), 43 CFR 1601 (Planning, Programming, Budgeting), and 43 CFR 

3400 (Coal Management). 

Specific guidance for processing applications is provided by BLM Manual 3420, 

Competitive Coal Leasing (BLM 1989) and the 1991 Powder River Regional Coal 

Team Operational Guidelines For Coal Lease-By-Applications (BLM 1991). The 

National Environmental Policy Act Handbook (BLM 1988) has been followed in 

developing this EIS. 

1.5 Conformance with Existing Land Use Plans 

FCLAA requires that lands considered for leasing be included in a 

comprehensive land use plan and that leasing decisions be compatible with 

that plan. The BLM Approved Resource Management Plan for Public Lands 

Administered by the Bureau of Land Management Buffalo Field Office (BLM 

2001a) [an update of the Buffalo Resource Area Resource Management Plan 

(BLM 1985)] governs and addresses the leasing of federal coal in Campbell 

County. 
1.0 Introduction 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 1-13 

The major land use planning decision that BLM must make concerning the 

federal coal resources is a determination of which federal coal lands are 

acceptable for further consideration for leasing. There are four screening 

procedures that BLM uses to identify these coal lands. These screening 

procedures require BLM to: 

• estimate development potential of the coal lands; 

• apply the unsuitability criteria listed in the regulations at 43 CFR 3461; 

• make multiple land use decisions that eliminate federal coal deposits from 

consideration for leasing to protect other resource values; and 

• consult with surface owners who meet the criteria defined in the 

regulations at 43 CFR 3400.0-5(gg)(1) and (2). 

Only those federal coal lands that pass these screens are given further 

consideration for leasing. BLM has applied these coal screens to federal coal 

lands in Campbell County several times, starting in the early 1980s. Most 

recently, in 1993, BLM began the process of reapplying the four screens to 

federal coal lands in Campbell, Converse, and Sheridan counties. This 

analysis was adopted in the 2001 BLM Buffalo Field Office RMP update (BLM 

2001a). The results of this analysis are included as Appendix D of the 2001 

BLM Buffalo Field Office RMP update, which can be viewed in the 2001 NEPA 

documents section on the Wyoming BLM website at: http://www.blm.gov/wy/ 

st/en/info/NEPA/documents.html. 

Under the first coal screening procedure, a coal tract must be located within an 

area that has been determined to have coal development potential [43 CFR 

3420.1-4(e)(1)]. The Eagle Butte West coal lease application is within the area 

identified as having coal development potential by the BLM in the coal 

screening analyses published in the 2001 BLM Buffalo Field Office planning 

document. 

The second coal screening procedure requires the application of the 

unsuitability criteria listed in the regulations at 43 CFR 3461. These coal 

mining unsuitability criteria have been applied to high to moderate coal 

development potential lands in the Wyoming PRB, including the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract and surrounding lands during the coal screening conducted for 

the 2001 BLM Buffalo Office RMP update. No lands included in the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract were found to be unsuitable for mining during the 

application of the unsuitability criteria for the 2001 RMP update; however, sitespecific unsuitability determinations for some criteria were deferred until an 

application to lease was filed. 

Appendix B of this EIS summarizes the unsuitability criteria, describes the 

general findings for the 2001 BLM Buffalo Field Office RMP update, and 

presents a validation of these findings for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 

Unsuitability Criterion Number 3 states that lands within 100 ft of the outside 

line of the ROW of a public road shall be considered unsuitable for surface coal 
1.0 Introduction 

1-14 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

mining, with certain exceptions. One of the exceptions allows surface coal 

mining in the ROW and buffer zone for a public road if the regulatory authority 

(or the appropriate public road authority designated by the regulatory 

authority) allows the public road to be relocated or closed after providing public 

notice and opportunity for a public hearing; and finding in writing that the 

interests of the affected public and landowners will be protected [30 CFR 

761.11(d) and 43 CFR 3461.5(c)(iii)]. 

As discussed in Section 1.1 and shown in Figure 1-2, a portion of Highway 14-

16 crosses the eastern edge of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. The 2001 BLM 

Buffalo RMP update deferred a decision on the unsuitability of the Highway 14-

16 ROW and associated buffer zone until a leasing action occurred, with the 

assumption that the exception discussed above would be applicable. At this 

time, FCW does not have approval from the appropriate public road authority 

(WYDOT) to relocate the road and the exception does not apply. As a result, 

BLM has determined that the portion of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract that 

includes Highway 14-16, its ROW, and a 100-ft buffer zone on either side of the 

ROW must be considered unsuitable for mining under Unsuitability Criterion 

Number 3 at this time. 

FCW and WYDOT are working on a plan to relocate Highway 14-16, which 

would allow recovery of the coal underlying the highway, the ROW and the 

buffer zone. If the road relocation is approved, the exception to Unsuitablity 

Criterion Number 3 would be applicable and the unsuitability determination for 

the coal underlying Highway 14-16, the ROW, and the associated buffer zone 

could be reconsidered. 

Although lands within the Highway 14-16 ROW and associated buffer zone are 

now determined to be unsuitable for mining, they are included in the LBA 

tract. If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased, but FCW does not get 

approval to relocate the road and the unsuitability designation remains in 

place, including these lands in the tract would allow recovery of all the 

mineable coal adjacent to and outside of the highway buffer zone and would 

comply with the coal leasing regulations, which do not allow leasing in less 

than 10-acre aliquot parts. If a permit to relocate the road is approved, 

including these lands in the tract would allow recovery of the coal underlying 

the highway ROW and associated buffer zone. A stipulation stating that no 

mining activity may be conducted within the Highway 14-16 ROW and 

associated 100-foot buffer zone until a permit to move the highway is approved 

will be attached if a lease is issued for this tract. The exclusion of the coal 

underlying the highway ROW and associated buffer zone from mining activity 

by lease stipulation honors the finding of unsuitability for mining under 

Unsuitability Criterion Number 3 for Highway 14-16. 

The third coal screening procedure, a multiple land use conflict analysis, must 

be completed to identify and “eliminate additional coal deposits from further 

consideration for leasing to protect resource values of a locally important or 

unique nature not included in the unsuitability criteria”, in accordance with 43 
1.0 Introduction 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 1-15 

CFR 3420.1-4(e)(3). The 2001 Buffalo RMP update addresses two types of 

multiple land use conflicts: municipal/residential conflicts and multiple 

mineral development (coal versus oil and gas) conflicts. 

The municipal/residential multiple land use conflict was addressed in the 1985 

Buffalo RMP by applying buffers around the municipal planning boundaries for 

the major municipalities within the BLM Buffalo Field Office area, including 

Gillette. The Gillette Buffer Zone, which extends three miles beyond the City of 

Gillette Planning District (Figure 1-3), was established at the request of the city 

in 1979 during the planning process when the predecessor to the Buffalo RMP 

(the Buffalo Management Framework Plan) was amended. The Buffalo 

Management Framework Plan included a provision that prohibited new coal 

leasing within the Gillette Buffer Zone. The Buffer Zone provision was carried 

forward into the BLM Buffalo RMP (1985) and the BLM Buffalo RMP update 

(2001). The purpose of the buffer zone is to allow for community expansion 

and open space. At the time the Gillette Buffer Zone was established, several 

existing coal leases associated with existing approved coal mining operations 

were located within its northern and eastern boundaries (Figure 1-3). These 

mining operations were allowed to continue operations within the buffer zone. 

In 1987, the Wyodak Mine (Figure 1-3) applied for a lease modification to 

acquire a small portion of federal coal within the buffer zone that would be 

bypassed if it was not mined with the adjacent leased coal. The City of Gillette 

passed a resolution in favor of approving Wyodak’s proposed lease modification 

(Gillette City Council Resolution 634, 12/7/1987). In response to Wyodak’s 

application and the City of Gillette’s resolution, the Buffalo RMP was amended 

in 1988 to allow lease modifications, exchanges, and emergency coal leasing 

within the Gillette Buffer Zone in situations where coal adjacent to existing 

mines would be bypassed if coal leasing was not allowed within the buffer zone, 

and where coal leasing would not conflict with city planning. These leasing 

actions cannot extend more than one mile beyond the existing coal lease 

boundaries. The RMP amendment also specified that, before any new coal is 

leased within the buffer zone, the coal screening process, including application 

of the coal unsuitability criteria, would be conducted and the Gillette City 

Council would be consulted. 

The decertification of the Powder River Federal Coal Region in 1990 allowed the 

BLM to begin processing applications to lease federal coal under the Leasing on 

Application regulations. On July 25, 1991, the operator of the Eagle Butte 

Mine (AMAX Land Company at that time) filed an application for a tract of 

federal coal that extended one mile into the Gillette Buffer Zone. The City of 

Gillette passed a resolution in support of AMAX’s proposed LBA on July 1, 

1991. 

The 1988 amendment to the Buffalo RMP did not specifically identify Leasing 

on Application as being allowed within the Gillette Buffer Zone. The 

regulations that apply to emergency coal leasing, found at 43 CFR 3425, are 

the same regulations that apply to Leasing on Application (the LBA process). 
R. 74 W. R. 73 W. R. 72 W. R. 71 W.

T.

49

N.

T.

50

N.

T.

51

N.

T.

52

N.

T.

49

N.

T.

50

N.

T.

51

N.

T.

52

N.

R. 74 W. R. 73 W. R. 72 W. R. 71 W.

GILLETTE

LEGEND

10000 20000

40000

0

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract

as Applied for

Existing Eagle Butte Mine Federal Coal Leases

City of Gillette Buffer Zone

Existing Dry Fork Mine Federal Coal Leases

Existing Rawhide Mine Federal Coal Leases

Existing Buckskin Mine Federal Coal Leases

Existing Wyodak Mine Federal Coal Leases

Figure 1-3. City of Gillette Buffer Zone.

1.0 Introduction

1-16 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application
1.0 Introduction 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 1-17 

Therefore, on August 17, 1993, the manager of the BLM Buffalo Field Office 

approved a change to the Buffalo RMP that added LBAs to the types of leasing 

actions that can be considered within the Gillette Buffer Zone. 

A portion of the Eagle Butte Mine West Extension LBA Tract as originally 

applied for by RAG on December 28, 2001 was within the Gillette Buffer Zone, 

between the Gillette-Campbell County Airport runways. The City of Gillette 

provided a letter to RAG dated May 1, 2002, stating they had no objection to 

Eagle Butte Mine’s plan to expand mining operations onto the Eagle Butte 

Mine West Extension LBA Tract (now called the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract), 

as it had been presented to them. On October 20, 2003, the BLM received an 

application to modify the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. The modified tract 

configuration (the tract as applied for) does not extend into the Gillette Buffer 

Zone. 

The 2001 Buffalo RMP includes two decisions related to multiple mineral 

development conflicts in Campbell, Converse, and Sheridan Counties. With 

respect to oil and gas leasing in coal mining areas, the RMP update determines 

that oil and gas tracts that would interfere with coal mining operations would 

not be offered for lease but that, where possible, oil and gas leases will be 

issued with specific conditions to prevent a development conflict with coal 

mining operations. With respect to coal leasing in oil and gas fields, the 2001 

Buffalo RMP update states that coal leasing in producing oil and gas fields 

would be deferred unless or until coal development would not interfere with the 

economic recovery of the oil and gas resources, as determined on a case-bycase basis. 

Both conventional oil and gas and CBNG wells are present inside and around 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. BLM’s evaluation of the potential for conflict 

with the development of oil and gas resources within the LBA tract is included 

in the Mineral Resources discussion in Section 3.3 of this EIS. BLM’s policy 

and guidance on conflicts between surface coal mine and CBNG development is 

to optimize the recovery of both resources and ensure that the public receives a 

reasonable return, as explained in BLM Instruction Memorandum No. 2006-

153 (BLM 2006a). 

The fourth coal screening procedure requires consultation with surface owners 

who meet the criteria defined in the regulations at 43 CFR 3400.0-5(gg)(1) and 

(2). Surface owner consultation was completed during the preparation of coal 

screening analyses published in 2001 Buffalo RMP. Qualified private surface 

owners in the Gillette coal development potential area were provided the 

opportunity to express their preference for or against surface mining of federal 

coal under their private surface estate during both these screenings (see 

Chapter 7 for a definition of a “qualified surface owner”). No federal coal lands 

within the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract were eliminated from further 

consideration for leasing due to qualified surface owner conflicts at that time. 

The surface of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for is owned by FCW, 

and FCW does not meet the qualified surface owner criteria, as defined in the 
1.0 Introduction 

1-18 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

regulations. BLM will review the surface ownership in any tract that is 

considered for leasing prior to holding a lease sale for the tract. If any private 

surface owners who are determined to be qualified are identified at that time, 

surface owner consultation will be completed. 

In summary, the lands in the FCW coal lease application have been subjected 

to the four coal planning screens and determined to be acceptable for further 

consideration for leasing. Thus, a decision to lease the federal coal lands in 

this application would be in conformance with the current BLM Buffalo RMP. 

1.6 Consultation and Coordination 

Initial Involvement

BLM received the Eagle Butte West coal lease application on December 28, 

2001. The application was initially reviewed by the BLM, Wyoming State 

Office, Division of Mineral and Lands. The BLM ruled that the application and 

lands involved met the requirements of regulations governing coal leasing on 

application (43 CFR 3425). 

A notice announcing the receipt of the Eagle Butte West coal lease application 

published in the Federal Register on April 29, 2002 served as public notice that 

this coal lease application had been received. Copies of the notice were sent to 

voting and nonvoting members of the PRRCT, including the governors of 

Wyoming and Montana, the Northern Cheyenne Tribe, the Crow Tribal Council, 

OSM, USFWS, National Park Service, and U.S. Geological Survey. The April 

29, 2002 Federal Register notice refers to the tract as the Eagle Butte Mine 

West Extension LBA Tract. The tract was subsequently renamed the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract. 

The PRRCT reviewed this lease application at public meetings held on May 30, 

2002, in Casper, Wyoming, and again on April 27, 2005, in Gillette, Wyoming. 

At those meetings, the applicant presented information about their existing 

mine and the pending lease application to the PRRCT. At both meetings, the 

PRRCT recommended that the BLM continue to process this application. The 

major steps in processing an LBA are shown in Appendix C. 

The BLM published a Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact 

Statement and Notice of Scoping in the Federal Register on May 2, 2005. The 

publication announced the time and location of a public scoping meeting and 

requested public comment on the application. Letters requesting public 

comment and announcing the time and location of the public scoping meeting 

were mailed to all parties on the distribution list in April 2005. 

A public scoping meeting was held on May 17, 2005 in Gillette, Wyoming. At 

the public meeting, the applicant orally presented information about their mine 

and their need for the coal. The presentation was followed by a question and 

answer period, during which 22 oral comments were made. The scoping period 
1.0 Introduction 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 1-19 

extended from May 2 through August 1, 2005, during which time BLM received 

written, e-mailed, and telephoned-in comments from 16 entities. 

Chapter 5 provides a list of other federal, state, and local governmental 

agencies that were consulted in preparation of this EIS and the distribution list 

for this EIS. 

Issues and Concerns

Issues and concerns that have been expressed by the public and government 

agencies relating to the potential impacts of leasing the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract specifically, and to previous coal lease applications in general include: 

• potential conflicts with existing conventional oil and gas development and 

existing and proposed CBNG development; 

• cumulative impacts of mineral development on all other resources; 

• validity and currency of resource data; 

• potential impacts to public access, particularly if Highway 14-16 is 

moved; 

• potential impacts to occupied dwellings and the school building located 

near the tract; 

• potential impacts to the structural integrity of the Gillette-Campbell 

County Airport; 

• potential impacts to aircraft landing at and taking off from the airport and 

any possible disruptions of the airport’s operations by mining activities; 

• potential impacts to threatened and endangered species and other species 

of concern; 

• potential air quality impacts (including cumulative impacts to visibility); 

• potential surface and groundwater quality and quantity impacts; 

• potential impacts of and possible mitigation for nitrogen oxide emissions 

resulting from blasting of coal and overburden; 

• the need to include reasonably foreseeable actions such as the 

construction and operation of the DM&E railroad and power plants in the 

cumulative analysis; 

• the need to address increasing coal production in the PRB in the 

cumulative analysis; 

• potential impacts on cultural and paleontological resources; 

• potential impacts to wetland resources; and 

• short- and long-term impacts on aquatic and terrestrial wildlife species. 

Draft EIS

Parties on the distribution list were sent copies of this Draft EIS, and copies 

were made available for review at the BLM offices in Casper and Cheyenne, 

Wyoming. 

A notice announcing the availability of the Draft EIS was published in the 

Federal Register by the EPA on October 20, 2006. A 60-day comment period 
1.0 Introduction 

1-20 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

on the Draft EIS commenced with publication of the EPA’s notice of availability 

and ended on December 19, 2006. The BLM published a Notice of 

Availability/Notice of Public Hearing in the Federal Register on October 20, 

2006. The BLM’s Federal Register notice announced the date and time of a 

public hearing, which was held on November 14, 2006, at 7:00 pm at the 

Clarion Hotel in Gillette, Wyoming. The purpose of the public hearing was to 

solicit public comments on the Draft EIS and on the fair market value, the 

maximum economic recovery, and the proposed competitive sale of federal coal 

from the LBA tract. The applicant and one member of the public made 

statements during the hearing. The BLM published a notice of public hearing 

in the Gillette News-Record on October 31 and November 7, 2006. A transcript 

of the public hearing is available for public review. 

Final EIS and Future Involvement

BLM received eight written comments on the Draft EIS. These comments are 

included, with agency responses, as Appendix I in this Final EIS. Availability 

of the Final EIS will be published in the Federal Register by the BLM and the 

EPA. After a 30-day availability period, BLM will make a decision to hold or not 

to hold a competitive lease sale for the federal coal in the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract. A public ROD for the tract will be mailed to parties on the mailing list, 

including those who commented on this EIS during the NEPA process. The 

public and/or the applicant can appeal the BLM decision to hold or not to hold 

a competitive sale and issue a lease for the tract. The BLM decision must be 

appealed within 30 days from the date the Notice of Availability for the Record 

of Decision is published in the Federal Register. The decision can be 

implemented at that time if no appeal is received. If a competitive lease sale is 

held, the lease sale will follow the procedures set forth in 43 CFR 3422, 43 CFR 

3425, and BLM Handbook H-3420-1 (Competitive Coal Leasing). 

Department of Justice Consultation

After a competitive coal lease sale, but prior to issuance of a lease, the BLM 

must solicit the opinion of the Department of Justice on whether the planned 

lease issuance creates a situation inconsistent with federal antitrust laws. The 

Department of Justice is allowed 30 days to make this determination. If the 

Department of Justice has not responded in writing within the 30 days, the 

BLM can proceed with issuance of the lease. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-1 

2.0 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 

This chapter describes the Proposed Action and alternatives to this action. The 

Proposed Action is to hold a competitive lease sale and issue a lease for the federal 

coal lands included in the Eagle Butte West LBA1 Tract as applied for by FCW. 

This alternative assumes the tract would be developed as a maintenance tract for 

the existing Eagle Butte Mine. 

Under the Proposed Action, the tract would be offered for lease as applied for at a 

sealed-bid, competitive lease sale, subject to standard and special lease 

stipulations developed for the PRB and that tract. The boundaries of the tract 

would be consistent with the tract configuration proposed by the applicant. The 

Proposed Action assumes that the applicant would be the successful bidder on the 

tract and that the tract would be mined as a maintenance lease for an existing 

mine. 

NEPA requires the consideration and evaluation of other reasonable ways to meet 

proposal objectives while minimizing or avoiding environmental impacts. Thus, 

NEPA requires the evaluation of a No Action Alternative and a practical range of 

other “reasonable” action alternatives that may avoid or minimize project impacts. 

Reasonable alternatives are defined by NEPA as those that are technically, 

economically, and environmentally practical and feasible. Reasonable alternatives 

are formulated to address issues and concerns raised by the public and agencies 

during scoping. These alternatives should represent another means of satisfying 

the stated purpose and need for the federal action. 

BLM Competitive Coal Leasing Manual (BLM Manual 3420-1) requires the BLM to 

evaluate modifying the configuration of federal coal tracts based on providing for 

maximum economic recovery of the coal resource, maintaining or increasing the 

potential for competition, and avoiding future bypass or captive tract situations. 

For NEPA purposes, BLM evaluates alternate tract configurations as alternatives 

to the Proposed Action. In evaluating this lease application, BLM has identified a 

study area for the tract, which includes the tract as applied for and adjacent 

unleased federal coal, shown in Figure 2-1. Under Alternative 1, the study area is 

evaluated for the purpose of identifying potential alternate tract configurations to 

the Proposed Action that would be technically, economically, or environmentally 

preferable to the Proposed Action. 

The Leasing on Application regulation at 43 CFR 3425.1-9 states that: “The 

authorized officer may add or delete lands from an area covered by an application 

for any reason he/she determines to be in the public interest.” Accordingly, under 

Alternative 1, BLM could increase or decrease the size of the tract as applied for.

1 Refer to page xv for a list of abbreviations and acronyms used in this document. 
T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

16

1

2 1

11

3

10

4

9

5

8

6

7

12

13

24

25

36

11

14

23

26

35

10

15

22

27

34

9

21

28

33

8

17

20

29

32

7

18

19

30

31

12

13

24

25

36

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

U.S. Highway 14-16

U.S. Highway 14-16

State Highway 59

LEGEND

0 2500 5000 10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Eagle Butte Mine Permit Boundary

Existing Eagle Butte Mine Federal Coal Leases

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as Applied for

Additional Area Evaluated Under Alternative 1

City of Gillette Buffer Zone

Figure 2-1. Eagle Butte West LBA Tract Alternatives.

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives

2-2 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-3 

The No Action Alternative (Alternative 2) is to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application. Under the No Action Alternative, the tract would not be offered for 

competitive sale, and the coal contained within the tract would not be mined as 

proposed. Rejection of the application would not affect currently permitted mining 

activities on existing leases at the existing Eagle Butte Mine and selection of the 

No Action Alternative would not preclude an application to lease the rejected tract 

in the future. Portions of the surface of the LBA tract have been disturbed in 

connection with mining operations on Eagle Butte Mine’s existing leases. 

Other alternatives considered but not analyzed in detail include: 

• holding a competitive lease sale and issuing a lease for federal coal lands 

included in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (as applied for or as modified by 

BLM), with the assumption that the tract would be developed as a new mine 

(Alternative 3); and 

• delaying the sale of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for in order 

to take advantage of higher coal prices and/or to allow recovery of the 

potential CBNG resources in the tract prior to mining (Alternative 4). Under 

this alternative, it is assumed that the tract could be developed later as a 

maintenance tract or a new mine start, depending on how long the sale was 

delayed. 

LBA tracts are nominated for leasing by companies with an interest in acquiring 

them but, as discussed in Chapter 1, the LBA process is, by law and regulation, 

an open, public, competitive sealed-bid process. If a tract is offered for lease, the 

applicant for that tract may or may not be the high bidder when the lease sale is 

held. The Proposed Action and Alternative 1 considered in this EIS assume that 

FCW would be the successful bidder if the federal coal included in the tract is 

offered for lease, and that the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would be mined as a 

maintenance tract for the permitted Eagle Butte Mine. 

If a decision is made to hold a competitive lease sale and a lease is issued, the 

lessee must obtain a permit to conduct coal mining operations before mining can 

begin on the tract. As discussed in Chapter 1, Section 1.3, this permit application 

would undergo detailed review by state and federal agencies as part of the 

approval process. The detailed permit application could potentially differ from the 

more general mining plan used to analyze the impacts of the Proposed Action and 

Alternative 1 in this EIS, but the differences would not be expected to 

substantially change the impacts described here. These differences would 

typically be related to the details of mining and reclaiming the tract but major 

factors, like the approximate number of tons of coal to be mined and yards of 

overburden to be removed, the acres disturbed, etcetera, would not be 

substantially different from the plan used in this analysis. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

2-4 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Under the Proposed Action and Alternative 1, it is assumed that an area larger 

than the tract would have to be disturbed in order to recover all of the coal in the 

tract. The disturbances outside the coal removal area would be due to activities 

like overstripping, matching undisturbed topography, and construction of flood 

control and sediment control structures. 

2.1 Proposed Action 

Under the Proposed Action, the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for by FCW 

would be offered for lease at a sealed-bid, competitive lease sale, subject to 

standard and special lease stipulations developed for the PRB (Appendix D). The 

boundaries of the tract would be consistent with the tract configuration proposed 

in the Eagle Butte West lease application (Figure 2-1). The Proposed Action 

assumes that FCW would be the successful bidder on the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract if it is offered for sale. 

The legal description of the proposed Eagle Butte West LBA Tract coal lease lands 

as applied for by FCW under the Proposed Action is as follows: 

T.51N., R.72W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming

Section 19: Lots 13, 14, 19, and 20; 187.79 acres 

Section 20: Lots 10(S1⁄2), 11(S1⁄2), and 12 through 15; 201.74 acres 

Section 29: Lots 1(W1⁄2), 2 through 7, 8(W1⁄2 and SE1⁄4), 

and 9 through 16; 635.45 acres 

Section 30: Lots 5, 6, 11 through 14, 19, and 20; 372.66 acres 

Total: 1,397.64 acres

The Land description and acreage are based on the BLM Status of Public Domain 

Land and Mineral Titles approved Coal Plat as of April 4, 2005. The coal estate in 

the tract described above is federal and the surface estate is owned by FCW. 

Ownership of the oil and gas estate is discussed in Section 3.11. 

A portion of U.S. Highway 14-16 crosses the eastern edge of the Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract (Figure 2-1). SMCRA prohibits surface mining operations on lands 

within 100 ft of the outside line of the ROW for a public highway. As discussed in 

Chapter 1, Section 1.5, the coal underlying Highway 14-16, its ROW, and a buffer 

zone extending 100 ft on either side of the ROW has been determined to be 

unsuitable for mining in accordance with SMCRA and as specified in coal leasing 

Unsuitability Criterion Number 3 (43 CFR 3461). 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-5 

There is an exception to this prohibition in the regulations at 30 CFR 761.11(d), 

which can be applied if the appropriate public road authority (WYDOT) allows the 

road to be relocated or closed. FCW and WYDOT are working on a plan to relocate 

U.S. Highway 14-16. If FCW obtains approval from WYDOT to move Highway 14-

16, the exception to the prohibition on mining within the highway ROW and buffer 

zone could be applied and the unsuitability determination could be reconsidered. 

In that case, FCW would be able to recover the coal underlying the highway ROW 

and buffer zone. If FCW does not obtain approval to move U.S. Highway 14-16, 

the coal underlying the highway ROW and buffer zone would remain unsuitable 

for mining and would not be recovered. 

The federal coal underlying Highway 14-16, its ROW, and the adjacent buffer zone 

is included in the tract because it would allow maximum recovery of the mineable 

coal adjacent to but outside of the highway ROW and buffer zone if the road is not 

moved; it would also allow recovery of the coal under the highway if the road is 

moved. If a lease is issued for this tract, a stipulation will be attached to the lease 

stating that no mining activity may be conducted in the portion of the lease within 

the ROW and buffer zone for U.S. Highway 14-16 unless approval is obtained from 

the appropriate authority to move the highway. 

If U.S. Highway 14-16 is moved, FCW estimates that the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract as applied for includes approximately 238 million tons of mineable coal. 

FCW assumes that about 96 percent of that coal, or about 228 million tons of 

coal, could be recovered from the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, based on historical 

recovery practices. If they acquire the tract and the highway is moved, a total of 

568 million tons of coal would be mined after January 1, 2006, with an estimated 

228 million tons coming from the LBA tract. 

If the highway is not moved, FCW estimates that approximately 211 million tons of 

coal would be mineable and approximately 203 million tons of coal could be 

recovered from the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for. If they acquire the 

tract and if the highway is not moved, a total of 543 million tons of coal would be 

mined after January 1, 2006, with an estimated 203 million tons coming from the 

LBA tract. Based upon this estimate of recoverable reserves, about 15 percent of 

the in-place coal reserves included within the LBA tract would not be recovered 

under normal mining practices and due to the presence of the unmineable 

reserves within the highway ROW and associated buffer zone. 

BLM independently evaluates the volume and average quality of the coal resources 

included in proposed LBA tracts as part of the fair market value determination 

process. If WYDOT approves the relocation of Highway 14-16, the estimated cost 

to FCW will be considered by BLM in the fair market value determination for the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. If the highway is not moved, the fact that the coal 

within the highway ROW and associated buffer zone cannot be recovered will be 

considered by BLM in the fair market value determination for the LBA tract. 

BLM’s estimate of the mineable federal coal reserves included in the tract may not 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

2-6 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

be in agreement with the mineable coal reserve and coal quality estimates 

provided by the applicant. BLM’s estimate of the mineable federal coal reserves 

included in the tract under BLM’s preferred alternative (Alternative 1) is discussed 

in Section 2.2 and will be published in the sale notice if the tract is offered for 

sale. Some coal quality information in the area of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

is included in Section 3.3 of this document. 

The Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would be mined as an integral part of the Eagle 

Butte Mine under the Proposed Action. Since the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

would be an extension of the existing Eagle Butte Mine, the facilities and 

infrastructure would be the same as those identified in the WDEQ/LQD Mine 

Permit 428 Term T5, approved November 1, 2005 and the BLM R2P2, which was 

approved October 26, 2005. 

FCW’s currently approved air quality permit from the WDEQ/AQD for the Eagle 

Butte Mine allows up to 35 million tons of coal per year to be mined. The Eagle 

Butte Mine produced: 

• 18.6 million tons of coal in 2000; 

• 24.8 million tons of coal in 2001; 

• 24.9 million tons of coal in 2002; 

• 24.7 million tons of coal in 2003; 

• 23.0 million tons of coal in 2004; 

• 24.1 million tons of coal in 2005, and 

• 25.3 million tons of coal in 2006 

(Wyoming Department of Employment 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005a, and 

2006a). 

As of December 31, 2005, approximately 420.4 million tons of coal had been 

mined from within the current permit area of the Eagle Butte Mine. Under the 

currently approved mining plan (the No Action Alternative), the Eagle Butte Mine 

would mine the remaining 340 million tons of recoverable coal reserves on the 

existing Eagle Butte leases in approximately 13.6 years at an average production 

rate of approximately 25 million tons per year. Under the Proposed Action and if 

Highway 14-16 is moved, FCW estimates that average annual coal production 

would continue to be approximately 25 million tons, mine life would be extended 

by about 9.1 additional years, and coal production at the Eagle Butte Mine would 

continue for nearly 23 years beginning in 2006. If U.S. Highway 14-16 is not 

moved and average annual coal production continues to be approximately 25 

million tons, mine life would be extended by about 8.1 additional years and coal 

production would continue for nearly 22 years beginning in 2006. 

Prior to disturbance and in advance of mining, mine support structures such as 

roads, power lines, substations, and flood and sediment control measures would 

be built as needed. Little Rawhide Creek runs north-south through the existing 

mine and the eastern portion of the LBA tract. Approximately 3.5 miles of the 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-7 

natural channel has been diverted to date within the Eagle Butte Mine’s current 

permit area. FCW would propose another diversion of Little Rawhide Creek if they 

acquire a lease for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. One overhead powerline, one 

buried telephone line and two buried pipelines would require relocation prior to 

mining. 

Topsoil removal with suitable heavy equipment, such as rubber-tired scrapers, 

would proceed ahead of overburden removal. Whenever possible, direct haulage to 

a reclamation area would be done but, due to scheduling, some topsoil would be 

temporarily stockpiled. As required by the reclamation plan, heavy equipment 

again would be used to haul and distribute the stockpiled topsoil. 

The Eagle Butte Mine has an approved Temporary Cessation of Operations area 

that is positioned to accommodate mining advancement to the west into the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract area. The Temporary Cessation of Operations area, which 

consists of an elongated trench running north-south adjacent and parallel to U.S. 

Highway 14-16, would facilitate placement of initial boxcut overburden material 

from the LBA tract. Mining would then be conducted in two separate pits; one 

located within the current permit area and one located within the proposed lease 

area. Overburden removal has been and would continue to be conducted using 

trucks and shovels. Other equipment used during overburden removal and 

backfilling would include dozers, scrapers, excavators, front-end loaders, 

motorgraders, fuel/lube trucks, and water trucks. Most overburden and all coal 

have been and would continue to be drilled and blasted to facilitate efficient 

excavation. The design of the Eagle Butte Mine seeks to confine disturbance to 

the active mine blocks. As overburden is removed, most would be directly placed 

into areas where coal has already been removed. 

Once the overburden has been replaced, it is sampled and verified to be suitable 

for reclamation, graded to approximate final contour, ripped, and finally topsoiled. 

Material that is found to be unsuitable for reclamation (i.e., material that is not 

suitable for use in reestablishing vegetation or that may affect groundwater quality 

due to high concentrations of certain constituents, such as selenium, or adverse 

pH levels) would either be removed and treated, or adequately covered with 

suitable overburden material prior to grading and topsoiling. Elevations 

consistent with an approved PMT plan would be established as quickly as 

possible. Under certain conditions, the PMT may not be immediately achievable. 

This occurs when there is an excess of material that may require temporary 

stockpiling, when there is insufficient material available from current overburden 

removal operations, or when future mining could redisturb an area already mined. 

Once a seedbed has been formed, vegetation that is consistent with the 

postmining land use would be reestablished. 

Coal would be produced from two seams that FCW refers to as the Roland and 

Smith. The combined thickness of the two coal seams averages about 110 ft, and 

ranges from about 33 to 133 ft inside the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. The 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

2-8 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

mineable coal seams are referred to as the Anderson and Canyon, WyodakAnderson, or Wyodak coal beds at other localities in the eastern PRB. The Roland 

coal seam is not present on the entire tract; decreasing the total coal thickness in 

the areas where it is not present. The parting between Roland and Smith coal 

seams ranges from one to 13 ft where both seams are present. Coal would be 

mined at several working faces to enable blending of the coal to meet customer 

quality requirements, to comply with BLM lease requirements for maximum 

economic recovery of the coal resource, and to optimize coal removal efficiency 

with available equipment. Coal would be loaded with electric-powered shovels into 

off-highway haul trucks for transport to crushing facilities. Coal haul roads would 

be temporary structures built within the mine areas. Currently, a single covered 

truck dump, or stilling shed, is used for all coal mined at the Eagle Butte Mine. A 

system of crushers, feeders, and transfer conveyors move the prepared coal to 

interim storage in four concrete silos located adjacent to the unit train loadout 

facility. All coal transfer location points and crushing operations are equipped 

with baghouse-type dust collectors or PECs. While the existing facilities have 

sufficient capacity at the projected rates of coal production, additional facilities 

may be constructed in order to improve operating efficiency and air quality 

protection. For example, a covered overland conveyor and near-pit crushing 

facility may be constructed on the proposed LBA tract, although no definite plans 

have been made to do so. 

Full-time employment at the Eagle Butte Mine is currently 223. If FCW acquires 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract under the Proposed Action, they anticipate that 

employment levels would remain the same for the additional eight to nine years 

that it would take to mine the coal included in the tract. This is based on the 

assumption that the average annual coal production rate would remain at 

approximately 25 million tons per year. 

As discussed in Chapter 1, the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is adjacent to existing 

leases at the Eagle Butte Mine, but is not adjacent to leases at any of the other 

existing mines in this area (see Figure 1-1). If a company other than FCW 

acquires the tract, the rate of coal production, mining sequence, equipment, and 

facilities would be different than if FCW acquired the tract as a maintenance lease, 

as described above. However, the area of disturbance and the impacts of 

removing the coal would not be substantially different from the area of 

disturbance and the impacts of FCW mining the tract. 

2.1.1 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring

SMCRA and Wyoming State Law require surface coal mines to collect extensive 

baseline information and implement extensive monitoring programs and 

mitigation measures. The currently approved mine permit for the Eagle Butte 

Mine includes these requirements. Monitoring programs and mitigation measures 

that are required by regulation are considered to be part of the Proposed Action 

and Alternative 1 for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. These data collection 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-9 

requirements, mitigation plans, and monitoring commitments are in place for the 

No Action Alternative, as part of the current approved permit to conduct mining 

operations for the existing Eagle Butte Mine. These data collection requirements, 

mitigation plans, and monitoring commitments would be extended to include 

mining operations on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, if it is leased and permitted 

for mining by the Eagle Butte Mine. A mining and reclamation plan for mining 

operations on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would have to be approved before 

mining operations could be conducted on the tract, regardless of who acquires it. 

The major mitigation and monitoring measures that are required by state or 

federal regulation are summarized in Table 2-1. More specific information about 

some of these mitigation and monitoring measures and their results at the Eagle 

Butte Mine are described in Chapter 3. 

If impacts are identified during the leasing process that are not addressed by the 

existing required mitigation measures, BLM can require additional mitigation 

measures, in the form of stipulations on the new lease, within the limits of its 

regulatory authority. In general, the levels of mitigation and monitoring required 

for surface coal mining by SMCRA and Wyoming State law are more extensive 

than those required for other surface disturbing activities; however, concerns may 

periodically be identified that are not monitored or mitigated under existing 

procedures. 

2.1.2 Hazardous and Solid Waste

Under the Proposed Action and Alternative 1, the procedures and requirements for 

handling of hazardous and solid wastes would be the same as the procedures and 

requirements for the existing mining operation. Solid waste that is produced at 

the existing Eagle Butte Mine consists of floor sweepings, shop rags, lubricant 

containers, welding rod ends, metal shavings, worn tires, packing material, used 

filters, and office and food wastes. A portion of the solid wastes produced at the 

Eagle Butte Mine is disposed of within the mine’s permit boundary in accordance 

with WDEQ-approved solid waste disposal plans. Solid waste is also disposed of 

at the Campbell County landfill. Sewage is handled by WDEQ-permitted sewage 

treatment system present on the existing mine facilities. Maintenance and 

lubrication of most of the equipment takes place at existing shop facilities at the 

Eagle Butte Mine. 

Major lubrication, oil changes, etcetera, of most equipment are performed inside 

the service garage and lubrication building at the Eagle Butte Mine, where used oil 

and grease are currently contained and deposited in storage tanks. All of the 

collected used oils and grease are then beneficially recycled off site. These 

practices would not change if the applicant acquires the LBA tract. 

FCW has reviewed the EPA’s Consolidated List of Chemicals Subject to Reporting 

Under Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Re-authorization Act (SARA) of 

1986 (as amended) and EPA’s List of Extremely Hazardous Substances as defined
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

 2-10 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Table 2-1. Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring Measures for Surface Coal Mining Operations Required by 

SMCRA and State Law for all Alternatives. 

Resource

Regulatory Compliance or Mitigation Required by 

Stipulations, State or Federal Law1 Monitoring1

Topography & Physiography 

Restoring to approximate original contour or other approved topographic configuration. LQD checks as-built vs. approved 

topography with each annual report.

Geology & Minerals Identifying & selectively placing or mixing chemically or physically unsuitable overburden 

materials to minimize adverse effects to vegetation or groundwater. 

LQD requires monitoring in advance of mining to detect unsuitable overburden.

Soil Salvaging soil suitable to support plant growth for use in reclamation; 

Protecting soil stockpiles from disturbance and erosional influences; 

Selectively placing at least four ft of suitable overburden on the graded backfill surface 

below replaced topsoil to meet guidelines for vegetation root zones. 

Monitoring vegetation growth on reclaimed areas to determine need for soil amendments; Sampling regraded overburden for compliance with root zone criteria. 

Air Quality Dispersion modeling of mining plans for annual average particulate pollution impacts on 

ambient air; Using particulate pollution control technologies; Using work practices designed to minimize fugitive particulate emissions; 

Using EPA- or state-mandated BACT, including:  Fabric filtration or wet scrubbing of coal storage silo and conveyor vents, 

 Watering or using chemical dust suppression on haul roads and exposed soils,  Containment of truck dumps and primary crushers,  Covering of conveyors,  Prompt revegetation of exposed soils, 

High efficiency baghouse dust collection systems or PECs, or atomizers/foggers on 

the crusher, conveyor transfer, storage bin and train loadout, meeting a standard 

of 0.01 grains per dry standard cubic foot (dscf) of exit volume, 

 Watering of active work areas,  Reclamation plan to minimize surface disturbances subject to wind erosion,  Paving of access roads,  Haul truck speed limits,  Limited material drop heights for shovels and draglines. 

On-site air quality monitoring for PM10

or TSP; Off-site ambient monitoring for PM10 or TSP; On-site compliance inspections. 

1 These requirements, mitigation plans, and monitoring plans are in place for the existing Eagle Butte Mine in its current approved mining and reclamation plan (the No Action 

Alternative). If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract were leased, these requirements, mitigation plans, and monitoring plans would be part of a mining and reclamation plan revision 

covering the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract that must be approved before mining can occur on the tract under the Proposed Action or Alternative 1. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-11 

Table 2-1. Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring Measures for Surface Coal Mining Operations Required by 

SMCRA and State Law for all Alternatives (Continued). 

Resource 

Regulatory Compliance or Mitigation Required by 

Stipulations, State or Federal Law1 Monitoring1

Air Quality (continued) Following voluntary and required measures to avoid exposing the public to NO2

from blasting clouds, including:

 Phone notification of neighbors and workers prior to blasting,  Monitoring weather and atmospheric conditions prior to decisions to blast,  Timing blasts to avoid temperature inversions and to minimize inconvenience to  neighbors,  Closing public roads when appropriate to protect the public,  Minimizing blast sizes,  Posting signs on major public roads. 

Surface Water Building and maintaining sediment control ponds or other devices during mining; 

Restoring approximate original drainage patterns during reclamation; Restoring stock ponds and playas during reclamation.

Monitoring storage capacity in sediment ponds; Monitoring quality of discharges; Monitoring streamflow and water quality.

Groundwater Quantity Evaluating cumulative impacts to water quantity associated with proposed mining; 

Replacing existing water rights that are interrupted, discontinued, or diminished by mining with water of equivalent quantity.

Monitoring wells track water levels in overburden, coal, interburden, underburden, and backfill.

Groundwater Quality

Evaluating cumulative impacts to water quality associated with proposed mining; Replacing existing water rights that are interrupted, discontinued, or diminished by mining with water of equivalent quality.

Monitoring wells track water quality in overburden, coal, interburden, underburden, and backfill.

Alluvial Valley Floors

Identifying all AVFs that would be affected by mining; Determining significance to agriculture of all identified AVFs affected by mining (WDEQ); Protecting downstream AVFs during mining; Restoring essential hydrologic function of all AVFs affected by mining.

Monitoring to determine restoration of essential hydrologic functions of any declared AVF.

Wetlands Identifying all wetlands that would be affected by mining; 

Identifying jurisdictional wetlands (COE); Replacing all jurisdictional wetlands that would be disturbed by mining; Replacing functional wetlands as required by surface managing agency, surface landowner, 

or WDEQ/LQD.

Monitoring of reclaimed wetlands using same procedures used to identify premining jurisdictional wetlands.

1 These requirements, mitigation plans, and monitoring plans are in place for the existing Eagle Butte Mine in its current approved mining and reclamation plan (the No Action 

Alternative). If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract were leased, these requirements, mitigation plans, and monitoring plans would be part of a mining and reclamation plan revision covering the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract that must be approved before mining can occur on the tract under the Proposed Action or Alternative 1. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

 2-12 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Table 2-1. Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring Measures for Surface Coal Mining Operations Required by 

SMCRA and State Law for all Alternatives (Continued). 

Resource

Regulatory Compliance or Mitigation Required by 

Stipulations, State or Federal Law1 Monitoring1

Vegetation Permanently revegetating reclaimed areas according to a comprehensive revegetation plan 

using approved permanent reclamation seed mixtures consisting predominantly of species 

native to the area; Reclaiming 20 percent of reclaimed area with native shrubs at a density of one per square meter; Controlling erosion on reclaimed lands prior to seeding with final seed mixture using mulching, cover crops, or other approved measures; Chemically and mechanically controlling weed infestation; Direct hauling of topsoil; Selectively planting shrubs in riparian areas; Planting sagebrush; Creating depressions and rock piles; Using special planting procedures around rock piles; Posting reclamation bond covering the cost of reclamation.

Monitoring of revegetation growth & diversity until release of final reclamation bond (minimum 10 years); Monitoring of erosion to determine need for corrective action during establishment of vegetation; Use of controlled grazing during revegetation evaluation to determine suitability for post-mining land uses.

Wildlife Restoring pre-mining topography to the maximum extent possible; 

Planting a diverse mixture of grasses, forbs, and shrubs in configurations beneficial to wildlife; Designing fences to permit wildlife passage; Raptor-proofing power transmission poles; Creating artificial raptor nest sites; Increasing habitat diversity by creating rock clusters and shallow depressions on reclaimed 

land; Cottonwood plantings along reclaimed drainages; Replacing drainages, wetlands, and AVFs disturbed by mining; Reducing vehicle speed limits to minimize mortality; Instructing employees not to harass or disturb wildlife; Following approved raptor mitigation plans. 

Baseline and annual wildlife 

monitoring surveys; Monitoring for Migratory Bird Species of Management Concern in Wyoming. 

Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Species 

Avoiding bald eagle disturbance; Restoring bald eagle foraging areas disturbed by mining; Restoring mountain plover habitat disturbed by mining; Using raptor safe power lines; Surveying for Ute ladies'-tresses; 

Baseline and annual wildlife monitoring surveys. 

1 These requirements, mitigation plans, and monitoring plans are in place for the existing Eagle Butte Mine in its current approved mining and reclamation plan (the No Action 

Alternative). If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract were leased, these requirements, mitigation plans, and monitoring plans would be part of a mining and reclamation plan revision 

covering the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract that must be approved before mining can occur on the tract under the Proposed Action or Alternative 1. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-13 

Table 2-1. Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring Measures for Surface Coal Mining Operations Required by 

SMCRA and State Law for all Alternatives (Continued). 

Resource

Regulatory Compliance or Mitigation Required by 

Stipulations, State or Federal Law1 Monitoring1

Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Species (continued) 

Surveying for mountain plover; Searching for black-footed ferrets if prairie dog colonies are on or move onto tract; Surveying for black-tailed prairie dog; Same as Wildlife Resource above. 

Baseline and annual wildlife monitoring surveys. 

Land Use Suitably restoring reclaimed area for historic uses (grazing and wildlife); Monitoring of controlled grazing prior 

to bond release evaluation. 

Cultural Resources 

Conducting Class I & III surveys to identify cultural properties on all state and federal lands 

and on private lands affected by federal undertakings; Consulting with SHPO to evaluate eligibility of cultural properties for the NRHP; Avoiding or recovering data from significant cultural properties identified by surveys, according to an approved plan; Notifying appropriate federal personnel if historic or prehistoric materials are uncovered during mining operations; Instructing employees of the importance of and regulatory obligations to protect cultural resources. 

Monitoring of mining activities during topsoil stripping; cessation of activities and notification of authorities if unidentified sites are encountered during topsoil removal. 

Native American Concerns

Notifying Native American tribes with known interest in this area of leasing action and 

request for help in identifying potentially significant religious or cultural sites.

No specific monitoring program.

Paleontological Resources

Notifying appropriate federal personnel if potentially significant paleontological sites are discovered during mining.

No specific monitoring program.

Visual Resources

Restoring landscape character during reclamation through return to approximate original contour and revegetation with native species.

No specific monitoring program.

Noise Protecting employees from hearing loss. MSHA inspections.Transportation Facilities Relocating existing pipelines, if necessary, in accordance with specific agreement between 

pipeline owner and coal lessee.

No specific monitoring program.

Socioeconomics Paying royalty and taxes as required by federal, state, and local regulations. 

No mitigation measures are proposed.

Surveying and reporting to document volume of coal removed.

1 These requirements, mitigation plans, and monitoring plans are in place for the existing Eagle Butte Mine in its current approved mining and reclamation plan (the No Action 

Alternative). If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract were leased, these requirements, mitigation plans, and monitoring plans would be part of a mining and reclamation plan revision 

covering the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract that must be approved before mining can occur on the tract under the Proposed Action or Alternative 1. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

 2-14 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Table 2-1. Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring Measures for Surface Coal Mining Operations Required by 

SMCRA and State Law for all Alternatives (Continued). 

Resource 

Regulatory Compliance or Mitigation Required by 

Stipulations, State or Federal Law1 Monitoring1

Hazardous & Solid Waste Disposing of solid waste and sewage within permit boundaries according to approved plans; 

Storing and recycling waste oil; Maintaining of files containing Material Safety Data Sheets for all chemicals, compounds, and/or substances used during course of mining; Ensuring that all production, use, storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials 

is in accordance with applicable existing or hereafter promulgated federal, state, and government requirements; Complying with emergency reporting requirements for releases of hazardous materials as established in CERCLA, as amended; Preparing and implementing spill prevention control and countermeasure plans, spill 

response plans, inventories of hazardous chemical categories pursuant to Section 312 of SARA, as amended; Preparing emergency response plans. 

No specific monitoring other than required by these other regulations and response plans.

1 These requirements, mitigation plans, and monitoring plans are in place for the existing Eagle Butte Mine in its current approved mining and reclamation plan (the No Action 

Alternative). If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract were leased, these requirements, mitigation plans, and monitoring plans would be part of a mining and reclamation plan revision 

covering the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract that must be approved before mining can occur on the tract under the Proposed Action or Alternative 1. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-15 

in 40 CFR 355 (as amended) for hazardous substances used at the Eagle Butte 

Mine. FCW maintains files containing Material Safety Data Sheets for all 

chemicals, compounds, and/or substances that are or would be used during the 

course of mining. 

FCW is responsible for ensuring that all production, use, storage, transport, and 

disposal of hazardous and extremely hazardous materials as a result of mining are 

in accordance with all applicable existing or hereafter promulgated federal, state, 

and local government rules, regulations, and guidelines. All mining activities 

involving the production, use, and/or disposal of hazardous or extremely 

hazardous materials are and would continue to be conducted so as to minimize 

potential environmental impacts. 

FCW must comply with emergency reporting requirements for releases of 

hazardous materials. Any release of hazardous or extremely hazardous 

substances in excess of the reportable quantity, as established in 40 CFR 117, is 

reported as required by CERCLA, as amended. The materials for which such 

notification must be given are the extremely hazardous substances listed in 

Section 302 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act and the 

hazardous substances designated under Section 102 of CERCLA, as amended. If 

a reportable quantity of a hazardous or extremely hazardous substance is 

released, immediate notice must be given to the WDEQ Solid and Hazardous 

Waste Division, WDEQ Water Quality Division, and all other appropriate federal 

and state agencies. 

Each mining company is expected to prepare and implement several plans and/or 

policies to ensure environmental protection from hazardous and extremely 

hazardous materials. These plans/policies include: 

• Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plans; 

• Spill Response Plans; 

• Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans; 

• Inventories of Hazardous Chemical Categories Pursuant to Section 313 of 

SARA, as Amended; and 

• Emergency Response Plans. 

All mining operations are also required to be in compliance with regulations 

promulgated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Federal Water 

Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act), Safe Drinking Water Act, Toxic 

Substances Control Act, Mine Safety and Health Act, Department of 

Transportation, and the Federal Clean Air Act. In addition, mining operations 

must comply with all attendant state rules and regulations relating to hazardous 

material reporting, transportation, management, and disposal. 

Compliance with these rules is the current practice at the Eagle Butte Mine. 

Acquisition of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract by FCW would not change these 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

2-16 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

current practices nor the type and quantity of any wastes generated and disposed 

of by the mine. 

2.2 Alternative 1 

Under Alternative 1 for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, BLM would reconfigure 

the tract and hold a competitive coal sale for the lands included in the 

reconfigured tract and issue a lease to the successful bidder. The modified tract 

would be subject to standard and special lease stipulations developed for the PRB 

and for this tract if it is offered for sale (Appendix D). Alternative 1, holding a 

competitive coal sale for a modified tract, is the BLM’s Preferred Alternative. 

Alternative 1 for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract assumes that FCW would be the 

successful bidder on the tract if a lease sale is held and that the federal coal would 

be mined to extend the life of existing Eagle Butte Mine. Other assumptions are 

the same as for the Proposed Action. 

As applied for, the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract consists of a single block of federal 

coal (Figure 1-2). In order to evaluate the potential that an alternate configuration 

of the tract would provide for more efficient recovery of the federal coal, increase 

competitive interest in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, and/or reduce the 

potential that some of the remaining unleased federal coal in this area would be 

bypassed in the future, BLM identified a study area. The BLM study area includes 

the tract as applied for and unleased federal coal adjacent to the northern and 

southern edges of the tract as applied for (Figure 2-1). Under this alternative, 

BLM could add some or all of the adjacent lands to the tract, or BLM could reduce 

the size of the tract, as discussed in Section 2.0. Under Alternative 1, the area 

BLM is evaluating in addition to the tract as applied for includes the following 

lands: 

T.51N., R.72W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming

Section 18: Lots 19 and 20; 83.89 acres 

Section 19: Lots 6 through 8 and 10 through 12; 290.46 acres 

Section 20: Lots 1 through 9, 10(N1⁄2), and 11(N1⁄2); 399.90 acres 

Section 32: Lots 1, 2, 3(E1⁄2), 6(E1⁄2E1⁄2), 7, 8(W1⁄2), 

 and 10(W1⁄2E1⁄2 and E1⁄2W1⁄2); 200.66 acres 

Total: 974.91 acres

Land descriptions and acreage are based on the BLM Status of Public Domain 

Land and Mineral Titles approved Coal Plat as of April 4, 2005. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-17 

FCW estimates that these 974.91 additional acres contain approximately 148.7 

million tons of in-place, mineable coal. 

As originally applied for, in 2001, the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract included 

additional coal north and south of the current application area. In 2003, FCW 

modified their application area by adding coal to the west of their original 

application and subtracting coal from the northern and southern portions of their 

original application. The northern boundary of the modified Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract was configured by FCW to allow the mine to maintain the setback distance 

from occupied dwellings and the Rawhide School that is required by WDEQ/LQD 

for conducting blasting operations, while the current location of the southern 

boundary was modified to reflect potential concerns with the location of the 

Gillette-Campbell County Airport. In identifying a study area, BLM included 

additional federal coal resources north and south of the current application area, 

as shown in Figure 2-1. BLM wanted to evaluate that federal coal in order to 

determine if it would be possible to safely recover additional coal in these areas 

because this coal will likely be bypassed if it is not leased at this time. After 

evaluating the tract configuration, BLM concluded that regulatory and safety 

considerations preclude extending the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract in either a 

north or a south direction due to the presence of the occupied dwellings, school, 

and airport. BLM did not reduce the size of the tract because the modified tract 

was configured to allow recovery of the federal coal while maintaining the setback 

distances for conducting blasting operations established by WDEQ/LQD for safety 

purposes. BLM did make a decision to add approximately 30 acres to the 

northeast corner of the tract. Although most of the coal included in this addition 

to the tract would not be recoverable due to the required setback distances, 

including this coal in the tract would potentially allow more efficient recovery of 

the coal up to the required setback distance. 

BLM’s preferred tract configuration is to add approximately 30 acres to the 

northeast corner of the tract as applied for (Figure 2-2). Under Alternative 1, BLM 

would add the following lands to the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for: 

T.51N., R.72W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming

Section 20: Lot 10(NW1⁄4) and Lot 11 (N1⁄2); 30.13 acres 

The legal description of BLM’s preferred configuration of the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract under Alternative 1 is as follows: 

T.51N., R.72W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming

Section 19: Lots 13, 14, 19, and 20; 187.79 acres 

Section 20: Lots 10(NW1⁄4, S1⁄2) and 11 through 15; 231.87 acres 
T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

16

1

2 1

11

3

10

4

9

5

8

6

7

12

13

24

25

36

11

14

23

26

35

10

15

22

27

34

9

21

28

33

8

17

20

29

32

7

18

19

30

31

12

13

24

25

36

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

U.S. Highway 14-16

U.S. Highway 14-16

State Highway 59

LEGEND

0 2500 5000 10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Eagle Butte Mine Permit Boundary

Existing Eagle Butte Mine Federal Coal Leases

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as Applied for

Area Added Under BLM's Preferred

Tract Delineation for Alternative 1

City of Gillette Buffer Zone

Figure 2-2. Eagle Butte West LBA Preferred Alternative Tract Configuration.

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives

2-18 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-19 

Section 29: Lots 1(W1⁄2), 2 through 7, 8(W1⁄2 and SE1⁄4), 

 and 9 through 16; 635.45 acres 

Section 30: Lots 5, 6, 11 through 14, 19, and 20; 372.66 acres 

Total: 1,427.77 acres

The land description and acreage are based on the BLM Status of Public Domain 

Land and Mineral Titles approved Coal Plat as of April 4, 2005. The coal estate in 

the tract described above is federal and the surface estate is owned by FCW. 

Ownership of the oil and gas estate is discussed in Section 3.11. 

Some of the coal in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract under this alternative is 

overlain by U.S. Highway 14-16 and SMCRA prohibits surface mining operations 

on lands within 100 ft of the outside line of the ROW for a public highway [SMCRA 

Section 522(e)(4) and 30 CFR 761.11(d)]. As discussed in Sections 1.5 and 2.1, 

the coal underlying the highway, its ROW, and a buffer zone extending 100 ft on 

either side of the ROW has been determined to be unsuitable for mining in 

accordance with SMCRA and as specified in coal leasing Unsuitability Criterion 

Number 3 (43 CFR 3461). 

As discussed in Section 2.1, there is an exception to this prohibition against 

mining the coal underlying the highway ROW and associated buffer zone that can 

be applied if the appropriate public road authority allows the road to be relocated 

or closed [SMCRA Section 522(e)(4) and 30 CFR 761.11(d)(2)]. FCW and WYDOT 

are working on a plan to relocate U.S. Highway 14-16. If FCW obtains approval 

from WYDOT to move Highway 14-16, the exception to the prohibition on mining 

within the highway ROW and buffer zone could be applied and the unsuitability 

determination could be reconsidered. In that case, FCW would be able to recover 

the coal underlying the highway ROW and buffer zone. If FCW does not obtain 

approval to move U.S. Highway 14-16, the coal underlying the highway ROW and 

buffer zone would remain unsuitable for mining and would not be recovered. 

The federal coal underlying Highway 14-16, its ROW, and the adjacent buffer zone 

is included in the tract because it would allow maximum recovery of the mineable 

coal adjacent to but outside of the highway ROW and buffer zone if the road is not 

moved; it would also allow recovery of the coal under the highway if the road is 

moved. If a lease is issued for this tract, a stipulation will be attached to the lease 

stating that no mining operations may be conducted in the portion of the lease 

within the highway ROW and buffer zone unless approval is obtained from the 

appropriate authority to move U.S. Highway 14-16. 

Section 522(e)(5) of SMCRA and the regulations at 30 CFR 761.11 (e), (f), and (g), 

which are the basis for Unsuitability Criterion Number 3 [43 CFR 3461.5(c)(1)], 

also prohibit mining within 300 ft of any public building, school, church, 

community or institutional building, or public park; or within 300 ft of an 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

2-20 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

occupied dwelling. A public school, the public road to the school, and several 

occupied dwellings are located in the north half (N1⁄2) of Section 20, T.51N., 

R.72W., within the northern portion of the additional area evaluated under 

Alternative 1 for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (Figure 2-1). Specifically, the 

Rawhide Elementary School is located in the NE1⁄4NW1⁄4NW1⁄4 of Section 20, 

T.51N., R.72W., and there are occupied residences in a subdivision located in the 

NE1⁄4 of Section 20, T.51N., R.72W. The coal underlying the school and occupied 

dwellings was included in the BLM study area for geological evaluation purposes 

because it is unmined federal coal that will likely be bypassed if it is not leased at 

this time, but this coal is unsuitable for mining, based on the regulatory 

requirements discussed above. The federal coal underlying the school and the 

occupied dwellings in the N1⁄2 of Section 20, T.51N., R.72W. is not included in the 

tract under BLM’s preferred tract configuration (Figure 2-2). This area is still 

considered to be part of the BLM study area and is included in the following 

discussions. 

The southern portion of the additional area evaluated under Alternative 1, lies 

within the City of Gillette Buffer Zone (Figure 2-1) and is also adjacent to facilities 

at the Gillette-Campbell County Airport. BLM included this coal in the study area 

for geological evaluation purposes because it is unmined federal coal that will 

likely be bypassed if it is not leased at this time. The BLM’s preferred tract 

configuration does not include any coal located within the City of Gillette Buffer 

Zone (Figure 2-2), but the area is still considered to be part of the BLM study area 

in the following discussions. 

If U.S. Highway 14-16 is not moved, FCW estimates that the Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract under BLM’s preferred tract configuration (Figure 2-2) includes 

approximately 214.2 million tons of mineable coal reserves. Using FCW’s 

projected recovery factor of 96 percent of the mineable coal reserves, about 206.1 

million tons of the mineable coal would be recoverable. At the average annual coal 

production rate of 25 million tons per year, mining this coal would extend the life 

of the mine by about 8.2 additional years. 

If the highway is moved, FCW estimates that the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

includes approximately 241.2 million tons of mineable coal reserves and that 

approximately 231.1 million tons of that coal would be recoverable. At the average 

annual coal production rate of 25 million tons per year, mining this coal would 

extend mine life by about 9.2 additional years. 

BLM independently evaluates the volume and average quality of the coal resources 

included in any federal coal lands that are considered for leasing. BLM’s 

evaluation indicates that the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract includes approximately 

255 million tons of mineable coal under BLM’s preferred tract configuration, 

assuming that Highway 14-16 is moved. Additional information from BLM’s 

evaluation will be published in the sale notice for the tract, if it is offered for sale. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-21 

If WYDOT approves the relocation of U.S. Highway 14-16, the estimated cost to 

FCW will be considered by BLM in the fair market value determination for the LBA 

tract under Alternative 1. If the highway is not moved, the fact that the coal 

within the highway ROW and the associated buffer zone cannot all be recovered 

will be considered by BLM in the fair market value determination for the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract under Alternative 1. 

2.3 Alternative 2 

Under Eagle Butte West LBA Tract Alternative 2, the No Action Alternative, FCW’s 

application to lease the coal included in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would be 

rejected, the tract would not be offered for competitive sale at this time, and the 

coal included in the tract would not be mined. 

Rejection of the application would not affect already permitted mining activities 

and employment on the existing leases at the Eagle Butte Mine. The Eagle Butte 

Mine currently leases approximately 4,884 acres of federal coal and 640 acres of 

state coal; all of which are within the existing mine permit boundary. A total of 

approximately 6,076 acres will eventually be affected in mining the current leases. 

If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is not leased, FCW estimates that the average 

annual production at the Eagle Butte Mine after January 1, 2006 will continue to 

be approximately 25 million tons, and the average full-time employment level is 

projected to be 223 persons. FCW may scale back the average annual production 

at the Eagle Butte Mine to 12 million tons from 2011 through 2028; if employment 

is reduced in proportion to production, approximately half of the workforce (113 

persons) would be lost during those years. 

In order to compare the economic and environmental consequences of mining 

these lands versus not mining them, this EIS was prepared under the assumption 

that the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would not be mined in the foreseeable future 

if the No Action Alternative is selected. However, selection of the No Action 

Alternative would not preclude leasing and mining of this tract in the future. If 

the decision is made to reject the Eagle Butte West lease application at this time, 

the tract could be leased as a maintenance lease in the future while the adjacent 

mine is in operation. If it is not leased while the existing adjacent mine is in 

operation, it may or may not be leased in the future. The tract being evaluated in 

this EIS does not include enough coal reserves to economically justify mining by a 

new operation; however, the coal reserves included in the tract could potentially 

be combined with adjacent unleased federal coal in this area to create a larger 

tract, which could be mined by a new operation in the future. 

2.4 Alternative 3 

Under this alternative, as under the Proposed Action and Alternative 1, the BLM 

would hold a separate, competitive, sealed-bid sale for the lands included in the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Alternative 3 assumes, however, that the successful 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

2-22 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

qualified bidder would be someone other than the applicant and that this bidder 

would plan to open a new mine to develop the coal resources included in the Eagle 

Butte West coal lease application. 

A company or companies acquiring this coal for a new stand-alone mine would 

require considerable initial capital expenses, including the construction of new 

surface facilities (i.e., offices, shops, warehouses, coal processing facilities, coal 

loadout facilities, and rail spur), extensive baseline data collection, and 

development of new mining and reclamation plans. In addition, a company or 

companies acquiring this coal for a new start mine would have to compete for 

customers with established mines in a competitive market. 

BLM currently estimates that a tract would potentially need to include as much as 

500 to 600 million tons of coal in order to attract a buyer interested in opening a 

new mine in the Wyoming PRB. This is based on several assumptions. First, it is 

assumed that an operator would construct facilities capable of producing 30 

mmtpy, in order to take advantage of the economies of scale offered by the coal 

deposits in the PRB. Secondly, it is assumed that 20 to 30 years of coal reserves 

would be needed to justify the expense of building the facilities described above. 

Given these assumptions, under the Proposed Action or Alternative 1, the tract 

does not include sufficient coal resources to consider opening a new mine. 

Therefore, it is unlikely that a company or companies would lease the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract in order to open a new mine. 

The potential difficulty in obtaining an air quality permit is another issue that 

could discourage new mine starts in the PRB. A new mine would create a new 

source of air quality impacts. As discussed in Chapter 3, the WDEQ/AQD 

administers a permitting program to assist the agency in managing the state’s air 

resources. Under this program, anyone planning to construct, modify, or use a 

facility capable of emitting designated pollutants into the atmosphere must obtain 

an air quality permit to construct. Coal mines fall into this category. 

In order to obtain a construction permit, an operator may be required to 

demonstrate that the proposed activities will not increase air pollutant levels 

above annual standards established by the Wyoming Air Quality Standards and 

Regulations, which can be found on the internet at http://deq.state.wy.

us/aqd/standards.asp. There were no exceedances of the 24-hour PM10

standards anywhere in the PRB through year 2000. From 2001 through 2005, 

there were 29 monitored exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 standard at seven 

operating mines in the Wyoming PRB. Nineteen of these exceedances occurred in 

2001 and 2002, while two, three, and five violations occurred in 2003, 2004, and 

2005, respectively (Shamley 2006). In the first months of 2007, there were nine 

exceedances at five mines. Although none of the exceedances occurred at the 

Eagle Butte Mine, three of the exceedances occurred in the group of mines located 

north and east of Gillette that includes the Eagle Butte Mine (Figure 1-1). 

Although many of these exceedances have been attributed to high winds, concerns 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-23 

about future potential exceedances of the NAAQS may make it more difficult for an 

operator planning on opening a new mine to demonstrate that new operations 

would not result in air pollution levels that are above annual Wyoming standards. 

In view of the issues discussed above, development of new mine on the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract is considered unlikely and this alternative is not analyzed in 

detail in this EIS. 

The environmental impacts of developing a new mine to recover the coal resources 

in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would be greater than under the Proposed 

Action, Alternative 1, or the No Action Alternative because of the need for new 

facilities, new rail lines, new employment, and the creation of additional sources of 

particulates (dust). In the event that a lease sale is held and the applicant is not 

the successful bidder, the successful bidder would be required to submit a 

detailed mining and reclamation plan for approval before any of the tract could be 

mined, and this NEPA analysis would be reviewed and supplemented as necessary 

prior to approval of that mining and reclamation plan. 

2.5 Alternative 4 

Under Alternative 4, the BLM would delay the sale of the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract as applied for. The prices received for coal from the PRB have generally 

increased in recent years. If that trend continues, the bonus and royalty 

payments to the government might be higher if the tract is offered for sale at a 

later date. Also, delaying the sale of the tract would allow CBNG resources to be 

more completely recovered prior to mining. Under this alternative, it is assumed 

that the tract could be developed later as either a maintenance tract or a new start 

mine, depending on how long the sale was delayed. 

There is no assurance at this time that delaying the sale would result in a higher 

coal price when the coal is leased or mined. Damage to railroad tracks in 

Wyoming and other states limited coal shipments during much of 2005. These 

shipping constraints combined with increasing world energy demands and natural 

disasters in other parts of the country led to large increases coal prices in 2005. 

Rail capacity increased in 2006 and prices moderated somewhat. 

There are two major sources of revenue to state and federal governments from the 

leasing and mining of federal coal: 1) the competitive bonus bid paid at the time 

the coal is leased, and 2) federal and state royalties and taxes collected when the 

coal is sold. 

If coal prices do increase, the fair market value of the coal resources in the LBA 

tract could potentially increase, which could result in an increased bonus bid 

when the coal is leased. However, postponing a lease sale would not necessarily 

lead to higher royalty or tax income to the state or federal governments. Royalty 

and tax payments are the larger of the two revenue sources and they increase 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

2-24 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

automatically when coal prices increase, because they are collected at the time the 

coal is sold. They cannot be collected until the coal is leased and permitted, which 

takes several years. If leasing is delayed, then by the time the coal is mined, the 

higher coal prices may or may not persist. If the higher coal prices do persist, 

they may enable the coal lessee to negotiate longer term contracts at higher prices, 

which would result in longer term, higher royalty and tax revenues. On the other 

hand, if an existing mine runs out of coal reserves before prices rise, it would 

potentially have to shut down before additional coal could be leased and permitted 

for mining. Under that scenario, the fair market value of the coal could actually 

decrease because the added expense of reopening a mine or starting a new mine 

would have to be factored into the fair market value. 

Other considerations include the value of leaving the mineable coal for future 

development versus the value of making low-sulfur coal available now, in 

anticipation of cleaner fuel sources being developed in the future. Continued 

leasing of PRB coal enables coal-fired power plants to meet CAA requirements 

without constructing new plants, revamping existing plants, or switching to 

existing alternative fuels, which may significantly increase power costs for 

individuals and businesses. If cleaner fuel sources are developed in the future, 

they could be phased in with less economic impact to the public. 

A range of the potential future economic benefits of delaying leasing until coal 

prices rise could be quantified in an economic analysis, but the benefits would 

have to be discounted to the present, which would make them similar to the 

Proposed Action and Alternative 1. 

CBNG resources are currently being recovered from oil and gas leases on the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract and there are several mechanisms in place that can 

be used to allow continuing recovery of the CBNG resources prior to mining if the 

federal coal in the tract is leased now. These include: 

• BLM can attach a Multiple Mineral Development stipulation to the lease, 

which states that BLM has the authority to withhold approval of coal 

mining operations that would interfere with the development mineral leases 

issued prior to the coal lease. 

• Mining of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract cannot occur until the coal lessee 

has a permit to mine the tract approved by the WDEQ/LQD and a MLA 

mining plan approved by the Secretary of the Interior. Before the MLA 

mining plan can be approved, BLM must approve the R2P2 for mining the 

tract. Prior to approving the R2P2, BLM can review the status of CBNG 

development on the tract and the mining sequence proposed by the coal 

lessee. The permit approval process generally takes the coal lessee several 

years. This would allow time for a large portion of the CBNG resources to 

be recovered from the tract. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-25 

• BLM has a policy in place on CBNG-coal conflicts (BLM Instruction 

Memorandum No. 2006-153) that directs BLM decision makers to optimize 

the recovery of both resources and ensure that the public receives a 

reasonable return (BLM 2006a). 

This alternative was not analyzed in detail because it would not produce 

substantially different impacts from other alternatives analyzed in detail. Rental 

and royalty provisions in the proposed lease provide for the U.S. to benefit if coal 

prices increase by the time of mining. Moreover, recovery of a large portion of the 

remaining economically-recoverable CBNG resources on the tract would be 

anticipated after lease issuance because of the mechanisms discussed above. The 

environmental impacts of mining the coal later as part of an existing mine would 

be expected to be similar and about equal to the Proposed Action and Alternative 

1. If a new mine start is required to mine the coal, the environmental impacts 

would be expected to be greater than if it were mined as an extension of an 

existing mine. 

2.6 Summary of Alternatives and Environmental Consequences 

2.6.1 Background 

The decision-making process for public lands in Wyoming is conducted in 

compliance with NEPA, which requires all federal agencies to involve interested 

publics in their decision making, consider reasonable alternatives to the proposed 

actions, develop measures to mitigate environmental impacts, and prepare 

environmental documents that disclose the impacts of proposed actions and 

alternatives. 

This final EIS analyzes three different alternatives for the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract described in the discussion above. 

2.6.2 Summary of Alternatives 

The Eagle Butte West LBA Tract under the Proposed Action and BLM’s preferred 

tract configuration under Alternative 1 are shown on Figures 2-1 and 2-2, 

respectively. Summary comparisons of projected coal production, surface 

disturbance, mine life, and federal and state revenues for the Proposed Action, 

BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1, and the No Action 

Alternative for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract are presented in Tables 2-2 and 2-

3. Table 2-2 presents the comparisons assuming that Highway 14-16 is moved 

and the underlying coal is recovered. Table 2-3 presents the comparisons 

assuming that Highway 14-16 is not moved and the underlying coal is not 

recovered. 

Table 2-4 presents a comparative summary of the direct and indirect 

environmental impacts of implementing each alternative as compared to the No 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

2-26 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Action Alternative. The No Action Alternative assumes completion of currently 

permitted mining at the Eagle Butte Mine for comparison to anticipated mining if 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased. Table 2-5 presents a comparative 

summary of cumulative environmental impacts of implementing each alternative. 

The environmental consequences of the Proposed Action and Alternatives 1 and 2 

are analyzed in Chapter 3. These summary impact tables are derived from the 

following explanation of impacts and magnitude. NEPA requires all agencies of 

the federal government to include, in every recommendation or report on 

proposals for legislation and other major federal actions significantly affecting the 

quality of the human environment, a detailed statement by the responsible official 

on: 

(i) the environmental impact of the Proposed Action, 

(ii) any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the 

proposal be implemented, 

(iii) alternatives to the Proposed Action, 

(iv) the relationship between local short-term uses of man=s environment and 

the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity, and 

(v) any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources which would 

be involved in the Proposed Action should it be implemented [42 USC '

4332(C)]. 

Impacts can be beneficial or adverse, and they can be a primary result of an 

action (direct) or a secondary result (indirect). They can be permanent, long-term 

(persisting beyond the end of mine life and reclamation) or short-term (persisting 

during mining and reclamation and through the time the reclamation bond is 

released). Impacts also vary in terms of significance. The basis for conclusions 

regarding significance are the criteria set forth by the Council on Environmental 

Quality (40 CFR 1508.27) and the professional judgment of the specialists doing 

the analyses. Impact significance may range from negligible to substantial; 

impacts can be significant during mining but be reduced to insignificance 

following completion of reclamation. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-27 

Table 2-2. Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract and Eagle Butte Mine – Assuming Highway 14-16 is Moved and the Underlying Coal is Recovered.

Item 

No Action Alternative

(Existing Eagle Butte 

Mine) 

Added by 

Proposed Action 

Added by Alternative 1 

(Preferred Tract 

Configuration) 

In-Place Coal (as of 1/1/06) 374.0 mmt 238.0 mmt 243.7 mmt Mineable Coal (as of 1/1/06) 354.0 mmt 238.0 mmt 241.2 mmt Recoverable Coal (as of 1/1/06)1 340.0 mmt 228.0 mmt 231.1 mmt Coal Mined Through 2005 420.4 mmt -- -- Lease Area2 4,884.0 ac 1,397.6 ac 1,427.8 ac Total Area To Be Disturbed2 6,076.0 ac 2,460.0 ac 2,460.0 ac Permit Area2 7,471.0 ac 2,460.0 ac 2,460.0 ac Average Annual Post-2005 Coal Production 25.0 mmt 0 mmt 0 mmt Remaining Life of Mine (post-2005) 13.6 yrs 9.1 yrs 9.2 yrs Average Number of Employees 223 0 0 Total Projected State Revenues (post-2005)3 $ 384.4 million $ 293.5 – $ 373.2 million $ 297.4 – $ 378.2 million 

Total Projected Federal Revenues (post-2005)4 $ 261.6 million $ 211.1 – $ 290.9 million $ 214.0 – $ 294.8 million 

1 Assumes 96 percent recovery of mineable coal. The estimated tons of recoverable coal added under the Proposed Action and Alternative 1 are based on the assumptions that the coal 

beneath the north half of Section 20 (under Alternative 1) would not be mined, and that the coal beneath U.S. Highway 14-16 ROW and associated buffer zone would be mined. 

2 The lease area includes federal coal leases only and does not include state coal within the permit boundary. The disturbed area exceeds the leased area (total federal and state) because 

of the need for highwall reduction, topsoil removal, and other mine support activities outside the lease boundaries. The permit area is larger than the leased or disturbed area to assure that all disturbed lands are within the permit boundary and to allow an easily defined legal land description.

3 Revenues to the State of Wyoming include income from severance tax, property and production taxes, sales and use taxes, and Wyoming’s share of federal royalty payments, bonus bids, 

and AML fees. State revenues are based on $5.80 per ton (projected for 8,400-Btu coal) price × amount of recoverable coal × federal royalty of 12.5 percent minus federal’s 50 percent share, plus $0.35 per ton for AML fees × amount of recoverable coal minus federal’s 50 percent share, plus bonus payment on LBA leased coal of $0.30 to $0.97 per ton (based on the range of bonus payments for the last 6 LBAs sold in 2004 and 2005) × amount of mineable coal minus federal’s 50 percent share, plus $0.023 per ton estimate for sales and use taxes ×

amount of recoverable coal, plus $0.26 per ton estimate for Ad Valorem taxes × amount of recoverable coal, plus $0.31 per ton estimate for severance taxes × amount of recoverable coal.

4 Federal revenues are based on $5.80 per ton (projected for 8,400-Btu coal) price × amount of recoverable coal × federal royalty of 12.5 percent minus state’s 50 percent share, plus $0.35 

per ton for AML fees × amount of recoverable coal minus state’s 50 percent share, plus $5.80 per ton (for 8,400-Btu coal) price × amount of recoverable coal × black lung tax of 4.0 percent, plus bonus payment on LBA leased coal of $0.30 to $0.97 per ton (based on the range of bonus payments for the last 6 LBAs sold in 2004 and 2005) × amount of mineable coal minus state’s 50 percent share.
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

 2-28 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Table 2-3. Summary Comparison of Coal Production, Surface Disturbance, Mine Life, and Revenues for Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract and Eagle Butte Mine – Assuming Highway 14-16 is Not Moved and the Underlying Coal is Not Recovered. 

Item 

No Action Alternative

(Existing Eagle Butte 

Mine) 

Added by 

Proposed Action 

Added by Alternative 1 

(Preferred Tract 

Configuration) 

In-Place Coal (as of 1/1/06) 374.0 mmt 238.0 mmt 243.7 mmt Mineable Coal (as of 1/1/06) 354.0 mmt 211.0 mmt 214.2 mmt Recoverable Coal (as of 1/1/06)1 340.0 mmt 203.0 mmt 206.1 mmt Coal Mined Through 2005 420.4 mmt -- -- Lease Area2 4,884.0 ac 1,397.6 ac 1,427.8 ac Total Area To Be Disturbed2 6,076.0 ac 2,395.0 ac 2,415.0 ac Permit Area2 7,471.0 ac 2,460.0 ac 2,460.0 ac Average Annual Post-2005 Coal Production 25.0 mmt 0 mmt 0 mmt Remaining Life of Mine (post-2005) 13.6 yrs 8.1 yrs 8.2 yrs Average Number of Employees 223 0 0 Total Projected State Revenues (post-2005)3 $ 384.4 million $ 261.1 - $ 331.8 million $ 264.2 - $ 336.0 million 

Total Projected Federal Revenues (post-2005)4 $ 261.6 million $ 187.9 - $ 258.5 million $ 190.7 - $ 262.5 million 

1 Assumes 96 percent recovery of mineable coal. The estimated tons of recoverable coal added under the Proposed Action and Alternative 1 are based on the assumptions that the north 

half of Section 20 (under Alternative 1) would not be mined, and the coal beneath the U.S. Highway 14-16 ROW and associated buffer zone would not be mined. 

2 The lease area includes federal coal leases only and does not include state coal within the permit boundary. The disturbed area exceeds the leased area (total federal and state) because 

of the need for highwall reduction, topsoil removal, and other mine support activities outside the lease boundaries. The permit area is larger than the leased or disturbed area to assure that all disturbed lands are within the permit boundary and to allow an easily defined legal land description.

3 Revenues to the State of Wyoming include income from severance tax, property and production taxes, sales and use taxes, and Wyoming’s share of federal royalty payments, bonus 

bids, and AML fees. State revenues are based on $5.80 per ton (projected for 8,400-Btu coal) price × amount of recoverable coal × federal royalty of 12.5 percent minus federal’s 50 percent share, plus $0.35 per ton for AML fees × amount of recoverable coal minus federal’s 50 percent share, plus bonus payment on LBA leased coal of $0.30 to $0.97 per ton (based on the range of bonus payments for the last 6 LBAs sold in 2004 and 2005) × amount of mineable coal minus federal’s 50 percent share, plus $0.023 per ton estimate for sales and use taxes × amount of recoverable coal, plus $0.26 per ton estimate for Ad Valorem taxes × amount of recoverable coal, plus $0.31 per ton estimate for severance taxes × amount of recoverable coal. 

4 Federal revenues are based on $5.80 per ton (projected for 8,400-Btu coal) price × amount of recoverable coal × federal royalty of 12.5 percent minus state’s 50 percent share, plus 

$0.35 per ton for AML fees × amount of recoverable coal minus state’s 50 percent share, plus $5.80 per ton (for 8,400-Btu coal) price × amount of recoverable coal × black lung tax of 4.0 percent, plus bonus payment on LBA leased coal of $0.30 to $0.97 per ton (based the range of bonus payments for the last 6 LBAs sold in 2004 and 2005) × amount of mineable coal minus state’s 50 percent share.
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-29 

Table 2-4. Summary Comparison of Magnitude1 and Duration of Direct and Indirect Impacts for the Proposed Action, 

Alternative 1, and the No Action Alternative for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract2.

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE MAGNITUDE AND DURATION OF IMPACT RESOURCE NAME NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 

PROPOSED ACTION and ALTERNATIVE 1

TOPOGRAPHY & PHYSIOGRAPHY Lower surface elevation Permanent topographic moderation, which could result in:  Microhabitat reduction  Habitat diversity reduction  Big game carrying capacity reduction  Reduction in water runoff and peak flows  Increased precipitation infiltration  Reduction in erosion  Potential enhanced vegetative productivity  Potential acceleration of groundwater recharge Diversion of Little Rawhide Creek during mining 

Moderate, permanent on existing mine area Moderate, long term on existing mine area Moderate, long term on existing mine area Moderate, long term on existing mine area Moderate, beneficial, long term on existing mine area Moderate, beneficial, long term on existing mine area Moderate, beneficial, long term on existing mine area Moderate, beneficial, long term on existing mine area Moderate, beneficial, long term on existing mine area Moderate, short term on existing mine area 

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

GEOLOGY AND MINERALS Removal of coal Removal and replacement of topsoil and overburden Physical characteristic alterations in replaced overburden Loss of unrecovered CBNG though venting and/or depletion of hydrostatic pressure Loss of access for development of sub-coal oil and gas resources and other minerals Destruction of paleontological resources that are not exposed on the surface 

Moderate, permanent on existing mine area Moderate, permanent on existing mine area Moderate, permanent on existing mine area Minor to moderate, permanent on existing mine area Moderate, short term on existing mine area Moderate, permanent on the existing mine area 

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

AIR QUALITY Particulate Emissions: 

 Elevated concentrations associated with projected average 

production of 25 mmtpy in compliance with ambient standard 

 Potential for public exposure to particulate emissions along 

U.S Highway 14-16 and in occupied dwellings, businesses and school located in area 

 Potential for human health impacts as a result of exposure 

to particulate emissions 

NOx Emissions from Machinery: 

 Elevated concentrations associated with projected average 

production of 25 mmtpy in compliance with ambient standard 

Moderate, short term for existing approved mining operations Minor to moderate, short term for existing approved mining operations Minor to moderate, short term for existing approved mining operations Moderate, short term for existing approved mining operations 

Same as No Action for from 8 to 9 additional years Same as No Action for from 8 to 9 additional years Same as No Action for from 8 to 9 additional years Same as No Action for from 8 to 9 additional years 

1 Refer to Chapter 3 for a discussion on magnitude of impacts. 2 All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

 2-30 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Table 2-4. Summary Comparison of Magnitude1 and Duration of Direct and Indirect Impacts for the Proposed Action, 

Alternative1, and the No Action Alternative for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract2 (Continued).

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE MAGNITUDE AND DURATION OF IMPACT RESOURCE NAME NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 

PROPOSED ACTION and ALTERNATIVE 1

AIR QUALITY (Continued)  Potential for public exposure to NOx emissions from 

machinery along U.S. Highway 14-16 and for occupied dwellings, airport, businesses and school located in area 

 Potential for human health impacts as a result of exposure 

to NOx emissions 

NOx Emissions from Blasting in Compliance with Eagle Butte 

Mine permit Blasting Conditions : 

 Potential for public exposure  Potential for human health impacts as a result of exposure 

to NOx emissions 

Visibility: 

 Elevated concentrations of fine particulate matter associated 

with projected average coal production of 25 mmtpy 

Acidification of Lakes: 

SO2 emissions derived from burning Eagle Butte coal to 

produce power 

Moderate, short term for existing approved mining operations Minor to moderate, short term for existing approved mining operations No projected events No projected events Moderate, short term for existing approved mining operations Moderate, short term in vicinity of power plants 

Same as No Action for from 8 to 9 additional years Same as No Action for from 8 to 9 additional years Same as No Action for from 8 to 9 additional years Same as No Action for from 8 to 9 additional years Same as No Action for from 8 to 9 additional years Same as No Action on expanded mine for from 8 to 9 additional years 

WATER RESOURCES Groundwater

 Removal of coal and overburden aquifers  Replacement of existing coal and overburden with 

unconsolidated backfill material 

 Depressed water levels in overburden and coal aquifers 

adjacent to mine 

 Change in hydraulic properties in backfilled areas  Increase in TDS concentrations in backfilled areas  Use of subcoal aquifers for water supply Surface Water

 Diversion and disruption of a portion of the Little Rawhide 

Creek drainage basin and associated reservoirs 

 Reconstruction of surface drainage systems  Increased runoff and erosion rates on disturbed lands due 

to vegetation removal 

 Increased infiltration on reclaimed lands due to topographic 

moderation

Moderate, short term on existing mine area Moderate, permanent on existing mine area Moderate, short to long term on existing mine and surrounding area Negligible, long term on existing mine area Moderate, long term on existing mine area Negligible, short term for existing approved mining operations Moderate, short term on existing mine area Permanent on existing mine areas Moderate, short term on existing mine area Moderate, beneficial, long term on existing mine area 

Same as No Action on expanded mine area Same as No Action on expanded mine area Same as No Action on expanded mine and surrounding area Same as No Action on expanded mine area Same as No Action on expanded mine area Same as No Action for from 8 to 9 additional years Same as No Action on expanded mine area Same as No Action on expanded mine area Same as No Action on expanded mine area Same as No Action on expanded mine area 

1 Refer to Chapter 3 for a discussion on magnitude of impacts. 2 All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-31 

Table 2-4. Summary Comparison of Magnitude1 and Duration of Direct and Indirect Impacts for the Proposed Action, 

Alternative 1, and the No Action Alternative for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract2 (Continued).

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE MAGNITUDE AND DURATION OF IMPACT RESOURCE NAME NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 

PROPOSED ACTION and ALTERNATIVE 1

WATER RESOURCES (Continued)  Increased runoff on reclaimed lands due to loss of soil 

structure 

 Potential for adverse downstream effects as a result of 

sediment produced by large storms 

Water Rights

 Disruption of water supply for water-rights holders with 

wells completed in the coal or overburden aquifer within the five-foot drawdown area or with surface water rights within the disturbance area

Moderate, long term on existing mine area Moderate, long term for existing approved mining operations Minor to moderate, long term on existing mine and surrounding area 

Same as No Action on expanded mine area Same as No Action for extended mining operations Same as No Action on expanded mine and surrounding area 

ALLUVIAL VALLEY FLOORS Little Rawhide Creek within the existing mine permit area, including the portion of the creek within the LBA tract, has been declared an AVF non-significant to agriculture. Based on evaluation, it is believed that the portion of Prong Draw within the tract does not include an AVF. 

Removal and restoration of AVFs determined not to be significant to agriculture Disruptions to streamflows supplying downstream AVFs

Moderate, short term on existing leases Negligible, short term on existing leases 

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

WETLANDS Removal of jurisdictional wetlands and loss of wetland function until reclamation occursRemoval of non-jurisdictional wetlands 

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

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

SOILS Changes in physical properties after reclamation: 

 Increased near-surface bulk density and decreased soil 

infiltration rate resulting in increased potential for soil erosion 

 More uniformity in soil type, thickness, and texture

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

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

1 Refer to Chapter 3 for a discussion on magnitude of impacts. 2 All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

 2-32 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Table 2-4. Summary Comparison of Magnitude1 and Duration of Direct and Indirect Impacts for the Proposed Action, 

Alternative 1, and the No Action Alternative for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract2 (Continued).

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE MAGNITUDE AND DURATION OF IMPACT RESOURCE NAME NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 

PROPOSED ACTION and ALTERNATIVE 1

SOILS (Continued) Decreased runoff due to topographic modificationChanges in biological properties in soils that are stockpiled 

before placement: 

Reduction in organic matter Reduction in microorganism population Reduction in seeds, bulbs, rhizomes and live plant parts 

Changes in chemical properties: 

More uniform soil nutrient distribution

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

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

VEGETATION During mining: 

 Progressive removal of existing vegetation 

Increased erosion 

 Wildlife and livestock habitat loss After revegetation: 

Changes in vegetation patterns Reduction in vegetation diversity Reduction in shrub density Decreased big game habitat carrying capacity Decreased habitat for shrub dependent species 

Potential invasion of non-native plant species

Moderate, short term on existing mine area Moderate, short term on existing mine area Moderate, short term on existing mine area Negligible, long term on existing mine area Negligible, long term on existing mine area Moderate, long term on existing mine area Moderate, long term on existing mine area Moderate, long term on existing mine area Moderate, short term on existing mine area 

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

WILDLIFEDisplacement of all wildlife from active mining areas Increased competition on adjacent undisturbed or reclaimed lands, especially big game Restriction of wildlife movement, especially big game Increased mortality of small mammals Surface and noise disturbance of active sage-grouse leks Disturbance of sage-grouse nesting and winter habitat during mining Loss of sage-grouse nesting habitat after reclamation Abandonment of raptor nests Loss of foraging habitat for raptors Loss of nesting and foraging habitat for Migratory Birds of Management Concern

Moderate, short term on existing mine area Moderate, short term on adjacent area Moderate, short term on existing mine area Moderate, short term on existing mine area Moderate, short to long term on existing mine area Moderate, short term on existing mine area Moderate, long term on existing mine area Negligible, short term on existing mine area Negligible, short to long term on existing mine area Negligible, short to long term on existing mine area 

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

1 Refer to Chapter 3 for a discussion on magnitude of impacts. 2 All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-33 

Table 2-4. Summary Comparison of Magnitude1 and Duration of Direct and Indirect Impacts for the Proposed Action, 

Alternative1, and the No Action Alternative for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract2 (Continued).

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE MAGNITUDE AND DURATION OF IMPACT RESOURCE NAME NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 

PROPOSED ACTION and ALTERNATIVE 1

WILDLIFE (Continued) Reduction in waterfowl resting and feeding habitat Loss of habitat for aquatic species, amphibians and reptiles during mining Road kills by mine-related traffic Reduction in habitat carrying capacity and habitat diversity on reclaimed lands Potential reduction in microhabitats on reclaimed lands Localized avoidance of foraging areas by big game 

Negligible, short term on existing mine area Negligible, short term on existing mine area Moderate, long term on existing mine area Moderate, long term on existing mine area Moderate, long term on existing mine area Minor, short term on existing mine area 

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

THREATENED, ENDANGERED, PROPOSED, AND CANDIDATE SPECIES (See Appendix E) Black-footed ferret Bald eagle Ute ladies’-tresses 

As determined by previous consultation with USFWS for all species 

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

LAND USE AND RECREATION Reduction of livestock grazing Loss of wildlife habitat Loss of access for sub-coal oil and gas development Removal of oil and gas production facilities 

Moderate, long term on existing mine area Moderate, long term on existing mine area Moderate, short term on existing mine area Moderate, short term on existing mine area 

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

CULTURAL RESOURCES Sites that are not eligible for NRHP Sites that are eligible for NRHP Sites that are unevaluated for eligibility 

Ineligible sites may be destroyed without further work on existing mine area Impacts to sites that are eligible for the NHRP are not permitted; eligible sites would be avoided or mitigated through data recovery prior to mining on existing mine area Impacts to unevaluated sites are not permitted; unevaluated sites would be evaluated prior to mining on existing mine area 

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

NATIVE AMERICAN CONCERNS No impact identified on existing mine area Same as No Action on expanded mine area 1 Refer to Chapter 3 for a discussion on magnitude of impacts. 2 All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

 2-34 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Table 2-4. Summary Comparison of Magnitude1 and Duration of Direct and Indirect Impacts for the Proposed Action, 

Alternative 1, and the No Action Alternative for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract2 (Continued).

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE MAGNITUDE AND DURATION OF IMPACT RESOURCE NAME NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 

PROPOSED ACTION and ALTERNATIVE 1

VISUAL RESOURCES During mining: 

Alteration of landscape by mining facilities and operations 

Visibility of mining operations from highway 

Following reclamation: 

Smoother sloped terrain Reduction in sagebrush density

Moderate, short term on existing mine area Moderate, short term on existing mine area Negligible, long term on existing mine area Moderate, short to long term on existing mine area 

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

NOISE Increased noise levels as a result of mining activities Moderate to substantial, short term noise impacts to 

occupied dwellings, school, businesses, and airport located within 2,500 feet of mining activities 

Same as No Action on expanded mine area 

TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES Use of rail systems and existing Eagle Butte Mine rail infrastructure to ship coal Employee and service contractor use of highways to and from mine sites Relocation of pipelines Relocation of utility lines Relocation of Highway 14-16, if approved by WYDOT, to allow recovery of coal under lease Mining operations near Highway 14-16, with or without approval of relocation Mining operations near Gillette-Campbell County Airport Mining operations impacting future airport expansion plans 

Moderate, for duration of existing approved mining operations Moderate, for duration of existing approved mining operations Negligible, short to long term on existing mine area Negligible, short to long term on existing mine area No impact at this time Moderate for duration of existing approved mining operations Moderate for duration of existing approved mining operations No Impact 

Same as No Action for from 8 to 9 additional years Same as No Action for from 8 to 9 additional years Same as No Action on expanded mine area Same as No Action on expanded mine area Moderate to substantial, long term to permanent Same as No Action for from 8 to 9 additional years Moderate (Proposed Action) to substantial (Alternative 1) for up to 12 additional years Delayed for from 8 to 9 years 

HAZARDOUS AND SOLID WASTE Waste generated by mining operations Negligible for duration of existing approved mining 

operations 

Same as No Action for from 8 to 9 additional years 

1 Refer to Chapter 3 for a discussion on magnitude of impacts. 2 All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-35 

Table 2-4. Summary Comparison of Magnitude1 and Duration of Direct and Indirect Impacts for the Proposed Action, 

Alternative 1, and the No Action Alternative for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract2 (Continued).

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE MAGNITUDE AND DURATION OF IMPACTRESOURCE NAME NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 

PROPOSED ACTION and ALTERNATIVE 1

SOCIOECONOMICS Employment Revenues from royalties and taxes to the state government Revenues from royalties and taxes to the federal government Revenues from taxes to local economy Additional housing and infrastructure needs

Moderate, beneficial short term for existing approved mining operations Moderate, beneficial short term for existing approved mining operations Moderate, beneficial short term for existing approved mining operations Moderate, beneficial short term for existing approved mining operations No impact related to existing approved mining operations 

Same as No Action for from 8 to 9 additional years Same as No Action for from 8 to 9 additional years Same as No Action for from 8 to 9 additional years Same as No Action for from 8 to 9 additional years Same as No Action for from 8 to 9 additional years 

1 Refer to Chapter 3 for a discussion on magnitude of impacts. 2 All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

 2-36 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Table 2-5. Summary Comparison of Magnitude and Duration of Cumulative Impacts1, 2.

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE MAGNITUDE, TYPE, AND DURATION OF IMPACT RESOURCE NAME NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE PROPOSED ACTION and ALTERNATIVE 1

TOPOGRAPHY & PHYSIOGRAPHY 

Alteration of topography following reclamation of coal disturbance areas Alteration of topography to accommodate coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related facilities

Permanent topographic moderation following reclamation Long term to permanent limited changes in discrete, scattered areas 

Same as No Action Same as No Action 

GEOLOGY AND MINERALS Recovery of coal resulting in reduction in coal resources and disturbance and replacement of overburden and topsoil Surficial disturbance and reclamation on oil and gas well sites and associated facilities 

Moderate, long term to permanent Moderate, long term to permanent 

Same as No Action Same as No Action 

PALEONTOLOGY Coal, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related development disturbance of PFYC Class 5 Wasatch and Class 3 Fort Union Formations 

Permanent potential adverse effects to scientifically significant fossils that are present but not visible prior to disturbance 

Same as No Action 

AIR QUALITY Impacts to Montana near-field receptors

 24-hour PM10 

 All other parameters Impacts to Wyoming near-field receptors

 24-hour PM10 

 Annual PM10

 All other parameters 

A maximum modeled impact in one area above NAAQS for the baseline year and both coal production scenarios for 2010 Modeled impacts in compliance with NAAQS and Montana AAQS Modeled impact above NAAQS at some receptors for both coal production scenarios for 2010 Maximum modeled impact above WAAQS at one 

receptor for the upper production scenario for 2010 Modeled impacts in compliance with NAAQS and WAAQS 

Same as No Action Same as No Action Same as No Action Same as No Action Same as No Action 

1 Cumulative impact discussion in this table and in Chapter 4 is based on the PRB Coal Review analyses (BLM 2005a-g, 2006b, and in preparation). 2 All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-37 

Table 2-5. Summary Comparison of Magnitude and Duration of Cumulative Impacts1, 2 (Continued).

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE MAGNITUDE, TYPE, AND DURATION OF IMPACT RESOURCE NAME NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE PROPOSED ACTION and ALTERNATIVE 1

AIR QUALITY (Continued) 

Non-regulatory PSD Impacts at Class I and Sensitive

Class II Areas

 Class I Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation  Class I Washakie Wilderness Area and Wind Cave 

National Park and Class II Crow Indian Reservation 

 All other Class I and Sensitive Class II modeled 

receptors 

Visibility Impacts

Acid deposition Impacts

 Florence Lake  Upper Frozen Lake  All other modeled sensitive lakes 

Modeled impacts above Class I increment levels for 24-hour PM10, annual PM10, 24-hour SO2, 3-hour SO2 

for baseline year and both coal production scenarios for 2010; above Class I increment for annual NO2 for 

upper coal production scenario for 2010 Modeled impacts above Class I increment levels for 24-hour PM10 for baseline year and both coal 

production scenarios for 2010 Modeled impacts within Class I increment levels for baseline year and both coal production scenarios for 2010 199 or more days with a change of 1.0 dv or greater at three Class I areas and seven sensitive Class II areas for the baseline year and both coal productions scenarios for 2010 All modeled impacts below the depositions threshold values for nitrogen and sulfur compounds Modeled impact above 10 percent ANC Modeled impact above 1 μeq/L Modeled impact below threshold values 

Same as No Action Same as No Action Same as No Action Same as No Action Same as No Action Same as No Action Same as No Action Same as No Action 

GROUNDWATER RESOURCES Removal of coal aquifer and replacement with backfill material Lowering of water levels in aquifers around the mines Water level decline in sub-coal aquifers as a result of all development Change in groundwater quality as a result of all development Overlapping drawdown in the coal aquifer caused by surface mining and CBNG development 

Moderate, permanent for mining areas Moderate, long term in area immediately west of mines No cumulative impacts anticipated No cumulative impacts anticipated Additive, long term in area immediately west of surface coal mines 

Same as No Action Same as No Action Same as No Action Same as No Action Same as No Action 

1 Cumulative impact discussion in this table and in Chapter 4 is based on the PRB Coal Review analyses (BLM 2005a-g, 2006b, and in preparation). 2 All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

 2-38 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Table 2-5. Summary Comparison of Magnitude and Duration of Cumulative Impacts1, 2 (Continued).

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE MAGNITUDE, TYPE, AND DURATION OF IMPACT RESOURCE NAME NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE PROPOSED ACTION and ALTERNATIVE 1

SURFACE WATER RESOURCES

Surface disturbance of intermittent and ephemeral streams and scattered ponds and reservoirs as a result of coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related development Discharge of coal mining and CBNG produced waters into intermittent and ephemeral streams Sediment input into intermittent and ephemeral streams and scattered ponds and reservoirs as a result of coal mining, coalrelated, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related development 

Moderate, short term Moderate, short term Moderate, short term 

Same as No Action Same as No Action Same as No Action 

ALLUVIAL VALLEY FLOORS

Coal mining disturbance of AVFs determined to be significant to agriculture Coal mining disturbance of AVFs determined not to be significant to agriculture 

Not permitted by regulation AVFs disturbed by mining must be restored to essential hydrologic function No cumulative impacts anticipated 

Same as No Action Same as No Action 

SOILS

Coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related disturbance and replacement of soil resources CBNG water disposal impacts to soil resources 

Moderate, short term and long term impacts through accelerated wind or water erosion, declining soil quality factors through compaction, reduced microbial populations and organic matter, and potential mixing of soil zones Potential increase in soil alkalinity depending on SAR levels in water and method of water disposal 

Same as No Action Same as No Action 

VEGETATION Coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related removal and replacement of native vegetation Coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related impacts to Special Status Plant Species Coal mining, coal related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related dispersal of noxious and invasive species 

Moderate, short to long term impacts due to potential differences in species composition and presence and size of woody species on reclaimed lands Potential incremental loss or alteration of potential or known habitat Potential displacement of native species and changes in species composition 

Same as No Action Same as No Action Same as No Action 

1 Cumulative impact discussion in this table and in Chapter 4 is based on the PRB Coal Review analyses (BLM 2005a-g, 2006b, and in preparation). 2 All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-39 

Table 2-5. Summary Comparison of Magnitude and Duration of Cumulative Impacts1, 2 (Continued).

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE MAGNITUDE, TYPE, AND DURATION OF IMPACT RESOURCE NAME NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE PROPOSED ACTION and ALTERNATIVE 1

WETLAND AND RIPARIAN VEGETATION 

CBNG-related discharge of produced water Moderate, short to long term creation of wetlands in 

areas that previously supported upland vegetation 

Same as No Action 

WILDLIFEDirect and indirect coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related development impacts to game and nongame species, including direct mortality, habitat fragmentation, animal displacement, noise and increased human presence Coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related disturbance of game and nongame species habitat during project development and operation Coal mining, coal related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related habitat changes after reclamation 

Moderate, short term Moderate, short term loss of all types of habitat present in disturbed areas Moderate, long term change in habitat with potential changes in associated wildlife populations 

Same as No Action Same as No Action Same as No Action 

FISHERIESAlteration or loss of habitat due to coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related development Changes in water quality as a result of surface disturbance or introduction of contaminants into drainages caused by coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related development Changes in available habitat as a result of water withdrawals or discharges related to coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related development 

Moderate, short to long term Moderate, short to long term Moderate, short term 

Same as No Action Same as No Action Same as No Action 

SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES

Direct and indirect coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related development impacts, including direct mortality, breeding area, nest or burrow abandonment, noise and increased human presence Coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related disturbance of habitat during project development and operation Coal mining, coal related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related habitat changes after reclamation 

Moderate, short term Moderate, short term loss of all types of special status species habitat present in disturbed areas Moderate, long term change in habitat with potential changes in associated populations of special status species 

Same as No Action Same as No Action Same as No Action 

1 Cumulative impact discussion in this table and in Chapter 4 is based on the PRB Coal Review analyses (BLM 2005a-g, 2006b, and in preparation). 2 All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

 2-40 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Table 2-5. Summary Comparison of Magnitude and Duration of Cumulative Impacts1, 2 (Continued).

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE MAGNITUDE, TYPE, AND DURATION OF IMPACT RESOURCE NAME NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE PROPOSED ACTION and ALTERNATIVE 1

LAND USE AND RECREATION

Loss of forage and range improvements and restriction of livestock movement due to coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related development Disturbance of developed recreation sites by coal mining, coalrelated, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related development Reduction or degradation of opportunities for dispersed recreation activities related to coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related development 

Moderate, short term Negligible, short term Moderate, short term on existing mine area 

Same as No Action Same as No Action Same as No Action 

CULTURAL RESOURCESDisturbance of cultural resource sites Moderate, permanent Same as No Action TRANSPORTATION AND UTILITIESMovement of segments of existing highways, pipelines, transmission lines, or railroads to accommodate coal mining development Increased vehicular traffic on roads and highways due to coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related development, and associated impacts including traffic accidents, road wear, air emissions, dust, noise, and vehicle collisions with wildlife and livestock Construction and operation of additional railroad and pipeline facilities and transmission lines to transport coal, oil and gas, and electricity 

Moderate, long term to permanent, disruptive effects would be minimized Moderate, short term Moderate, short to long term 

Same as No Action Same as No Action Same as No Action 

SOCIOECONOMICS Increases in employment related to coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related development 

Significant, short to long term Same as No Action 

Increases in personal income due to employment increases related to coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related development 

Significant, beneficial, short to long term Same as No Action 

Increase in population due to employment increases related to coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related development 

Significant, short to long term Same as No Action 

Expansion of housing supply due to employment increases related to coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related development 

Significant, short to long term Same as No Action 

1 Cumulative impact discussion in this table and in Chapter 4 is based on the PRB Coal Review analyses (BLM 2005a-g, 2006b, and in preparation). 2 All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise. 
2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 2-41 

Table 2-5. Summary Comparison of Magnitude and Duration of Cumulative Impacts1, 2 (Continued).

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL IMPACT BY RESOURCE MAGNITUDE, TYPE, AND DURATION OF IMPACT RESOURCE NAME NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE PROPOSED ACTION and ALTERNATIVE 1

SOCIOECONOMICS (Continued) 

Increases in school enrollment due to employment increases related to coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related development 

Moderate, short term Same as No Action 

Need for additional local government facilities and services due to employment increases related to coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related development 

Moderate, short to long term Same as No Action 

Increased federal state and local revenues related to coal mining, coal-related, oil and gas, and oil- and gas-related development 

Significant, beneficial, short to long term Same as No Action 

1 Cumulative impact discussion in this table and in Chapter 4 is based on the PRB Coal Review analyses (BLM 2005a-g, 2006b, and in preparation). 2 All impacts are assumed to be adverse unless noted otherwise. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-1 

3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

This chapter describes the existing conditions of the physical, biological, cultural, 

and socioeconomic resources in the general analysis area for the Eagle Butte West 

LBA1 Tract (the affected environment) and analyzes the direct and indirect impacts 

to those resources that would be associated with mining the tract if it is leased 

under the Proposed Action or under the BLM’s preferred tract configuration for 

Alternative 1 (the environmental consequences). 

The probable environmental consequences of the No Action Alternative (Alternative 

2, not issuing a lease for the tract) with respect to the environmental resources are 

also considered in this analysis. 

In addition, this chapter considers regulatory compliance; mitigation; monitoring; 

residual impacts; the relationship between local short-term uses of man’s 

environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity; 

and the irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources that would occur 

with implementation of the Proposed Action or the BLM’s preferred tract 

configuration under Alternative 1. As discussed in Chapter 2, regulatory 

compliance and mitigation and monitoring measures that are required by federal 

and/or state law are considered to be part of the Proposed Action and 

Alternative 1. 

Critical elements of the human environment (BLM 1988) that could potentially be 

affected by the Proposed Action or the BLM’s preferred tract configuration under 

Alternative 1 include air quality, cultural resources, Native American religious 

concerns, T&E species, migratory birds, hazardous or solid wastes, water quality, 

wetlands/riparian zones, invasive non-native species, and environmental justice. 

Five other critical elements (areas of critical environmental concern, prime or 

unique farmlands, floodplains, wild and scenic rivers, and wilderness) are not 

present in the analysis area and are not addressed further. In addition to the 

critical elements that are potentially present in the general analysis area, this EIS 

discusses the status and potential effects of mining the LBA tract on topography 

and physiography, geology and mineral resources, soils, water quantity, alluvial 

valley floors, vegetation, wildlife, land use and recreation, paleontological 

resources, visual resources, noise, transportation resources, and socioeconomics. 

 

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

Additional, more detailed information about the affected environment in the 

general analysis area is contained in a separate document entitled 

Supplementary Information on the Affected Environment in the General Analysis 

Area for the Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application EIS, which is available on 

request. 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-2 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

The resources that are addressed in this EIS were identified during the scoping 

process or interdisciplinary team review as having the potential to be affected. 

Figure 3-1 shows the general analysis area for most environmental resources. The 

general analysis area for the tract includes the BLM study area for the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract (the tract as applied for and the entire additional area evaluated 

under Alternative 1) and the anticipated permit amendment study area for the 

Eagle Butte Mine. The anticipated permit amendment study area is generally 

defined as those lands adjacent to and outside of Eagle Butte Mine’s current 

permit area that the applicant mine anticipates would be included within the 

amended mine permit area if the tract is leased. 

Table 3-1 shows the total leased and total mine disturbance areas for the existing 

Eagle Butte Mine (which represents the No Action Alternative). As indicated in 

Table 3-1, Eagle Butte’s current federal coal leases include approximately 4,884 

acres and, under the currently approved mining and reclamation plan, the mine 

would disturb a total of approximately 6,076 acres in order to recover that coal. 

According to Eagle Butte Mine’s 2004 Annual Report submitted to WDEQ/LQD, 

the mine had disturbed a total of about 3,556 acres as of December 2004 (FCW 

2004b). Of that area of disturbance, approximately 1,535 acres were occupied by 

permanent or temporary facilities (stockpiles, hydrologic control structures, mine 

buildings and coal loading facilities, railroad loop, environmental monitoring 

areas, etc.), 795 acres were being actively mined, and 1,226 acres had been mined 

and reclaimed or were in the process of being reclaimed (FCW 2004b). 

If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased to the applicant as a maintenance 

tract under the Proposed Action or the BLM’s preferred tract configuration for 

Alternative 1, the permit area for the adjacent Eagle Butte Mine would have to be 

amended to include the new lease area before it could be disturbed by mining 

activities. Table 3-1 also shows how the leased area and disturbance area would 

change for the tract as applied for and for the BLM’s preferred tract configuration 

under Alternative 1. The estimates of recoverable coal, associated disturbance, 

and mine life shown in Table 3-1 and elsewhere in this chapter assume that U.S. 

Highway 14-16 is not moved. If WYDOT approves relocation of Highway 14-16, 

the estimated tons of recoverable coal, associated disturbance, and mine life 

would increase as discussed in Sections 2.1 and 2.2 and in Table 2-2. A portion 

of the LBA tract lies inside the current mine permit area (Figure 3-1). If the tract 

is leased, the area that would have to be added to the existing mine permit area 

would be that portion of the LBA tract that lies outside the existing permit 

boundary plus an adjacent strip of land that would be used for highwall reduction 

after mining and such mine-related activities as construction of diversions, flood 

and sediment control structures, roads, and stockpiles. Portions of the LBA tract 

under the Proposed Action and the BLM’s preferred tract configuration for 

Alternative 1 lie east of U.S. Highway 14-16, as shown in Figure 3-1. Some of 

these areas of the tract have been disturbed by the current Eagle Butte mining 

operation in order to recover the coal in the existing coal leases (Figure 2-1). The 

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-4 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Table 3-1. Comparison of Existing and Proposed Eagle Butte Mine Disturbance 

Area and Mining Operations – Assuming that U.S. Highway 14-16 is 

Not Moved and the Coal Underlying the Highway is Not Recovered.1

No Action 

Alternative 

(Existing 

Permit Area) 

Proposed 

Action 

BLM Study 

Area Under 

Alternative 12

BLM Preferred 

Tract 

Configuration 

Under 

Alternative 13

Additional Lease Area (Acres) --- 1,397.6 2,372.6 1,427.8 

Total Lease Area (Acres)4 4,884.0 6,281.6 7,256.6 6,311.8 

Increase in Lease Area 

(Percent) --- 28.6 48.6 29.2 

Estimated Additional Coal 

Removal Area (Acres) 1,333.0 1,989.0 1,352.0 

Estimated Additional Mine 

Disturbance Area (Acres)5 --- 2,395.0 2,505.0 2,415.0 

Estimated Total Mine 

Disturbance Area (Acres) 6,076.0 8,471.0 8,581.0 8,491.0 

Increase in Estimated 

Disturbance Area (Percent) --- 39.4 41.2 39.8 

Estimated Additional 

Recoverable Coal (Million 

Tons)6 --- 203.0 299.9 206.1 

Estimated Recoverable Coal 

for Mine as of 1/06 (Million 

Tons) 340.0 543.0 639.9 546.1 

Increase in Estimated 

Recoverable Coal as of 1/06 

(Percent) --- 59.7 88.2 60.6 

1 If the highway is moved, there would be approximately 65 additional acres disturbed and approximately 

25 million additional tons of coal would be recovered under the Proposed Action. 2 The BLM study area includes the tract as applied for and the additional area evaluated by BLM under 

Alternative 1. 3 The BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1 is shown in Figure 2-2. 

4 Includes federal and state coal. 

5 Total Disturbance Area = area to be mined + area disturbed for mine facilities, access roads, haul roads, 

highwall reduction, railroad facilities, stockpiles, etc. 6 Estimated Recoverable Coal Resources = tons of mineable coal x recovery factor (96 percent). 

environmental consequences of leasing the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract under the 

Proposed Action or the BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1 would 

be similar in nature, but selection of the Proposed Action would disturb a slightly 

smaller area of land surface.

Surface mining and reclamation have been ongoing in the eastern PRB for about 

three decades. During this time, effective mining and reclamation technologies 

have been developed and continue to be refined. Mining and reclamation 

operations are regulated under SMCRA and Wyoming statutes. WDEQ technically 

reviews all mine permit application packages to ensure that the mining and 

reclamation plans comply with all state permitting requirements and that the 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-5 

proposed coal mining operations comply with the performance standards of the 

DOI-approved Wyoming program. BLM attaches special stipulations to all coal 

leases (Appendix D), and there are a number of federal and state permit approvals 

that are required in order to conduct surface mining operations (Appendix A). The 

regulations are designed to ensure that surface coal mining impacts are mitigated. 

Impacts can range from beneficial to adverse and they can be a primary result of 

an action (direct) or a secondary result (indirect). They can be permanent, longterm (persisting beyond the end of mine life and reclamation), or short-term 

(persisting during mining and reclamation and until the time the reclamation 

bond is released). Impacts also vary in terms of significance. The basis for 

conclusions regarding significance are the criteria set forth by the Council on 

Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1508.27) and the professional judgment of the 

specialists doing the analyses. Impact significance may range from negligible to 

substantial; impacts can be significant during mining but be reduced to 

insignificance following completion of reclamation. 

3.1 General Setting 

The general analysis area is located in the PRB, a part of the Northern Great 

Plains that includes most of northeastern Wyoming. Vegetation is primarily 

sagebrush and mixed grass prairie. 

3.1.1 Climate and Meteorology

The climate in the general analysis area is typical of a semi-arid, high plains 

environment with relatively large seasonal and diurnal variations in temperature 

and seasonal variation in precipitation. The average annual precipitation at a 

NOAA meteorological station (Gillette 9ESE), located about 11 miles southeast of 

the Eagle Butte Mine, is 15.64 inches (WRCC 2006). June (2.72 inches) and May 

(2.60 inches) are the wettest months, and February (0.55 inch) is the driest. 

Snowfall averages 56.7 inches per year, with most occurring in March (10.4 

inches) and April (8.6 inches). Potential evapotranspiration, at approximately 

31 inches (NOAA 1969), exceeds annual precipitation. Summers are relatively 

short and warm, while winters are longer and cold. The average daily mean 

temperature is 45.2 degrees F. The highest recorded temperature was 107 

degrees F and the lowest was minus 40 degrees F. July is the warmest month, 

with a mean daily temperature of 71.0 degrees F, and January is the coldest 

month, with a mean daily temperature of 21.7 degrees F. The frost-free period is 

100-130 days. 

In the general analysis area, surface wind speeds average approximately 10 mph 

throughout the year. The area experiences extreme wind gusts, especially during 

thunderstorm activity that occurs in June, July, and August. Distinct diurnal 

changes occur, with average wind velocities increasing during the day and 

decreasing during the night. Local variations in wind speed and direction are 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-6 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

primarily due to differences in topography. Wind speeds are highest in the winter 

and spring (October through April) and are predominantly from the western and 

northern sectors. During the warmer months (May through September), wind 

speeds are calmer and directions are more random, although winds from the 

northern or southeastern sectors are slightly more predominant. 

During periods of strong wind, dust may impact air quality across the region. An 

average of 15 air-stagnation events occurs annually in the PRB with an average 

duration of two days each (BLM 1974). 

3.2 Topography and Physiography 

3.2.1 Affected Environment

The general analysis area is a high plains area within the eastern portion of the 

PRB. The PRB is an elongated, asymmetrical structural downfold that is bounded 

by the Black Hills on the east; the Big Horn Mountains on the west; the Hartville 

Uplift, Casper Arch, and Laramie Mountains on the south; and the Miles City Arch 

and the Yellowstone River on the north. The Eagle Butte Mine is located on the 

gently dipping eastern limb of the structural downfold. The regional dip in the 

area of the mine is to the west. 

Landforms of the area consist of a dissected rolling upland plain with low relief, 

broken by low red-capped buttes, mesas, hills, and ridges. Playas are common in 

the basin, as are buttes and plateaus capped by clinker or sandstone. Elevations 

in the PRB range from less than 2,500 ft to greater than 6,000 ft above sea level. 

The major river valleys have wide, flat floors and broad floodplains. The drainages 

dissecting the area are incised, typically are ephemeral or intermittent, and do not 

provide year-round water sources. 

The general analysis area is drained by Little Rawhide Creek, which is the most 

prominent topographic feature. The topography is generally level to gently rolling, 

dissected by locally shallow gullies and the broader meandering floodplain of Little 

Rawhide Creek, an intermittent stream. Unmined lands surrounding the tract are 

characterized by low rolling hills; there is a prominent ridgeline immediately to the 

west. Surface mine lands, both active and reclaimed, dominate the landscape east 

of the LBA tract and U.S. Highway 14-16. Elevations within the BLM study area 

shown in Figure 3-1 range from about 4,240 ft to 4,560 ft above sea level, slopes 

range from flat to around 40 percent, and 73 percent of the surface has a slope of 

five percent or less. 

Habitat types within the LBA tract and adjacent area include seeded pastures, 

sagebrush-grassland, upland-grassland, and areas of previous disturbance. 

Nearly 65 percent of the BLM study area is currently agriculture pasture and 

disturbed land. Other habitats present in limited extent include bottomland or 

riparian areas, sparse trees, and some open water along Little Rawhide Creek, 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-7 

primarily in the southern portion. Little Rawhide Creek passes through the 

eastern portion of the tract from south to north, and its tributary, Prong Draw, 

passes through the central portion of the tract from southwest to northeast. 

Overall, the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is similar in topography and 

physiography to the rest of the Eagle Butte Mine permit area. 

3.2.2 Environmental Consequences

3.2.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

Surface coal mining would permanently alter the topography of the LBA tract if it 

is leased and mined. Topsoil would be removed from the land and stockpiled or 

placed directly on recontoured areas. Overburden would be blasted and stockpiled 

or directly placed into the already mined pit, and coal would be removed. The 

existing topography on the LBA tract would be substantially changed during 

mining. A highwall with a vertical height equal to overburden plus coal thickness 

would exist in the active pits. If necessary, the Little Rawhide Creek would be 

diverted into a temporary channel to prevent pits from being flooded. 

Typically, a direct permanent impact of coal mining and reclamation is 

topographic moderation. After reclamation, the restored land surfaces are 

generally gentler, with more uniform slopes and restored basic drainage networks. 

The original topography of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract ranges from relatively 

flat to gently rolling hills. Slopes range from flat to around 40 percent, as 

discussed above, and the average slope is about four percent. The expected 

postmining topography would be similar to the premining topography, but 

somewhat gentler and more uniform. Following reclamation, the average surface 

elevation on the LBA tract as proposed would be approximately 69 ft lower due to 

coal removal. The removal of the coal would be partially offset by the swelling that 

occurs when the overburden (and interburden, if present) is blasted, removed, and 

replaced. Table 3-2 presents the approximate postmining surface elevation 

change for the LBA tract as applied for and the BLM’s preferred tract configuration 

under Alternative 1. After the coal is removed, the land surface would be restored 

to approximate original contour or to a configuration approved by WDEQ/LQD 

when the mining and reclamation permit for the existing mine is amended to 

include coal removal from the LBA tract. 

Direct adverse impacts resulting from topographic moderation include a reduction 

in microhabitats (e.g., cutbank slopes) for some wildlife species and a reduction in 

habitat diversity. The reduction in slope-dependent shrub communities and 

associated habitat would be slight, due to the lack of steep, premining topography 

on the tract. These impacts may result in a long-term reduction in carrying 

capacity for some species. A direct beneficial impact of the lower and flatter 

terrain would be reduced water runoff, which would allow increased infiltration 

and result in a minor reduction in peak flows. This may help counteract the 

potential for increased erosion that could occur as a result of the higher near-
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-8 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Table 3-2. Comparison of Average Overburden and Coal Thicknesses and 

Approximate Postmining Surface Elevation Changes Under the No 

Action and Action Alternatives. 

No Action 

Alternative 

(Existing Leases) 

Proposed Action 

(As Applied For 

LBA Tract) 

Alternative 1

Preferred 

Tract 

Configuration

Average Overburden Thickness (ft) 200.0 325.0 325.0 

Average Interburden Thickness 

(ft) 5.3 8.0 8.0 

Average Coal Thickness (ft) 100.0 110.0 110.0 

Swell Factor (percent) 11 11 11 

Coal Recovery Factor (percent) 96 96 96 

Postmining Elevation Change1 73.4 ft lower 69.0 ft lower 69.0 ft lower 

1 Reclaimed (postmining) elevation surface change calculated as: (overburden + interburden thickness) + (overburden swell) – (coal thickness x coal recovery factor).

surface bulk density of the reclaimed soils (Section 3.8.2). It may also increase 

vegetative productivity, and potentially accelerate recharge of groundwater. 

The approximate original drainage pattern would be restored, and stock ponds 

would be replaced to provide livestock and wildlife watering sources. These 

topographic changes would not conflict with regional land use, and the postmining 

topography would be designed to adequately support anticipated land use. 

These impacts are occurring on the existing Eagle Butte Mine coal leases as coal is 

mined and mined-out areas are reclaimed. For the Proposed Action and for the 

BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1, the areas that would be 

permanently topographically changed would increase as shown in Table 3-1. As 

discussed in Section 3.0, the estimated recoverable coal, associated disturbance, 

and mine life shown in Table 3-1 assume that Highway 14-16 is not moved. 

3.2.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the Eagle Butte West coal lease application would 

be rejected and coal removal would not occur on the LBA tract. Mining operations 

and the associated impacts to topography and physiography would continue as 

permitted on the existing Eagle Butte Mine leases. Table 3-2 presents the 

approximate postmining surface elevation change for the existing mine. The 

portion of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract lying west of U.S. Highway 14-16 would 

not be disturbed to recover the coal in the existing leases, which are east of the 

highway. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-9 

3.2.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring

The mined-out area must be restored to approximate original contour or other 

topographic configuration approved by WDEQ/LQD. The topographic 

configuration would be developed and approved as part of the required mining and 

reclamation plan for the Eagle Butte Mine. WDEQ/LQD monitors topographic 

restoration by checking the as-built topography in the annual report filed by the 

mine to see if it conforms to the approved topography. 

3.2.4 Residual Impacts

Topographic moderation is a permanent consequence of mining. The indirect 

impacts of topographic moderation on wildlife habitat diversity would also be 

considered permanent. 

3.3 Geology, Mineral Resources, and Paleontology 

3.3.1 General Geology and Coal Resources

3.3.1.1 Affected Environment

Stratigraphic units that would be impacted if the tract under consideration for 

leasing is mined include, in descending order, recent (Quaternary age) alluvial and 

eolian deposits, the Eocene age Wasatch Formation (the overburden), and the 

Paleocene age Fort Union Formation (which contains the target coal seams). 

Figure 3-2 is a chart showing the stratigraphic relationships of the surface and 

subsurface geologic units in the general analysis area. Additional information 

about these units is included in the Groundwater section of this document 

(Section 3.5). 

Surficial deposits in the general analysis area include alluvial and eolian deposits 

and weathered Wasatch Formation. Alluvial deposits occupy the Little Rawhide 

Creek valley and the lowermost section of a tributary, Prong Draw, where it joins 

the mainstem of Little Rawhide Creek. 

The Eocene Wasatch Formation forms most of the overburden in the general 

analysis area. The boundary between the Wasatch Formation and the underlying 

Paleocene Fort Union Formation is not distinct. From a practical standpoint, the 

top of the mineable coal zone is considered as the contact between the two 

formations. As indicated in Table 3-2, overburden thicknesses average about 325 

feet in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for and in the BLM’s preferred 

tract configuration under Alternative 1. The Wasatch overburden in the general 

analysis area consists of interbedded sand, clay, silty claystone, and very thin coal 

beds. Thick sand layers up to 200 ft thick were encountered during exploration 

drilling in the area. As discussed in Section 3.2.1, the regional dip in this area is 

to the west; as a result, the overburden thickness is generally thinner to the east 

 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-11 

and increases to the west. Within the general analysis area, overburden thickness 

ranges from about 183 ft to 460 ft. 

As shown in Figure 3-2, the Fort Union Formation is divided into three members: 

the Tongue River, the Lebo, and the Tullock, in descending order. 

The mineable coal seams in the PRB are part of the Tongue River Member of the 

Fort Union Formation. At the Eagle Butte Mine and within the Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract, there are two mineable coal seams. Locally, these coal seams are 

referred to as the Roland (upper seam) and Smith (lower seam), separated by a 

shale parting of variable thickness. The mineable coal seams are referred to as 

the Anderson and Canyon, Wyodak-Anderson, and Wyodak coal beds by other 

mines in the eastern PRB. The “Wyodak-Anderson Zone” is the official USGS 

nomenclature. In the Eagle Butte Mine area, the Roland seam ranges from zero to 

70 ft thick, with an average thickness of 40 ft. The Smith seam in places reaches 

thicknesses of over 100 ft, with an average thickness of 70 ft. 

Within the BLM study area (the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for and the 

additional area evaluated under Alternative 1), the combined thickness of the two 

coal seams averages about 110 ft (Table 3-2). However, the Roland seam is not 

present on the entire tract; the total coal thickness decreases in the areas where it 

is not present. The thickness of coal ranges from approximately 33 ft to 133 ft. 

Interburden between the two seams, where both seams are present, varies from 

about 1 ft to 13 ft. 

The Fort Union coal seams are subbituminous and are generally low-sulfur, lowash coals. Typically, the coal being mined north of Gillette has a lower heating 

value and higher sulfur content than the coal being mined south of Gillette. 

According to the analyses (which were done on an as-received basis) of exploration 

drilling samples collected in the BLM study area for Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, 

the average heating value of the coal is approximately 8,350 Btu/lb, with an 

average of about 0.35 percent sulfur, 1.9 percent sodium, 4.7 percent ash, and 31 

percent moisture. 

3.3.1.2 Environmental Consequences

3.3.1.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

The geology from the base of the lowest coal seam mined to the land surface would 

be subject to permanent change after the coal is removed from the LBA tract as 

applied for or from the BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1. 

The subsurface characteristics of these lands would be radically altered by 

mining. The replaced overburden and interburden (backfill) would be a mixture of 

the geologically distinct layers of sandstone, siltstone, and shale that currently 

exist. 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-12 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Mining would remove an average of 325 ft of overburden, eight ft of interburden, 

and 110 ft of coal from about 1,333 acres for the tract as applied for up to about 

1,352 acres for the BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1. These 

figures represent the estimated area of actual coal removal, assuming that U.S. 

Highway 14-16 is not moved. Table 3-2 presents the average overburden and coal 

thicknesses for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for and for the BLM’s 

preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1. 

The replaced overburden and interburden would be a relatively homogeneous 

(compared to the premining layered overburden and interburden) and partly 

recompacted mixture averaging about 374 ft in thickness under both the Proposed 

Action and Alternative 1. Approximately 203 million additional tons of coal would 

be recovered from the tract as applied for, and an estimated 206.1 million tons 

would be recovered from the BLM’s preferred tract configuration under 

Alternative 1. 

3.3.1.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the Eagle Butte West coal lease application would 

be rejected and coal removal would not occur on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 

Mining operations and coal removal would continue as permitted on the existing 

Eagle Butte Mine coal leases for about 13.6 years. Table 3-2 presents the average 

overburden, interburden, and coal thicknesses for the existing Eagle Butte Mine 

permit area. The portion of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract lying west of Highway 

14-16 would not be disturbed to recover the remaining coal in the existing leases 

east of the highway. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.3.1.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring

Drilling and sampling programs are conducted on existing leases by all mine 

operators to identify overburden material that may be unsuitable for reclamation 

(i.e., material that is not suitable for use in reestablishing vegetation or that may 

affect groundwater quality due to high concentrations of certain constituents, 

such as selenium, or adverse pH levels). As part of the mine permitting process, 

each mine operator develops a management plan to ensure that this unsuitable 

material is not placed in areas where it may affect groundwater quality or 

revegetation success. Each mine operator also develops backfill monitoring plans 

as part of the mine permitting process to evaluate the quality of the replaced 

overburden. These plans are in place for the existing Eagle Butte Mine and would 

be developed for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract if it is leased. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-13 

3.3.1.4 Residual Impacts

Geology from the base of the coal to the surface would be subject to significant, 

permanent change. 

3.3.2 Other Mineral Resources

3.3.2.1 Affected Environment

3.3.2.1.1 Conventional Oil and Gas

The following discussion is based on a report on conventional and CBNG 

resources in the area of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract prepared by the BLM’s 

Reservoir Management Group (WSO-RMG 2005a). 

WSO-RMG’s review of IHS Energy data indicates that the Muddy, Dakota and 

Minnelusa formations have been productive to date in T.51N., Rs.72 and 73W. 

The nearest producing wells produce both oil and gas from the Kitty Field, two 

miles or more west of the LBA study area, and the Mill-Gillette Field, two miles or 

more to the east. Both fields produce from the Cretaceous-age Muddy Formation. 

There has been one productive Minnelusa well in these two townships, located in 

Section 1, T.51N., R.72W.; it produced only a few barrels of oil and a small 

amount of gas. 

Nine conventional tests have been drilled in a 12-section area encompassing or 

immediately adjacent to the BLM study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

(the tract as applied for and the additional area evaluated by BLM under 

Alternative 1), including four within the study area itself. According to WOGCC 

records, all were drilled and abandoned without any reported production. 

Although no oil or gas was produced, the records suggest that the Minnelusa, 

Dakota and Muddy formations were tested. The most recent conventional test 

well in the 12-section area was drilled in 1985. 

See Section 3.11 for discussion of the ownership of the oil and gas resources in 

the LBA tract. 

3.3.2.1.2 Coal Bed Natural Gas (CBNG)

CBNG has been commercially produced in the PRB since 1989 when production 

began at the Rawhide Butte Field, immediately west of the Eagle Butte Mine (De 

Bruin and Lyman 1999). The Rawhide Butte Field is located within the northern 

portion of the general analysis area. Extensive development of CBNG in the 

Roland-Smith/Wyodak-Anderson coal zone has occurred in the vicinity of the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. WOGCC records show that as of May 19, 2006, 68 

wells had been drilled for CBNG production and 19 wells were capable of 

producing from the Roland-Smith/Wyodak-Anderson coal zone in the sections 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-14 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

that include the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for and the additional area 

evaluated by BLM under Alternative 1 (WOGCC 2006). Extensive CBNG 

development has also occurred immediately north, west, and south of the LBA 

tract. 

CBNG is being produced locally from other deeper seams in the PRB. For 

example, west of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, in T.51N., R.73W., one well 

completed in the Dannar coal seam (approximately 1,300 ft deep) reported 

production of CBNG. Several Dannar coal well completions were reported during 

2005 and 2006 in Sections 30 and 31, T.51N., R.72W.; five of these wells are 

located within the BLM study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. These 

wells started reporting production of water in 2006, but reported no gas 

production to the WOGCC through November of 2006 (WOGCC 2007). 

The following discussion is based on a report on conventional and CBNG 

resources in the area of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract prepared by the BLM’s 

Reservoir Management Group (WSO-RMG 2005a). 

CBNG wells were initially drilled on 40-acre spacing in the Wyoming PRB. 

Production/reservoir analyses that have been submitted to the WOGCC in various 

public hearings indicate that CBNG wells in the PRB will produce reserves from 

larger areas than 40 acres. As a result, the WOGCC established an 80-acre 

spacing pattern as the default spacing for CBNG wells completed in the PRB 

within the Fort Union and Wasatch Formations. Most CBNG wells on and near 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract were drilled on a 40-acre pattern, either because 

the wells were drilled either before the spacing was changed to 80 acres or under 

the authorization of spacing exceptions granted by WOGCC. Certain townships in 

the PRB are exempt from the 80-acre spacing pattern rule, including T.51N., 

R.72W. (WOGCC 2005a). All 40-acre spacing units within the proposed Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract have been drilled or proposed for drilling. Only four 40-acre 

spacing units within the BLM study area have not been drilled or proposed for 

drilling. There has been little recent interest in drilling additional wells for 

completion in the Roland-Smith/Wyodak-Anderson coal zone in this area. 

According to WOGCC and IHS Energy records, the most recent RolandSmith/Wyodak-Anderson well in the 12-section area encompassing or 

immediately adjacent to the BLM study area was completed in September 2003. 

For the purposes of this EIS, the BLM WSO-RMG reviewed the existing CBNG 

resource and production data in the general analysis area (WSO-RMG 2005a). 

The BLM WSO-RMG and USGS have collected extensive CBNG data, including 

coal gas content, from a number of coal cores at locations near existing PRB 

mines. The cores were taken from depths comparable to the coal seams in the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (reported depth 325 ft.), ranging from 134 to 407 ft. 

Although none of the samples were near the Eagle Butte Mine area (cores were 

collected near the Rawhide mine in deeper seams), the core data generally 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-15 

indicated that coal seams were substantially depleted of CBNG in the vicinity of 

the mines when the near-mine cores were collected in 2000. 

Measured gas content was minimal in all of the cores. Desorbed gas 

measurements from more than 300 core samples range from 37 to less than 0.1 

scf/ton (USGS 2005). Average total gas content from the core desorption analyses 

is approximately 6.8 scf per ton; the median value is 4.8 scf/ton; and the most 

common measurement (rounded to a whole number) is 2.0 scf/ton. 

Gas content in the Roland-Smith/Wyodak-Anderson coal in the area of the Eagle 

Butte Mine would have been expected to be comparable to these averages in 2000. 

Based on the gas content estimates derived from the desorption analyses and the 

estimates of the volume of coal included in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, the 

estimated gas-in-place in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would have ranged from 

approximately 1.1 bcf to 1.5 bcf of CBNG in 2000. For the BLM study area, the 

estimated gas-in-place in 2000 would have ranged from 1.6 bcf to 2.3 bcf (WSORMG 2005a). 

Previous analyses by BLM WSO-RMG, USGS, CBNG operators and others have 

shown that dewatering the coals, both by CBNG production and mine dewatering, 

reduces the hydrostatic pressure in the coals and allows the CBNG to desorb and 

escape from the coal. These effects continue over time with continued dewatering. 

Production has continued since 2000, and it is likely that desorption has 

continued since 2000; as a result, coal gas content and the gas-in-place on the 

tract would currently be expected to be less than in 2000. 

Due to the extensive prior development, there is sufficient production data 

available to estimate well life and reserves for the existing CBNG wells/spacing 

units located in the BLM study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (the tract 

as applied for and the additional area evaluated by BLM under Alternative 1). 

BLM WSO-RMG prepared decline analyses, using IHS Energy’s “Powertools” 

software, for all the CBNG wells in T.51N., R.72W., where the LBA tract is located. 

Since the area has been nearly completely developed, the wells within the 12-

section area encompassing or immediately adjacent to the BLM study area were 

considered sufficient for all analyses prepared for this review. BLM WSO-RMG 

reviewed the wells within this 12-section area individually. Overall, BLM WSORMG estimated that the average EUR for the active wells within the 12-section 

area is approximately 290.5 mmcf and total economic life is approximately 12 

years. Most of the active wells within the 12-section area are projected to be 

uneconomic to produce by the end of 2008. Only two wells are projected to 

continue to produce beyond 2010. 

The ownership of oil and gas resources in the LBA tract, which includes the CBNG 

resources, is discussed in Section 3.11. 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-16 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

3.3.2.1.3 Other Minerals

Bentonite, uranium, and scoria are commercially produced in the PRB in addition 

to conventional oil and gas and CBNG (WSGS 2004 and 2005a). 

Layers of bentonite (decomposed volcanic ash) of varying thickness are present 

throughout the PRB. Some of the thicker layers are mined around the edges of 

the PRB. Bentonite has a large capacity to absorb water, and because of this 

characteristic it is used in a number of processes and products, including drilling 

mud and cat litter. No mineable bentonite reserves have been identified on the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract under the Proposed Action or the additional area 

evaluated by BLM under Alternative 1. 

There are substantial uranium resources in Johnson, Campbell, and Converse 

Counties. There are currently two operating in-situ uranium recovery sites in the 

PRB, which were recently combined into one operation that is located in central 

Converse County (WSGS 2005a). No known uranium reserves exist within the 

general analysis area. 

Scoria, also called clinker or burn has been and continues to be a major source of 

aggregate for road construction in the area due to the shortage of more competent 

materials. Scoria consists of sediments that were baked, fused, or melted in place 

when the underlying coal burned spontaneously. Scoria is present within the 

northern portion of the Eagle Butte Mine permit area, predominantly within 

Sections 15 and 16, T.51N., R.72W. Scoria does not occur on the LBA tract as 

applied for or the BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1. Small, 

localized deposits are present in the extreme northwest corner of the additional 

area evaluated under Alternative 1, in Sections 18 and 19, T.51N., R.72W. See 

Section 3.5.1.1.2 for additional information on scoria. 

A search of the BLM mining claim index revealed that no active mining claims are 

presently located on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 

3.3.2.2 Environmental Consequences

3.3.2.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

During mining, other minerals present on the LBA tract could not be developed. 

Some of these minerals could, however, be developed after mining. The 

conventional oil and gas reservoirs and the CBNG reservoirs below the RolandSmith coal would not be directly disturbed by removal of the mineable coal. The 

oil and gas lessees could drill wells to recover oil and gas resources from any oil 

and gas or CBNG reservoirs below the mineable coal seams following mining and 

reclamation. This would only occur if they believe that the value of the reserves 

would justify the expense of drilling the wells. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-17 

Although the area included in the BLM study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract generally appears to be unfavorable for additional conventional oil and gas 

discoveries, the entire study area has not been tested. The formations producing 

conventional oil and gas in the BLM study area occur at much greater depths than 

would be affected by mining. The average depth of the productive formations 

ranges from approximately 8,000 – 8,500 ft. for the Muddy and Dakota Formation 

wells to nearly 9,900 – 10,000 ft. for the Minnelusa Formation wells. At these 

depths there would be no direct effects from mining. However, conflicts could 

arise between the conventional oil and gas production and mining if conventional 

wells are in production at the time the well locations are to be mined. 

Before mining operations could begin, all CBNG wells would have to be 

abandoned, and all gas production equipment would have to be removed to a level 

below the coal. CBNG resources that have not been recovered from the RolandSmith/Wyodak-Anderson zone prior to mining would be lost when the coal is 

removed. 

CBNG production requires withdrawal of water from the coal seams to reduce 

hydrostatic pressure and enable methane desorption from the coals. Mine-related 

dewatering of the coal seams reduces hydrostatic pressure and allows the 

methane to escape in the same way that CBNG well dewatering of the coal seam 

does. BLM WSO-RMG’s review and other CBNG reservoir analyses indicate that 

depletion of the hydrostatic pressures and methane resources starts to occur 

adjacent to mining areas a short time after mining begins. Coal mining operations 

have been ongoing for more than 20 years and are continuing at the Eagle Butte 

Mine and other adjacent surface coal mines in this area. The ongoing reduction of 

hydrostatic pressure in the coal due to mining has been accelerated by extensive 

CBNG production from surrounding lands. 

BLM WSO-RMG’s analyses of the production and reservoirs indicate that the 

CBNG resource within the Roland-Smith/Wyodak-Anderson seam has been 

substantially depleted, either by mining or by recovery from producing wells. Only 

a few wells remain in production on or adjacent to the LBA tract and it seems 

likely that these will have exhausted their economic reserves prior to initiation of 

mining in the LBA tract. Most production or reservoir analyses submitted to 

WOGCC at various public hearings indicate that a CBNG well will generally 

produce reserves from larger areas than 40 acres; therefore, it is likely that any 

undrilled spacing units in the BLM study area have been drained by production 

from the existing wells and nearby mining activity. Overall, BLM WSO-RMG’s 

analyses suggest that there are insufficient reserves remaining in the tract to 

support additional drilling. As a result, mining the proposed Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract is unlikely to affect, or to be affected by, CBNG production from the 

Roland-Smith/Wyodak-Anderson coal seams. 

Production from the coal zones underlying the Roland-Smith/Wyodak-Anderson 

could be delayed as the parcel is mined. If production from these lower seams is 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-18 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

established on the LBA tract in the future, additional measures would be required 

to accommodate both mining and CBNG production (see Section 3.3.2.3). 

Section 3.11.1 includes a discussion on the ownership of the oil and gas resources 

on the LBA tract and the oil and gas facilities in the area of the tract. 

3.3.2.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the Eagle Butte West coal lease application would 

be rejected and coal removal would not occur on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 

Mining operations would continue to limit the development of other mineral 

resources described above on the existing Eagle Butte Mine coal leases. Mineral 

development limitations related to mining operations at the Eagle Butte Mine 

would not be extended onto portions of the LBA tract that will not be affected 

under the current mining and reclamation plan. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.3.2.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring

No conventional oil and gas reservoirs containing producible quantities of oil and 

gas are known to underlie the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, and the reservoir 

analyses conducted by the BLM WSO-RMG indicate that most of the recoverable 

CBNG resources in the Roland-Smith/Wyodak-Anderson coal beds on the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract have probably been produced by the existing wells. 

Potential does exist for conflicts between coal operations and CBNG wells 

completed in coal zones below the Roland-Smith/Wyodak-Anderson. 

If the federal coal in the tract is leased and conflicts do develop between the 

operators of the oil and gas wells and the surface coal mine operator, there are 

several mechanisms that can be used to facilitate recovery of the conventional oil 

and gas and CBNG resources prior to mining: 

• BLM will attach a Multiple Mineral Development stipulation to the Federal 

coal lease, which states that BLM has the authority to withhold approval of 

coal mining operations that would interfere with the development of mineral 

leases issued prior to the coal lease (see Appendix D). 

• Conventional oil and gas wells must be abandoned while mining and 

reclamation operations are in progress but could be recompleted or redrilled 

following mining if the value of the remaining reserves would justify the 

expense of reestablishing production. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-19 

• BLM has a policy in place on CBNG-coal conflicts (BLM Instruction 

Memorandum No. 2006-153), which directs BLM decision-makers to 

optimize the recovery of both resources and ensure that the public receives 

a reasonable return (BLM 2006a). This memorandum offers royalty 

incentives to CBNG operators to accelerate production in order to recover 

the natural gas while simultaneously allowing uninterrupted coal mining 

operations. In addition, this memorandum also states that it is the policy of 

the BLM to encourage oil and gas and coal companies to resolve conflicts 

between themselves; when requested, the BLM will assist in facilitating 

agreements between the companies. 

• Mining of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract cannot occur until the coal lessee 

has a permit to mine the tract approved by the WDEQ/LQD and a MLA 

mining plan approved by the Secretary of the Interior. Before the MLA 

mining plan can be approved, BLM must approve the R2P2 for mining the 

tract. Prior to approving the R2P2, BLM can review the status of CBNG and 

conventional oil and gas development on the tract and the mining sequence 

proposed by the coal lessee. The permit approval process generally takes 

the coal lessee several years, during which time CBNG resources can be 

recovered. 

• Prior to mining the Federal coal, the coal lessee can negotiate an agreement 

with owners and operators of existing oil and gas facilities on the tract, 

including owners and operators of oil and gas well and pipeline facilities, 

regarding removal and relocation of those facilities prior to mining. 

3.3.2.4 Residual Impacts

CBNG resources not recovered prior to mining would be vented to the atmosphere 

and permanently lost. 

3.3.3 Paleontology

3.3.3.1 Affected Environment

The formation exposed on the surface of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is the 

sedimentary Eocene Wasatch Formation, which is known to produce fossil 

vertebrates of scientific significance throughout Wyoming, including the PRB 

(Delson 1971, Winterfeld 1978, EVG 2001). 

BLM ranks areas according to their potential to contain vertebrate fossils or 

noteworthy occurrences of invertebrate or plant fossils. The Wasatch Formation is 

ranked as fulfilling BLM Paleontology Condition No. 1, which is described in the 

Paleontological Resource Management Handbook 8270-I as “areas that are known 

to contain vertebrate fossils or noteworthy occurrences of invertebrate or plant 

fossils”. According to the handbook, “consideration of paleontological resources 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-20 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

will be necessary if the Field Office review of available information indicates that 

such fossils are present in the area”. 

The BLM in Wyoming uses an additional planning tool, called the PFYC, to classify 

geological units, usually at the formation or member level, according to the 

probability that they will yield paleontological resources that are of concern to 

land managers. This classification system is based largely on how likely a geologic 

unit is to produce scientifically significant fossils. BLM considers the Wasatch 

Formation to fulfill either the PFYC Class 4 or Class 5, depending on the nature of 

bedrock exposures present. PFYC classes 4 and 5 are described as follows: 

Class 4 - These geologic units are Class 5 units (see below) that have lowered 

risks of human-caused adverse impacts and/or lowered risk of natural 

degradation. 

Class 5 - Fossilferous geologic units that regularly and predictably produce 

vertebrate fossils and/or scientifically significant non-vertebrate (plant and 

invertebrate) fossils, and that are at risk of natural degradation and/or 

human-caused adverse impacts. 

Although the Wasatch Formation is known to produce fossil vertebrates of 

scientific significance in Wyoming, outcrops of the Wasatch Formation in the PRB 

are not generally well-exposed and the conditions of deposition of the formation 

have contributed to a low preservation potential for fossils. Vertebrate fossils that 

have been described from the Wasatch Formation include mammals such as early 

horses, tapiroids, condylarths, primates, insectivores, marsupials, creodonts, 

carnivores, and multituberculates; reptiles such as crocodilians, alligators, lizards, 

and turtles; birds; eggs; amphibians; and fish. Non-marine invertebrates such as 

mollusks and ostrocods have also been described from the Wasatch. 

Fossil plant material is common in the Wasatch Formation. The fossil plants 

inventoried are primarily leaves and fossilized wood. The leaves usually occur as 

lignitic impressions in sandstone and siltstone and as compact masses in shale. 

Leaves are the most abundant fossils found during paleontological surveys and 

are frequently encountered during mining operations. Fossilized wood often 

occurs near the top of a coal seam, in carbonaceous shale or within channel 

sandstone. Exposures of fossil logs are common, but usually very fragmentary. 

Like fossil leaves, fossil logs can be readily collected in the PRB. 

Paleontological surveys were conducted in conjunction with the cultural resource 

inventories of the current Eagle Butte Mine permit area and the BLM study area 

for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (the tract as applied for and the additional 

area evaluated under Alternative 1). Pedestrian examinations for fossil indications 

were conducted along rock outcrops. One of the primary goals of the 

paleontological surveys was to locate unique pockets of fossilized bone such as 

those reported elsewhere in the Wasatch Formation in the PRB. Such 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-21 

concentrations of fossilized bone were not found, nor were any fossil vertebrates. 

Two relatively unique occurrences of tree stumps were found in 1974 within 

Sections 27 and 34, T.51N., R.72W, within the existing Eagle Butte Mine permit 

area. The only other fossils inventoried to date have been wood fragments. 

No significant or unique paleontological resource localities have been recorded on 

federal lands in the general analysis area and no specific mitigation has been 

recommended for paleontology. 

3.3.3.2 Environmental Consequences

3.3.3.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

The rock outcrops present on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract were examined for 

the presence of fossils, as discussed above, and no scientifically significant fossils 

were located. Fossils with scientific significance could be present on the tract but 

not exposed at the surface. If the tract is leased as applied for or under the BLM’s 

preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1, paleontological resources located on 

the tract that are not exposed on the surface would be destroyed when the 

overburden is removed. 

3.3.3.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the Eagle Butte West coal lease application would 

be rejected and coal removal would not occur on the LBA tract. Mining operations 

and the associated potential impacts to paleontological resources described above 

would continue as permitted on the existing Eagle Butte Mine coal leases. 

Disturbance related to mining operations at the Eagle Butte Mine would not be 

extended onto portions of the LBA tract that will not be affected under the current 

mining and reclamation plan. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.3.3.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring

If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased, BLM will attach a stipulation to the 

lease requiring the operator to report significant paleontological finds to the 

authorized federal agency and suspend production in the vicinity of the find until 

an approved paleontologist can evaluate the paleontological resource 

(Appendix D).
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-22 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

3.3.3.4 Residual Impacts

Paleontological resources that are not identified and removed prior to or during 

mining operations would be lost. 

3.4 Air Quality 

3.4.1 Background

The air quality of any region is controlled primarily by the magnitude and 

distribution of pollutant emissions and the regional climate. The transport of 

pollutants from specific source areas is strongly affected by local topography. In 

the mountainous western United States, topography is particularly important in 

channeling pollutants along valleys, creating upslope and downslope circulations 

that may entrain airborne pollutants, and blocking the flow of pollutants toward 

certain areas. In general, local effects are superimposed on the general weather 

regime and are most important when the large-scale wind flow is weak. 

Wyoming can be characterized as having a combination of both highland and midlatitude semiarid climates. The dominant factors that affect the climate of the 

area are elevation, local relief, and the mountain barrier effect. This barrier effect 

can produce marked temperature and precipitation differences between windward 

and leeward slopes. Generally, temperature decreases and precipitation increases 

with increasing elevation. See Section 3.1.1 for additional information about the 

climate in the general analysis area. 

The general analysis area, shown in Figure 3-1, is located in the east-central 

portion of the PRB, a part of the Northern Great Plains that includes most of 

northeastern Wyoming. As discussed in Section 3.2.1, the topography is primarily 

rolling plains and tablelands of moderate relief (with occasional valleys and 

buttes). Elevations range from about 4,240 ft to 4,560 ft above sea level. Slopes 

in the general analysis area are generally flat and no topographic features that 

would be expected to profoundly affect the local wind flow patterns or pollutant 

transport are present. The Big Horn Mountains lie approximately 60 miles to the 

west and the Black Hills lie approximately 60 miles to the east. 

3.4.1.1 Regulatory Framework

Regulations applicable to surface coal mining may include NAAQS/WAAQS, PSD, 

NSPS, and the Federal Operating Permit Program (Title V). These regulatory 

programs are described below. 

Air pollution impacts are limited by local, state, tribal, and federal air quality 

regulations and standards, and implementation plans established under the 

federal Clean Air Act, which was last amended in 1990. The Clean Air Act 

required EPA to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-23 

pollutants considered harmful to public health and the environment. In Wyoming, 

air pollution impacts are managed by WDEQ/AQD, under the WAQSR and the 

EPA-approved State Implementation Plan. The State of Wyoming has established 

state ambient air quality standards (or WAAQS). A fundamental requirement of 

the federal and state regulations is that ambient concentrations for specific 

criteria pollutants do not exceed the NAAQS or WAAQS, respectively. 

The EPA has established NAAQS for six pollutants, which are known as “criteria 

pollutants”. These six pollutants are carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, 

particulate matter, ozone, and sulfur oxides. The WAAQS for these pollutants are 

as stringent as or more stringent than the NAAQS, and are enforceable under 

WAQSR. Selected NAAQS and WAAQS are shown in Table 3-3. The EPA and the 

State of Wyoming have established these standards at levels deemed necessary to 

preclude adverse impacts on human health and welfare. The NAAQS and WAAQS 

are health-based criteria for the maximum acceptable concentrations of criteria 

pollutants at all locations to which the public has access. 

The NAAQS for particulate matter shown in Table 3-3 include revisions to the 

national standards for particulate matter that took effect in December of 2006. 

The State of Wyoming must enter into rulemaking to revise the WAAQS for 

particulate matter so that they remain as stringent as or more stringent than the 

NAAQS. Additional discussion of the changes in the NAAQS for particulate matter 

is included in Section 3.4.2. 

Pursuant to the Clean Air Act, the EPA has developed classifications for distinct 

geographic regions known as air basins and for major MSAs. Under these 

classifications, for each federal criteria pollutant, each air basin (or portion of a 

basin or MSA) is classified as in “attainment” if the area has “attained” compliance 

with (not exceeded) the adopted NAAQS for that pollutant or is classified as “nonattainment” if the levels of ambient air pollution exceed the NAAQS for that 

pollutant. Areas for which sufficient ambient monitoring data are not available 

are designated as “unclassified” for those particular pollutants. States designate 

areas within their borders as being in “attainment” or “non-attainment” with the 

AAQS. Existing air quality throughout most of the PRB in Wyoming is in 

attainment with all ambient air quality standards, as demonstrated by comparing 

the background concentration levels with the AAQS concentration levels presented 

in Table 3-3. However, the Sheridan, Wyoming area has been designated as a 

non-attainment area (PM10 – moderate) where the applicable standards have been 

violated in the past. 

A company initiating a project must go through the WDEQ/AQD New Source 

Review permitting process to obtain either a construction or modification permit or 

a permit waiver. During the New Source Review permitting process, applicants 

must demonstrate compliance with the AAQS standards; this can be done by 

modeling or other methods approved by the WDEQ/AQD Administrator. A project 

will typically model for criteria pollutants that would be emitted by the project in 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

 3-24 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Table 3-3. Assumed Background Air Pollutant Concentrations, Applicable AAQS, and PSD Increment Values (in μg/m3).Criteria Pollutant 

Averaging 

Time1

Background 

Concentration 

Primary 

NAAQS2

Secondary 

NAAQS2 WAAQS 

PSD Class I 

Increments3 

PSD Class II 

Increments3 

Carbon monoxide 

1-hour 8-hour 

3,3364 

1,381 

40,000 10,000 

40,000 10,000 

40,000 10,000 

--- --- 

--- --- 

Nitrogen dioxide 

Annual 55 100 100 100 2.5 25 

Ozone 8-hour 706 157 157 157 --- --- Sulfur dioxide 3-hour 

24-hour 

Annual 

1817

627137

--- 

365 

80 

1,300 

--- --- 

1,300 

260 

60 

25 

5 2 

512 

91 20 

PM108 24-hour 

Annual 

549

139

150 

-- 

150 

-- 

150 

50 

8 4 

30 17 

PM2.58 24-hour 

Annual 

1310

410

35 15 

35 15 

65 15 

--- --- 

--- --- 

1 Annual standards are not to be exceeded; short-term standards are not to be exceeded more than once per year.

2 Primary standards are designed to protect public health; secondary standards are designed to protect public welfare.

3 All NEPA analysis comparisons to the PSD increments are intended to evaluate a threshold of concern and do not represent a regulatory PSD 

 Increment Consumption Analysis. 

4 Data collected by Amoco at Ryckman Creek for an eight-month period during 1978-1979, summarized in Riley Ridge EIS (BLM 1983).

5 Data collected at Thunder Basin National Grassland, Campbell County, Wyoming in 2002. 

6 Data collected at Thunder Basin National Grassland, Campbell County, Wyoming in 2002-2004 (8-hour 4th high). 7 Data collected by Black Hills Power & Light at Wygen 2, Campbell County, Wyoming in 2002. 8 On October 17, 2006, EPA published final revisions to the NAAQS for particulate matter that took effect on December 18, 2006. The 

 revision strengthens the 24-hour PM2.5 standard from 65 to 35 μg/m3 and revokes the annual PM10 standard of 50 μg/m3. The State of 

 Wyoming will enter into rulemaking to revise the WAAQS. 

9 Data collected at the Eagle Butte Mine, Campbell County, Wyoming in 2002. 10 Data collected at the Buckskin Mine in 2002.Source: (BLM 2005b and WDEQ/AQD) 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-25 

order to show the project’s contribution to ambient air quality concentrations. 

The assumed background pollutant concentrations included in Table 3-3 were 

provided by WDEQ/AQD (BLM 2005a). The assumed background pollutant 

concentrations are below applicable NAAQS and WAAQS for all criteria pollutants 

and averaging times. 

The PSD regulation is intended to prevent deterioration of air quality in areas that 

are in attainment with the NAAQS. The Clean Air Act requires EPA to place each 

airshed within the U.S. into one of three PSD area classifications. PSD Class I is 

the most restrictive air quality category. Mandatory federal Class I areas were 

designated by Congress and include international parks, national wilderness areas 

greater than 5,000 acres in size, national memorial parks greater than 5,000 acres 

in size, and national parks greater than 6,000 acres in size which were in 

existence on August 7, 1977 [40 CFR 52.21(e)]. These classifications may not be 

redesignated. All areas not established as Class I were designated as Class II 

areas, which allow a relatively greater deterioration of air quality over that in 

existence in 1977, although still within the NAAQS. No Class III areas, which 

would allow air quality to degrade to the NAAQS, have been designated. The 

federal land managers have also identified certain federal assets with Class II 

status as “sensitive” Class II areas for which air quality and/or visibility are 

valued resources. The Clean Air Act also provides for specific visibility protection 

of mandatory federal Class I areas. 

Table 3-4 is a list of mandatory federal Class I areas, tribal Class I areas, and 

federal Class II areas that are of special interest in the region and their distance 

from the Eagle Butte West tract general analysis area. Wind Cave National Park, 

Badlands Wilderness Area, and the Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation are the 

closest Class I areas to the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Most of the PRB in 

Wyoming is designated as PSD Class II with less stringent requirements. Even 

though the development activities being considered in this EIS would occur within 

areas designated as PSD Class II, the potential impacts are not allowed to cause 

incremental effects greater than the more stringent Class I thresholds to occur 

inside any distant PSD Class I area. 

The PSD regulation prevents deterioration of air quality in attainment areas by 

establishing increments, or maximum allowable increases in the ambient 

concentration of PM10, NO2, and SO2 for Class I and Class II areas. As shown in 

Table 3-3, the allowable incremental impacts for NO2, PM10, and SO2 within PSD 

Class I areas are very limited. 

Future development projects that have the potential to emit more than 250 tpy of 

any criteria pollutant (or certain listed sources that have the potential to emit 

more than 100 tpy) would be required to undergo a regulatory PSD increment 

consumption analysis under the federal New Source Review permitting 

regulations. Development projects subject to the PSD regulations must also 

demonstrate the use of BACT and show that the combined impacts of all PSD 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-26 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Table 3-4. Approximate Distances and Directions from the Eagle Butte West 

Tract General Analysis Area to PSD Class I and Class II Sensitive 

Receptor Areas. 

Receptor Area 

Distance 

(miles) 

Direction to

Receptor 

Mandatory Federal PSD Class I Area 

Badlands Wilderness Area1 160 SE

Bridger Wilderness Area 215 SW 

Fitzpatrick Wilderness Area 215 SW 

Gates of the Mountain Wilderness Area 340 NW 

Grand Teton National Park 250 W 

North Absaroka Wilderness Area 205 W 

Red Rocks Lake Wilderness Area 300 W 

Scapegoat Wilderness Area 390 NW 

Teton Wilderness Area 230 W 

Theodore Roosevelt National Park (North Unit) 235 NE 

Theodore Roosevelt National Park (South Unit) 205 NE 

U.L. Bend Wilderness Area 235 NW 

Washakie Wilderness Area 210 W 

Wind Cave National Park 115 SE 

Yellowstone National Park 225 W 

Tribal Federal PSD Class I 

Fort Peck Indian Reservation 250 N

Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation 95 NNW 

Federal PSD Class II 

Absaroka-Beartooth Wilderness Area 235 NW

Agate Fossil Beds National Monument 160 SE 

Badlands National Park 135 SE 

Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area 130 W 

Black Elk Wilderness Area 105 SE 

Cloud Peak Wilderness Area 80 W 

Crow Indian Reservation 100 NW 

Devils Towner National Monument 40 NE 

Fort Belknap Indian Reservation 310 NW 

Fort Laramie National Historic Site 150 SE 

Jewel Cave National Monument 95 SE 

Mount Rushmore National Memorial 110 E 

Popo Agie Wilderness Area 205 SW 

Soldier Creek Wilderness Area 150 SE 

1 The U.S. Congress designated the Wilderness Area portion of Badlands National Park as a 

mandatory Federal PSD Class I area. The remainder of Badlands National Park is a PSD 

Class II area. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-27 

sources will not exceed the allowable incremental air quality impacts for NO2, 

PM10, or SO2. Modifications to existing major PSD sources are also subject to PSD 

regulation if the modification results in a significant net emissions increase of any 

regulated pollutant. The net emissions increase is determined by adding the 

modification to the permits issued after a baseline date. In the PRB, the PM10

baseline year is 1997; the NO2 baseline year is 1988. 

To date, there are no coal mines within the State of Wyoming that have been 

subject to PSD review in the permitting process. Existing surface coal mining 

operations in the PRB, including the Eagle Butte Mine, are not subject to PSD 

regulations for two reasons: 1) surface coal mines are not on the EPA list of 28 

major emitting facilities for PSD regulation; and 2) point-source emissions from 

individual mines have not exceeded the PSD emissions threshold. A new mine 

would be classified as a major source and subject to PSD review if potential 

emissions of any regulated pollutant would equal or exceed 250 tpy. Fugitive 

emissions are not included in the definition of potential emissions except for 

certain specified source types [40 CFR 52.21, (b)(1)(iii)]. Mining-related fugitive 

emissions are exempt from the applicability determination. This NEPA analysis 

compares potential air quality impacts from mining the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract as applied for or under BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1 

to applicable ambient air quality standards, PSD increments, and AQRVs (such as 

visibility), but it does not constitute a regulatory PSD analysis; rather, it is strictly 

for informational purposes. 

All sources being permitted within the State of Wyoming must utilize BACT, not 

just sources subject to PSD review. During the New Source Review permitting 

process, a BACT analysis is performed for the proposed construction or 

modification. The BACT process evaluates possible control technologies for the 

proposed action on the basis of technical feasibility and economic reasonability. 

Decisions about which technology should be applied are made on a case-by-case 

basis and are mandated through the permit. See Section 3.4.2.3 for a discussion 

of BACT measures that have been applied at coal mines. 

The NSPS were established by the Clean Air Act and adopted by reference into the 

WAQSR. The standards, which are for new or modified stationary sources, require 

the sources to achieve best-demonstrated emission control technology. The NSPS 

apply to specific processes that are listed in the standards. For surface coal 

mining in the PRB, this includes certain activities at coal preparation plants. The 

requirements applicable to these existing units can be found in 40 CFR Part 60, 

Subpart Y (Standards of Performance for Coal Preparation Facilities). 

Major sources of air pollutants must obtain an operating permit from WDEQ/AQD 

Operating Permit Program (also known as Title V). A “major source” is, generally, 

a facility that emits over 100 tpy of any criteria pollutant, 25 tpy of combined 

HAPs or 10 tpy of an individual HAP. The operating permit compiles all applicable 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-28 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

air quality requirements for a facility and specifies compliance assurance in the 

form of testing, monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements. 

3.4.1.1.1 Surface Coal Mine Regulatory Framework

The WDEQ/AQD administers a permitting program to assist the agency in 

managing the state's air resources. Under this program, anyone planning to 

construct, modify, or use a facility capable of emitting designated pollutants into 

the atmosphere must obtain an air quality permit to construct. Coal mines fall 

into this category. A new coal mine or a modification to an existing mine must be 

permitted by WDEQ/AQD under WAQSR Chapter 6, Section 2 and must 

demonstrate that the proposed mining operations will comply with all applicable 

aspects of WAQSR. The following summarizes the construction/modification 

permitting analysis for surface coal mines. 

When a company decides to construct a new surface coal mine or proposes a 

modification to an existing surface coal mine that will cause an increase in 

pollutant emissions, they must submit an application, which is reviewed by the 

WDEQ/AQD New Source Review staff and the applicable WDEQ/AQD Field Office. 

Typically, a company will meet with the WDEQ/AQD prior to submitting an 

application to determine issues and details that need to be included in the 

application. A surface coal mining application will include the standard 

application, BACT measures that will be implemented, an inventory of point and 

fugitive sources in the area, and modeling analyses. 

BACT must be utilized for all sources being permitted within the State of 

Wyoming. WAQSR Chapter 6, Section 2(b)(v) lists BACT measures to be utilized 

by (but not limited to) large mining operations. Applicants use these and other 

BACT measures in the development of their own PM10 and NO2 point and fugitive 

source inventories (see Section 3.4.2.3 for a discussion of mining BACT 

measures). During the application review, WDEQ/AQD can also require further 

control measures through the BACT review process. 

For a coal mine PM10 modeling analysis, an applicant must put together an 

emission inventory of PM10 from their facility and surrounding sources. For PM10, 

both point sources and fugitive dust emissions are quantified. The emissions are 

based on the facility’s potential to emit in the highest production year. The 

applicant also examines the facilities at surrounding coal mines and their previous 

air quality permits to determine the worst-case emission year for those facilities, 

based on potential to emit. They then choose two or more years for modeling 

analyses. 

Long-term PM10 modeling is conducted for the permit application to demonstrate 

compliance with the annual PM10 standard. Per WDEQ/AQD guidance, the 

Industrial Source Complex Long-Term Model, Version 3 (ISCLT3) is used for point 

sources. For fugitive emission sources, the fugitive dust model is used. A PM10 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-29 

background concentration of 15 μg/m3 and a NOx background concentration of 20 

μg/m3 are used, which WDEQ/AQD has chosen as representative of background 

ambient air quality in the area prior to operation of coal mine sources. Potential 

emissions corresponding to the maximum production level from the coal mine 

undergoing permitting and other coal mines in the area are added to this 

background. The resulting particulate levels are then compared to the average 

annual PM10 standard of 50 μg/m3 and the average annual NOx standard of 100 

μg/m3 to determine compliance with the annual AAQS. This constitutes a 

demonstration of compliance with the “long-term” or annual AAQS. 

The background concentrations for PM10 and NOx concentrations chosen by 

WDEQ/AQD are different than the background PM10 and NOx concentrations 

shown in Table 3-3. The background values chosen by WDEQ/AQD are 

representative of background ambient air quality prior to coal mining. The values 

shown in Table 3-3 are based on recently monitored values in the PRB and 

include all sources operating at the time the value was measured, including 

existing coal mine operations located around Gillette. The annual background 

values shown in Table 3-3 for PM10 and NOx are based on data collected for a 

recent evaluation of potential cumulative air quality impacts in the PRB conducted 

by ENSR for Wyoming and Montana (BLM 2006b), which is discussed in 

Chapter 4. 

Short-term PM10 modeling is not required by WDEQ/AQD, nor does WDEQ/AQD 

consider it to be an accurate representation of short-term impacts. Section 234 of 

the Clean Air Act Amendment of 1990 mandates the Administrator of the EPA to 

analyze the accuracy of short-term modeling in regard to fugitive particulate 

emissions from surface coal mines. A June 26, 1996 letter from EPA Region VIII 

to Wyoming State Representatives states the results of a study where the shortterm model failed to meet evaluation criteria and tended to over-predict 24-hr 

impacts of surface coal mines. A Memorandum of Agreement between EPA Region 

VIII and the State of Wyoming, dated January 24, 1994, allows WDEQ/AQD to 

conduct monitoring in lieu of short-term modeling for assessing coal miningrelated impacts in the PRB. This regulatory procedure remains in place and in 

effect. Ambient particulate monitoring is required of each coal mine through 

conditions of their respective permits. The 1994 Memorandum of Agreement also 

required WDEQ/AQD to implement “Best Available Work Practice” mitigation 

measures at any mine where an exceedance of the PM10 air quality standard has 

occurred. 

Coal mines in the PRB are also required to quantify NO2 emissions from their 

facilities. Dispersion modeling is required to demonstrate compliance with the 

ambient standard. Potential emissions from diesel powered mining equipment 

and blasting are modeled. Train locomotive engine emissions are also quantified 

and included in the NO2 modeling analysis. 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-30 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Each application for a permit to construct a new coal mine or modify and existing 

coal mine is reviewed by WDEQ/AQD to determine compliance with all applicable 

air quality standards and regulations. This includes review of compliance with 

emission limitations established by NSPS, review of compliance with ambient 

standards through modeling analyses, and establishment of control measures to 

meet BACT requirements. The WDEQ/AQD-proposed permit conditions are 

placed on public notice for a 30-day review period, after which a final decision on 

the permit is made. 

3.4.1.2 Emission Sources

Air quality conditions in rural areas in the PRB are likely to be very good, as they 

are characterized by limited air pollution emission sources (few industrial facilities 

and residential emissions in the relatively small communities and isolated 

ranches) and good atmospheric dispersion conditions, resulting in relatively low 

air pollutant concentrations. Occasional high concentrations of CO and 

particulate matter may occur in more urbanized areas (e.g., cities of Gillette, 

Sheridan, and Buffalo) and around industrial facilities, especially under stable 

atmospheric conditions that occur during winter. 

The major types of emissions that come from surface coal mining activities are in 

the form of fugitive dust and tailpipe emissions from large mining equipment. 

Activities such as blasting, excavating, loading and hauling of overburden and 

coal, and the large areas of disturbed land all produce fugitive dust. Stationary or 

point sources are associated with coal crushing, storage, and handling facilities. 

In general, particulate matter (PM10) is the major significant pollutant from coal 

mine point sources. 

Blasting is responsible for another type of emission from surface coal mining. 

Overburden blasting sometimes produces gaseous, orange-colored clouds that 

contain NO2. Exposure to NO2 may have adverse health effects, as discussed in 

Section 3.4.3. NO2 is one of several products resulting from the incomplete 

combustion of explosives used in the blasting process. Wyoming’s ambient air 

standards for NO2 are shown in Table 3-3. 

Other existing air pollutant emission sources within the region include: 

 • exhaust emissions (primarily CO and NOx) from existing natural gas fired 

compressor engines used in production of natural gas and CBNG; gasoline 

and diesel vehicle tailpipe emissions of combustion pollutants (VOCs, CO, 

NOx, PM10, PM2.5, and SO2); 

 • dust (particulate matter) generated by vehicle travel on unpaved graded 

roads, windblown dust from neighboring areas, agricultural activities such 

as plowing, and paved road sanding during the winter months; 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-31 

 • transport of air pollutants from emission sources located outside the region; 

 • emissions from railroad locomotives used to haul coal (primarily NO2 and 

PM10); and 

 • SO2 and NOx from power plants. The closest coal-fired power plants are the 

Dave Johnston plant, located about 100 miles south-southwest of the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract, and the Wyodak, Wygen, and Neil Simpson plants, 

located about 10 miles southeast of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 

3.4.2 Particulate Emissions

3.4.2.1 Affected Environment for Particulate Emissions

The federal standard for particulate matter was measured as TSP until 1989. This 

measurement included all suspendable dust (generally less than 100 microns in 

diameter). In 1989, EPA changed from a TSP-based standard to a PM10-based 

standard. PM10 is particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns 

or less that can potentially penetrate into the lungs and cause health problems. 

In 1997, EPA set separate standards for fine particles (PM2.5), based on their link 

to serious health problems. In 2006, EPA again revised the air quality standards 

for particulate matter by tightening the 24-hour fine particle standard from the 

previous level of 65 μg/m3 to 35 μg/m3 and revoking the annual PM10 standard of 

50 μg/m3. EPA retained the existing annual PM2.5 standard of 15 μg/m3 and the 

24-hour PM10 standard of 150μg/m3. These revisions took effect on December 18, 

2006. The current federal ambient air standards are shown in Table 3-3. 

Wyoming added PM10 based standards to match the federal standards in 1989, 

but retained the TSP standards as state standards until March 2000. TSP is still 

monitored in some locations to be used as a surrogate for PM10 and as an 

indication of overall atmospheric levels of particulate matter. Wyoming also 

adopted a PM2.5 standard in March 2000. In view of the December 2006 revisions 

to the NAAQS for particulate matter, the State of Wyoming will enter into 

rulemaking to revise the WAAQS for particulate matter so that they remain as 

stringent as or more stringent than the NAAQS. Wyoming’s current ambient air 

standards are shown in Table 3-3. 

3.4.2.1.1 Regional Particulate Emissions

As a result of WDEQ/AQD requirements for the PRB mines to collect air quality 

data, which is discussed in Section 3.4.2.3, the eastern PRB is one of the most 

intensely monitored areas in the world for air quality. There are numerous 

monitors located at and adjacent to mining operations in the PRB, as shown in 

Figure 3-3. These include six TSP monitors, four PM2.5 monitors and 30 PM10

monitors. Data for TSP date back to 1980 and data for PM10 date back to 1989. 

Through 2004, nearly 57,000 TSP and 27,000 PM10 samples had been collected. 
LEGEND

GRAPHIC SCALE (MILES)

0 25 50

Particulate Monitoring

Station, Active in 2005

12.5

Source: EPA (2005a and 2005b)

CASPER DOUGLAS

GILLETTE BUFFALO

SHERIDAN

CROOK

COUNTY

WESTON

COUNTY

NIOBRARA

COUNTY

SHERIDAN

COUNTY

JOHNSON

COUNTY

NATRONA

COUNTY

CAMPBELL

COUNTY

CONVERSE

COUNTY

MONTANA

SOUTH DAKOTA

Figure 3-3. Active Particulate Monitoring Stations in Northeastern Wyoming.

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

3-32 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-33 

Table 3-5 summarizes the annual arithmetic average of these data from 1980 

through 2004 of all sites located at and adjacent to mining operations. 

As indicated in Table 3-5, the long-term trend in particulate emissions remained 

relatively flat through 1998. The overall average annual TSP concentration from 

1980 through 1998 was 33.1 μg/m3, with annual averages ranging between 27.8 

μg/m3 and 39.4 μg/m3. There were increases in 1988 and 1996, which may have 

been the result of fires in the region during those years. Annual average PM10

concentrations from 1989 through 1998 were similarly relatively flat, ranging 

between 12.9 μg/m3 and 16.5 μg/m3, with an overall average of 15.4 μg/m3. 

This time period (1980-1998) was associated with significant growth in the surface 

coal mining industry. Coal production increased from about 59 mmtpy to over 

293 mmtpy (an increase of almost 500 percent), and associated overburden 

production increased from 105 mmbcy to 669 mmbcy per year (an increase of over 

600 percent). From 1990 through 2004, the average annual increase in coal 

production was 6.5 percent, while annual overburden production increased an 

average of 13.1 percent over the same time period. The larger annual increase in 

overburden production is probably due to the fact that the mines are gradually 

moving into deeper coals as the shallower reserves are mined out. 

The relatively flat trend in particulate emissions from 1980 through 1998 is due in 

large part to the Wyoming Air Quality Program that requires BACT at all permitted 

facilities. BACT control measures, which include watering and chemical treatment 

of roads, limiting the amount of area disturbed, temporary revegetation of 

disturbed areas to reduce wind erosion, and timely final reclamation, are 

discussed in Section 3.4.2.3. 

The average annual TSP concentration increased from 33.9 μg/m3 in 1998 to 55.3 

μg/m3 in 1999, and remained greater than 50.0 μg/m3 through 2003. Since 2003 

there have been too few remaining TSP monitoring sites to provide a meaningful 

estimate of the average annual TSP concentration. The average annual PM10

concentration increased from 15.9 μg/m3 in 1998 to 21.6 μg/m3 in 1999, and has 

remained equal to or greater than 20 μg/m3 through 2004, as shown in Table 3-5. 

The increases in coal production over those six years (an average of 4.6 percent 

per year and 14.7 mmtpy over the six-year period) and associated overburden 

production (an average of 10.0 percent per year and 85.9 mmbcy over the six-year 

period) were not larger than any of the six-year increases during the previous 18 

years, but the particulate concentration increase was much larger than in 

previous years. There were no major fires in the region between 1998 and 2004, 

but there was an increase in CBNG development in the PRB during that time 

frame, and northeastern Wyoming has experienced extreme drought conditions as 

well as a dramatic increase in surface disturbance activities associated with CBNG 

development since 1999. All of these factors have exacerbated particulate 

emissions.
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-34 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Table 3-5. Summary of WDEQ/AQD Reports on Air Quality Monitoring in 

Wyoming’s PRB, 1980-2004. 

Year 

Coal 

Produced

(mmtpy) 

Overburden

Moved 

(mmbcy) 

Number of Mines 

Operating/ 

Monitoring TSP/ 

Monitoring PM101

Number of 

TSP/PM10

Monitoring

Sites2

TSP 

Average 

(μg/m3) 

PM10

Average

(μg/m3) 

1980 58.7 105.3 10/14/0 34/0 35.5 na3

1981 71.0 133.4 11/13/0 35/0 39.4 na 

1982 76.1 141.1 11/14/0 40/0 31.2 na 

1983 84.9 150.9 13/14/1 41/1 32.6 11.2 

1984 105.3 169.5 14/16/1 42/1 33.9 11.1 

1985 113.0 203.4 16/17/0 49/0 32.3 na 

1986 111.2 165.7 16/17/0 45/0 29.3 na 

1987 120.7 174.6 16/17/0 43/0 31.7 na 

1988 138.8 209.7 16/17/0 43/0 37.7 na 

1989 147.5 215.6 15/17/3 40/3 32.1 15.9 

1990 160.7 220.1 17/17/5 47/5 34.3 14.8 

1991 171.4 242.3 17/17/5 46/6 32.7 16.5 

1992 166.1 296.0 17/17/7 41/7 31.7 15.9 

1993 188.8 389.5 17/17/8 40/11 27.8 14.5 

1994 213.6 483.9 17/18/8 44/11 31.7 15.5 

1995 242.6 512.7 16/18/8 41/12 29.6 12.9 

1996 257.0 605.4 17/18/8 41/12 35.4 16.0 

1997 259.7 622.0 16/17/10 39/15 33.3 15.9 

1998 293.5 669.0 16/17/12 36/17 33.9 15.9 

1999 317.1 762.9 15/17/12 36/18 55.3 21.6 

2000 322.6 868.9 15/15/12 31/17 56.1 23.4 

2001 354.1 927.7 12/11/12 29/29 57.5 27.2 

2002 359.7 1,032.1 13/11/13 23/38 56.0 23.3 

2003 363.6 1,044.2 13/10/13 16/34 51.9 20.8 

2004 381.6 1,184.4 13/5/13 6/36 --4 20.0 

1 Mines include Buckskin, Rawhide, Eagle Butte, Dry Fork, Fort Union (acquired by Dry 

Fork), Clovis Point (acquired by Wyodak), Wyodak, Caballo, Belle Ayr, Caballo Rojo, 

Cordero, Coal Creek, Jacobs Ranch, Black Thunder, North Rochelle, North Antelope, 

Rochelle, Antelope, and Dave Johnston. 

2 Some sites include more than one sampler, so the number of samplers is greater than the 

number of sites. 

3 Not applicable because no monitoring for PM10 was done. 

4 Data no longer pertinent due to paucity of monitoring sites. 

Sources: 1980 through 1996 emissions and production data from April 1997 report prepared 

by WMA for WDEQ/AQD. 1997 through 2004 emissions data from EPA AirData and 

WDEQ/AQD databases (EPA 2005a, WDEQ/AQD 2005a). 1997 through 2004 

production data from WDEQ/AQD and Wyoming State Inspector of Mines 

(WDEQ/AQD 2005b and Wyoming Department of Employment 1997-2004). 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-35 

There were no monitored exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 standards anywhere in 

the PRB through year 2000. From 2001 through 2005, there were 29 monitored 

exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 standard at seven operating mines in the 

Wyoming PRB. Nineteen of these exceedances occurred in 2001 and 2002, while 

two, three, and five exceedances occurred in 2003, 2004, and 2005, respectively 

(Shamley 2006). In early 2007, there were nine exceedances at four mines. Most 

of the monitored exceedances have occurred in the group of mines located south 

and east of the town of Wright; however, six exceedances have occurred in the 

group of mines located north and east of Gillette (Figure 1-1). The Eagle Butte 

Mine is located in the northern group of mines but none of the monitored 

exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 standards were monitored at the Eagle Butte 

Mine. The PRB monitoring data show no exceedances of the annual PM10

standard to date. 

According to WDEQ/AQD, the circumstances associated with the exceedances 

prior to 2007 have provided adequate reason to believe that high wind events and 

blowing dust have caused exceedances of the NAAQS that otherwise would not 

have occurred (WDEQ/AQD 2006a). The 2007 exceedances were also associated 

with periods of high winds. 

In response to the measured exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS and in 

anticipation of conditions that would potentially lead to future exceedances, the 

WDEQ/AQD has collaborated with the Wyoming Mining Association to develop a 

Natural Events Action Plan for the coal mines of the PRB, based on EPA Natural 

Event Policy guidance. A report describing the plan, which has been submitted to 

the EPA for comment and approval, can be accessed on the WDEQ/AQD’s website 

on the Internet (WDEQ/AQD 2006a). If a Natural Events Action Plan is designed 

and implemented to minimize PM10 concentrations, EPA will exercise its 

discretion, under Section 107(d)(3) of the Clean Air Act, not to redesignate areas 

as nonattainment, provided that the exeedances are demonstrated to be the result 

of natural events. Based on EPA’s Natural Events Policy, PM10 concentrations due 

to dust raised by unusually high winds will be treated as uncontrollable natural 

events under the following conditions: 1) the dust originated from nonanthropogenic sources, or 2) the dust originated from anthropogenic sources 

controlled with BACM. 

The WDEQ/AQD Natural Events Action Plan includes a public education plan, a 

public notification and health advisory program, and a plan to abate or minimize 

appropriate contributing controllable sources of PM10, which includes three 

categories of control measures. The three categories of control measures are 

discussed in Section 3.4.2.3, below. The Natural Events Action Plan currently 

proposed by WDEQ/AQD only includes measures for control of coal mine sources 

since it is the ambient monitoring systems around the large surface coal mines 

that have recorded the exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS. If it is 

demonstrated that there are non-coal sources contributing to elevated 

measurements in an area of concern, WDEQ/AQD may address these additional 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-36 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

sources separately from the proposed Natural Events Action Plan or as a future 

update of the plan. 

3.4.2.1.2 Site Specific Particulate Emissions

For the Eagle Butte Mine air quality monitoring sites, historical particulate matter 

ambient air quality data generally show the same results as described above for 

the PRB as a whole. The locations of PM10 and TSP particulate emission 

monitoring samplers at the Eagle Butte Mine are shown on Figure 3-4. The 

progression of mining operations requires that the location and number of 

particulate monitors be adjusted in order to provide the best documentation of the 

ambient air quality. Figure 3-5 presents the average annual TSP and PM10

emissions measured at Eagle Butte Mine’s particulate monitors from 1996 

through 2005. Annual coal and overburden production for the Eagle Butte Mine 

for these years are also shown on Figure 3-5. 

As discussed above, TSP was the federally regulated pollutant until 1989 and was 

retained as a state regulated pollutant until 2000. PM10 became a federal 

standard in 1989 and was also adopted by the State of Wyoming in 2000. Until 

recently, TSP measurements have been used as a surrogate for PM10 in lieu of 

having to replace and/or co-locate an existing TSP sampler with a new PM10

sampler. As of October 2004, Eagle Butte Mine no longer monitors TSP. In 1996, 

there were two instances that the 24-hour TSP concentration monitored at the 

Eagle Butte Mine exceeded the 150 μg/m3 standard. In 2001, there were three 

instances that the 24-hour TSP concentration monitored at the Eagle Butte Mine 

exceeded 150 μg/m3. As a result of these exceedances of the 24-hour TSP 

standard, WDEQ-AQD required the mine to monitor PM10 concentration and TSP 

measurements could no longer be used as a surrogate for PM10 measurements at 

the site of exceedance. Eagle Butte Mine began monitoring PM10 in 1996 and 

there have been no exceedances of the 24-hour or annual PM10 standards. 

3.4.2.2 Environmental Consequences Related to Particulate Emissions

Particulates include solid particles and liquid droplets that can be suspended in 

air. Particulates, especially fine particles, have been linked to numerous 

respiratory-related illnesses and can adversely affect individuals with pre-existing 

heart or lung diseases. They are also a major cause of reduced visibility in parts 

of the United States. While individual particles cannot be seen with the naked 

eye, collectively they can appear as black soot, dust clouds, or gray hazes. 

3.4.2.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

The Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would be mined as an integral part of the Eagle 

Butte Mine. FCW projects that average annual coal production would be 25 

million tons, with or without the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Eagle Butte Mine’s 
R. 73 W. R. 72 W. R.72W. R.71W.

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

R. 72 W. R. 71 W.

16

1

12

2

11

3

10

1

12

2

11

3

10

4

9

5

8

6

7

6

7

6

7

18

19

30

31

1

12

13

24

25

36

2

11

14

23

26

35

3

10

15

22

27

34

4

9

21

28

33

5

8

17

20

29

32

6

7

18

19

30

31

1

12

13

24

25

36

2

11

14

23

26

35

3

10

15

22

27

34

U.S. Highway 14-16

U.S. Highway 14-16

State Highway 59

BNSF Railroad

BNSF Railroad

EB-3

EB-2

EB-1

EB-5

Eagle Butte Mine

Coal Plant Facilities

Eagle Butte Mine Permit Boundary

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as Applied for

10 TSP and PM Air Quality

Sampling Locations

Meteorological Station

0 3.3 5.4 8.5 11.0 11.0 & >

MPH

KEY 0 4000 8000 16000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

LEGEND

N

E

S

W 0%

Windrose

Period: 1995-2000

Additional Area Evaluated Under Alternative 1

Area Added Under BLM's Preferred

Tract Delineation for Alternative 1

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

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-37
Coal Production (million tons) and

Overburden Removal (million cubic yards)

Coal Production (million tons) and

Overburden Removal (million cubic yards)

Site EB-5

Site EB-3

Site EB-2

Production Year

ANNUAL AVERAGE PM10 vs. PRODUCTION

ANNUAL AVERAGE TSP vs. PRODUCTION

Overburden Removal

Coal Production

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

0

2001 2002 2003 2004

60

0

Annual Average

TSP Concentration (μg/m

3

)

50

40

30

20

10

2005

60

50

40

30

20

10

Production Year

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

0

2001 2002 2003 2004

60

0

50

40

30

20

10

60

50

40

30

20

10

Site EB-1

Site EB-3

Site EB-2 Overburden Removal

Coal Production

2005TSP no longer monitored

Annual Average

PM10 Concentration (μg/m

3

)

Figure 3-5. Annual Coal Production and Overburden Removal vs. Ambient Particulates for Eagle Butte

Mine (1996 through 2005).

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

3-38 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-39 

currently approved air quality permit from the WDEQ/AQD limits annual coal 

production to 35 million tons of coal. According to FCW, if they acquire the 

additional coal in the LBA tract, production would continue at an average rate of 

25 mmtpy for about eight years under the Proposed Action or the BLM’s preferred 

tract configuration for Alternative 1. As discussed in Section 3.0, the estimates of 

recoverable coal, associated disturbance, and mine life shown in Table 3-1 assume 

that U.S. Highway 14-16 is not moved. As indicated in Table 2-2, approximately 

27 million additional tons of coal could be recovered if the highway is moved, 

which would extend operations at the mine for about one additional year. 

Potential particulate emissions related to mining operations at the existing Eagle 

Butte Mine are described below. Because of the similarities in mining rates and 

mining operations, the potential impacts of mining the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract have been inferred from the projected impacts of mining the existing coal 

leases as currently permitted. 

WDEQ/AQD issued air quality permit MD-1251 for the Eagle Butte Mine on 

October 24, 2005. This air quality permit was issued based on an analysis using 

emission factors, estimation methods, and model selection consistent with 

WDEQ/AQD policy. This current air quality permit reflects analyses based on a 

revised coal removal progression and mine plan. The change did not affect the 

LNCM boundary or the permitted coal production limit of 35 mmtpy. Eagle Butte 

Mine’s air quality permit also approves the construction of a stilling shed at the 

coal truck dump, which replaces water spray dust control. Shovels, trucks, frontend loaders, and dozers are utilized for the movement of both overburden and coal 

(FCW 2004a). 

Particulate emission inventories for the mining activities at Eagle Butte Mine were 

prepared for all years in the currently anticipated life of the mine. Two years, 

2005 and 2006, were then selected for worst-case dispersion modeling of PM10

based on mine plan parameters and emission inventories. The area source, haul 

road, and point source PM10 information for Eagle Butte Mine and other sources 

in the area were input into the ISCLT3 Model for each worst-case year. 

Receptor locations were placed at approximately 500-meter intervals along the 

ambient air quality (or LNCM) boundary (see Figures 3-6 and 3-7). As discussed 

in Section 3.4.1.1.1, a PM10 concentration of 15 μg/m3 was added to all modeled 

emissions to account for background fugitive dust. Predicted PM10 emissions from 

the neighboring mines (Buckskin, Rawhide, Fort Union, Dry Fork, and Wyodak) 

were inventoried using those mines’ most recent WDEQ/AQD air quality permit 

applications. Impacts on ambient air from the Eagle Butte Mine and other 

regional mines vary by year due to annual changes in emission strength, emission 

density, pit proximity to defined ambient air boundaries, and pit configuration. 

Emissions for each year are ranked and candidate worst-case years are further 

evaluated regarding proximity to neighboring mining operations and emissions. 

The total PM10 concentration at each receptor was determined by summing the 
T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

6 5 1 6

7

18

19

30

31

12

13

24

25

36

11

32

7

18

19

30

31

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

R. 72 W.

2

4 3

14

23

26

33 34 35

29 28 27

8 9 10

17

20

R. 72 W.

16

15

22 21

U.S. Highway 14-16

BNSF Railroad

State Highway 59

U.S. Highway 14-16

PM10=30.6 μg/m3

NOx=33.5 μg/m3

Existing Eagle Butte Mine

Federal Coal Leases

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract

as Applied for

LEGEND

5000 10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Receptor Location

Area Source

Ambient Air Boundary

Haul Roads

0 2500

Additional Area Evaluated Under Alternative 1

Area Added Under BLM's Preferred

Tract Delineation for Alternative 1

Figure 3-6. Maximum Modeled PM10 and NOX

 Concentrations at the Eagle Butte Mine Ambient Air

Boundary for the Year 2005.

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

3-40 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application
T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

16

1

2

4 3 6 5 6

7

18

19

30

31

12

13

24

25

36

11

14

23

26

35

10

15

22

27

34

9

21

28

33

8

17

20

29

32

7

18

19

30

31

R. 72 W.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

U.S. Highway 14-16

U.S. Highway 14-16

State Highway 59

BNSF Railroad

PM10=34.9 μg/m3

NOx=35.3 μg/m3

R. 72 W.

LEGEND

2500 5000 10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Existing Eagle Butte Mine

Federal Coal Leases

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract

as Applied for

Receptor Location

Area Source

Ambient Air Boundary

Haul Roads

0

Additional Area Evaluated Under Alternative 1

Area Added Under BLM's Preferred

Tract Delineation for Alternative 1

Figure 3-7. Maximum Modeled PM10 and NOX

 Concentrations at the Eagle Butte Mine Ambient Air

Boundary for the Year 2006.

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-41
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-42 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

concentration due to each active mine in the general area and adding the 

estimated pre-mining background concentration of 15 μg/m3. The resulting 

particulate levels were then compared to the average annual PM10 standard of 50 

μg/m3 to demonstrate compliance with the annual WAAQS. 

Long-term modeling indicates the currently projected mine activities will be in 

compliance with the annual PM10 ambient air standard for the life of the Eagle 

Butte Mine. Based on mine plan parameters and highest emissions inventories, 

the years 2005 and 2006 were selected as the worst-case years. The dispersion 

model showed a maximum concentration of 30.59 μg/m3 in 2005 and 34.88 

μg/m3 in 2006. The modeling assumed that coal production in both years would 

be at the maximum permitted production level of 35 million tons (FCW 2004a). 

The locations of the maximum-modeled PM10 concentrations for 2005 and 2006 

are shown on Figures 3-6 and 3-7, respectively. 

As discussed in Section 3.4.1.1, surface coal mines in the Wyoming PRB have not 

been subject to PSD requirements. Only some fraction of the mine emissions 

included in the WDEQ/AQD air quality permit analyses consumes increment 

based on permits in place in the baseline year of 1997. As a result, the 

concentrations predicted by the WDEQ/AQD air quality permit analyses should 

not be compared to PSD increments. 

The Eagle Butte Mine point source emissions inventory includes all coal 

preparation and processing facilities (i.e., crushers, material transfer points, silos, 

and loadouts). All point source parameters for the regional mining operations, 

which were obtained from WDEQ/AQD files, were also considered in the modeling 

analysis. As discussed in Section 3.4.1.1, a proposed new point source that has 

the potential to emit more than 250 tpy of any criteria pollutant (the primary 

pollutant being particulate matter) must undergo a regulatory PSD increment 

consumption analysis as well as a BACT review. An inventory of all point sources, 

controls, and emissions for the MD-1251 air quality permit showed a potential to 

emit 77.4 tpy; therefore, a PSD increment consumption analysis was not 

necessary. Because this value is below the 100 tpy major source threshold limit 

specified in Chapter 6, Section 3 of the WAQSR, Eagle Butte Mine will not be 

subject to the Title V Operating Permit program (FCW 2004a). 

In Wyoming, monitoring results have been used in lieu of short-term (24-hour) 

modeling for assessing short-term coal mining-related impacts in the PRB. WDEQ 

has chosen this procedure in accordance with an agreement between EPA and the 

State of Wyoming, as discussed in Section 3.4.1.1.1. That agreement recognizes 

that appropriate models do not exist to accurately predict 24-hour impacts. 

Twenty-four-hour impacts have been estimated from recent monitoring and 

emission control activities. 

There were two instances in 1996 and three instances in 2001 that the 24-hour 

TSP concentration monitored at the Eagle Butte Mine exceeded 150 μg/m3, which 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-43 

was the federal particulate matter standard before 1989. As a result of these 

monitored TSP concentrations in excess of 150 μg/m3, WDEQ-AQD required the 

mine to monitor PM10 concentration and did not allow the continued use of TSP 

measurements as a surrogate for PM10 measurements at the site of exceedance. 

There have been no exceedances of the 24-hour or annual PM10 standards at the 

Eagle Butte Mine. Methods for the control of particulate emissions at the mine 

are discussed in Section 3.4.2.3. No exceedances of the 24-hour or annual 

ambient air standards are expected from mining the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

at the proposed mining rate of 25 mmtpy or at the maximum permitted rate of 35 

mmtpy. 

The estimated average overburden thickness is greater in the LBA tract than 

within the current leases, but the thickness of the coal in the LBA tract as applied 

for and in BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1 is about the 

same as in the existing mine area (see Table 3-2). If the Eagle Butte Mine acquires 

and mines the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, this could result in an increase in 

fugitive emissions per ton of coal mined from current levels due to the increased 

volume of overburden that would have to be removed to recover the coal. The 

increase in fugitive dust emissions could potentially be moderated somewhat if 

removal of the larger volume of overburden material results in a slower rate of 

mining advancement through the LBA tract. This would potentially decrease the 

number of acres disturbed annually and cause haul distances to increase more 

slowly. 

Current mining techniques would be expected to continue for a longer period of 

time than is shown in the currently approved air quality permit. Shovels and 

trucks would continue to be utilized for the movement of both overburden 

materials and coal. Facilities shown in the current air quality permit would not 

change as a result of proposed mining of the LBA tract. The Eagle Butte Mine 

does not conduct cast blasting and there are no plans to change blasting 

procedures or blast sizes associated with the mining of the LBA tract. In addition, 

current BACT measures for particulates would continue to be employed. 

Modeling conducted for the current Eagle Butte Mine permit predicted no 

exceedances of the annual PM10 NAAQS at a 35-mmtpy production rate and there 

have been no exceedances of the 24-hour and annual PM10 NAAQS. If the Eagle 

Butte Mine acquires and mines the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, they estimate 

that average coal production would be approximately 25 mmtpy. Under the 

Proposed Action and BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1, mine 

life would be extended by approximately up to nine years and the overburden 

thickness would increase during that time period, but fugitive dust emissions 

should remain in compliance with daily and annual air quality standards. 

Public exposure to particulate emissions from surface mining operations is most 

likely to occur along publicly accessible roads and highways that pass through the 

area of the mining operations. Occupants of dwellings in the area could also be 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-44 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

affected. There are a number of occupied dwellings, businesses, the Gillette – 

Campbell County Airport, and a public school (Rawhide Elementary School) in the 

area of the existing Eagle Butte Mine and the BLM study area for the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract (the tract as applied for and the additional area evaluated under 

Alternative 1), as shown in Figure 3-8. Roads, highways, and school bus stops in 

the vicinity of the Eagle Butte Mine and the LBA tract are also shown in Figure 3-

8. BLM’s study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, which is shown in Figure 

3-8 and discussed in Section 2.2, includes the north half of Section 20, T.51N., 

R.72W, where the school and several occupied dwellings (Echo Subdivision) are 

located. However, BLM must consider this coal to be unsuitable for mining, based 

on SMCRA and the associated regulatory requirements (see Section 2.2). BLM’s 

study area also extends south to include a wedge of land lying between the airport 

runways. BLM’s preferred tract configuration, shown in Figure 3-8, does not 

include either the federal coal underlying the school and occupied dwellings in 

Section 20 or the federal coal located between the airport runways. 

As discussed above, there have been no exceedances of the 24-hour and annual 

PM10 NAAQS at the Eagle Butte Mine, and modeling conducted for the current 

Eagle Butte Mine permit predicted no exceedances of the annual PM10 NAAQS at a 

35-mmtpy production rate. However, several nearby residents who attended the 

Eagle Butte West LBA scoping meeting, held in Gillette on May 17, 2005, and/or 

who submitted written scoping comments regarding FCW’s proposal to lease the 

tract indicated that blowing dust from existing operations at the Eagle Butte Mine 

has affected the air quality in and around their residences, and expressed concern 

that this problem would continue in the future if the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

is leased and mined. The distance between the federal coal included in the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract (as applied for or under BLM’s preferred tract configuration) 

and the occupied dwellings and the airport would be similar to, but not less than, 

the distance between the federal coal that has previously been recovered from the 

existing Eagle Butte Mine leases and the dwellings and airport. The distance 

between the coal included in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (as applied for or 

under BLM’s preferred tract configuration) would be closer to Rawhide Elementary 

School than the federal coal included in any of the existing Eagle Butte Mine 

leases. 

Another concern expressed during the scoping process was the potential impact of 

particulate emissions on human health. One written comment suggested that 

there seems to be a higher than normal incidence of asthma and respiratory 

problems in the residents living near the mine. According to the EPA, fine 

particles (2.5 micrometers in diameter and smaller) are small enough to get into 

the lungs and cause health problems. Scientific studies have linked particle 

pollution to health problems including decreased lung function, aggravated 

asthma, development of chronic bronchitis, irregular heartbeat, nonfatal heart 

attacks, and premature death in people with heart or lung diseases. People with 

heart or lung diseases, children, and older adults are most likely to be affected by 

particle pollution exposure (EPA 2007a). EPA considered these studies in 
1

12 7

12

13

24

25

36

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

1

12

6

12

13

24

25

36

23

29 28 27 26

7

18

19

30

31

State Highway 59

BNSF Railroad

RAWHIDE SCHOOL

GILLETTE -

CAMPBELL

COUNTY

AIRPORT

2

11

3

4 5

35 33 34 32

16

11

14

10

15

22

9

21

8

17

20

U.S. Highway 14-16

EAGLE BUTTE

MINE OFFICE

8

9 10

U.S. Highway 14-16

State Highway 59

LEGEND

0 2500 5000 10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Eagle Butte Mine Permit Boundary

Existing Eagle Butte Mine Federal Coal Leases

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as Applied for

Single Occupied Residence

School Bus Stop

Multiple Occupied Residences, Businesses,

and Roads Exist Within this Area

(Boundaries are Approximate)

Additional Area Evaluated Under Alternative 1

Area Added Under BLM's Preferred

Tract Delineation for Alternative 1

Figure 3-8. Residences, School Bus Stops, Public Roads, and other Publicly Accessible Facilities Within

and Adjacent to the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract.

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-45
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-46 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

revising the air quality standards for particle pollution in 2006. The revisions to 

the standards are discussed above in Section 3.4.2.1. References to the studies 

linking particle pollution to health problems that EPA reviewed in revising the 

particulate matter standards and the results of those studies can be found in the 

Related Documents Section of EPA’s Particulate Matter Standards website at 

http://www.epa.gov/air/particlepollution/standards.html. 

3.4.2.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the Eagle Butte West coal lease application would 

be rejected and the Eagle Butte Mine would continue to operate as currently 

permitted for approximately 13.6 more years. A discussion of the currently 

permitted mining operations and potential impacts related to PM10 emissions is 

included in Section 3.4.2.2.1. Impacts related to mining operations at the Eagle 

Butte Mine would continue on the existing mine area as permitted, but mining 

operations would not be extended onto those portions of the LBA tract that will 

not be affected under the current mining and reclamation plan. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.4.2.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation, and Monitoring for Particulate 

Emissions

Control of particulate emissions at all PRB coal mines is accomplished with a 

variety of measures. The WDEQ/AQD permits for all of the surface coal mines in 

the PRB require the following dust control measures, which are considered to be 

BACT measures: 

1. No mines are allowed to have out-of-pit open coal stockpiles. All coal 

removed from the mine pits must be stored in totally enclosed coal silos or 

barns. 

2. Unless specifically exempted, all coal mine main access roads must be 

paved. 

3. As use and condition warrant, the minor access roads at coal mines which 

are unpaved must be watered or treated with dust suppressants. 

4. All coal conveyor transfer points must be shrouded or otherwise enclosed 

to direct coal fines from one belt to the next. 

5. The transfer point and crushers within coal processing plants must be 

equipped with control devices and measures specified in individual 

permits. These control devices and measures may include, but are not 

limited to, the use of dust collection baghouses, cyclones, scrubbers, fog 

systems, and controlled flow transfer chutes. 

6. All out-of-pit conveyors must be hooded or contained in a conveyor gallery. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-47 

7. All out-of-pit coal dump hoppers must be fitted with a dust control stilling 

shed, water sprays, or a baghouse dust collector. 

8. Active longer-term coal haul roads must be treated with dust control 

chemicals and/or water. 

9. Active short-term mine haul roads that must be continuously relocated 

are maintained and watered while in use. 

10. All haul roads must be regularly maintained to reduce the amount of dust 

re-entrained by haulage equipment (WDEQ/AQD 2006a). 

Additional site-specific requirements related to mine-specific layout and mining 

practices may be included in individual mine permits. When the Eagle Butte 

Mine’s air quality permit was first issued, the BACT on emissions from the mine’s 

point sources included covered conveyors, telescoping loadout chutes, enclosed 

storage devices (silos), and water spray dust controls at all coal transfer points. In 

2005, WDEQ/AQD issued air quality permit MD-1251 to modify operations at the 

Eagle Butte Mine with the addition of a PEC dust control system (stilling shed) at 

the coal truck dump that replaced the existing water spray dust controls. 

Fugitive emissions are also controlled with a variety of other measures that the 

WDEQ/AQD considers BACT. Mines often apply dust suppressants to adjoining 

county roads. Haul truck speed limits are imposed to further help to reduce 

fugitive emissions from roads. Material drop heights for shovels and draglines 

(bucket to truck bed or backfill) are limited to the minimum necessary to conduct 

the mining operations. Timely permanent and temporary revegetation of 

disturbed areas is utilized to minimize wind erosion. All of these control measures 

are employed at the Eagle Butte Mine. 

The Natural Events Action Plan discussed in Section 3.4.2.1.1 identifies two 

categories of control measures designed to prevent exceedances during high wind 

events in addition to the BACT measures discussed above (WDEQ/AQD 2006a). 

One of these categories, BACM, is an additional list of control measures that the 

mines can implement continuously so that they are in place before a high wind 

event occurs. These measures are not current requirements in all of the mines’ 

air quality permits. They primarily address the principal mine-controlled sources 

of fugitive dust, which are large contiguous disturbed areas. These measures 

include: 

1. Stabilizing topsoiled areas as soon as practicable following topsoil 

replacement. 

2. Ripping, windrowing, mulching, temporarily seeding or chemically treating 

areas greater than 300 contiguous acres in size that have been stripped of 

topsoil but will not be mined in the near future. 

3. Ripping, windrowing, temporarily seeding or chemically treating graded 

backfill areas greater than 300 contiguous acres in size. 

4. Ripping, mulching, temporarily seeding or chemically treating long-term 

out-of-pit overburden and topsoil stockpiles that have been graded. 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-48 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

5. Applying non-vegetative barriers such as gravel or other large-diameter 

particles to erodible surfaces to reduce surface erosion where appropriate. 

6. Cleaning, treating, and maintaining pads in front of truck dumps to prevent 

accumulations of spilled materials from getting pulverized. 

7. Scheduling topsoil removal, backfill grading, and topsoil replacements 

concurrently to minimize open areas when possible. 

8. Requiring contractors to apply water and/or chemical dust suppressants in 

their haulage areas. 

The second category of control measures discussed in the Natural Events Action 

Plan includes measures that are not currently required by all of the individual 

mines’ air quality permits but are actions that can be taken during a high wind 

event, depending on site-specific conditions (WDEQ/AQD 2006a). These include: 

1. The mine operator will consider relevant information, including NWS 

forecasts and local meteorological information, to confirm that a high wind 

event is to occur. 

2. The mine operator will visually determine areas of mining activity that are 

generating excessive visible dust and direct water trucks to those areas. 

3. The mine operator should direct overburden operations to the shortest haul 

distance available during a high wind event. 

4. The mine operator will evaluate the practicality of dumping the overburden 

as low as possible. 

5. Mine employees will inspect for and extinguish coal fires. 

6. The mine operator will evaluate shutting down scoria crushing operations 

that appear to be generating excess dust. 

7. The mine operator will evaluate shutting down road maintenance activities 

that are generating dust. 

8. The mine operator will evaluate ordering contractors to increase watering, 

reduce operating equipment or shut down haulage. 

9. The mine operator will evaluate the need to shut down and/or reduce 

earthmoving activities as the mine schedule and conditions will allow. 

WDEQ/AQD may require implementation of these control steps and continual 

evaluation of activity plans when exceedances are monitored at surface coal 

mines. Some of these measures have been formally implemented at the Black 

Thunder, North Rochelle, and Jacobs Ranch mines through the establishment of a 

formal, site-specific mitigative response plan at each of those mines. A mitigative 

response plan will be developed by any mine that records an exceedance or 

violation of the NAAQS downwind of its mining operations. 

Other operational control measures that WDEQ/AQD may require at specific 

mines when exceedances occur include, but are not limited to, site-specific 

watering of inactive areas and problem areas; relocation of overburden truckdumping operations; and deferring blasting. The mines are experimenting with 

dust control treatments, including magnesium chloride, surfactants, and 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-49 

petroleum-based products. In addition, WDEQ/AQD may require additional 

monitoring, action levels based on continuous monitoring, expedited reporting of 

monitored exceedances, detailed reporting of contributing factors (e.g., 

meteorological conditions), and continual evaluation of activity plans when 

exceedances are monitored at surface coal mines. 

The WDEQ/AQD is continually reviewing the data and considering regulatory 

options, such as increasing the frequency of monitoring. Where elevated 

emissions have occurred, continuous PM10 monitors, or TEOMs, are installed, 

which allows monitoring of emissions on a real-time basis (WDEQ/AQD 2006a). 

Other regulatory options may include enforcement actions such as Notices of 

Violation resulting in a consent decree and/or modified permit conditions. 

WDEQ/AQD is also coordinating with EPA to develop additional monitoring 

requirements in CBNG development areas, high PM10 mitigation action plans in 

permits, and additional mitigation measures under the SIP. 

Additional measures that have been instituted as mine permit requirements at the 

Eagle Butte Mine to facilitate control of or diminish both NOx emissions and public 

exposure to flyrock from blasting operations also act to limit dust impacts to the 

nearby businesses, residents, and the public school, as well as highways (refer to 

Section 3.4.3.3). For example, the following condition is included in the 

WDEQ/LQD Mine Permit No. 428-T5: 

 The mine will block traffic on U.S. Highway 14-16 and State Highway 59 for 

all overburden blasts that occur within 1,100 ft of the highway ROW, and 

traffic control points are periodically moved as mining locations change. 

If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased to the applicant, permit conditions 

designed to control or limit public exposure to NO2 and flyrock would be expected 

to be included within specified distances of potentially affected businesses, 

dwellings, and the school, as well as the highway when mining operations on the 

new lease are conducted. According the WDEQ/LQD, if the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract is leased, permit conditions designed to control or limit public exposure to 

NO2 and flyrock from blasting operations would be no less stringent than the 

permit conditions for the existing Eagle Butte Mine (Emme 2007). 

Continuous monitors have not been required at the Eagle Butte Mine. After the 

monitors recorded 24-hour TSP concentrations in excess of 150 μg/m3 in 1996 

and 2001, WDEQ/AQD required the mine to monitor PM10 concentration and to 

discontinue using TSP measurements as a surrogate for PM10 measurements at 

the site that recorded the exceedance. Eagle Butte Mine’s air quality permit (FCW 

2004a) includes an analysis that demonstrates compliance with the 24-hour PM10

standard that focuses of historical monitoring data and continuing employment of 

BACT on mine-wide emissions and concludes that the 24-hour PM10 WAAQS 

would be protected through the LOM. 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-50 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

The eastern side of the PRB has one of the most extensive networks of monitoring 

sites for PM10 in the nation. As discussed in Section 3.4.2.1, the monitoring sites 

include six TSP monitors, four PM2.5 monitors, and 30 PM10 monitors, including 

TEOMs. Most of these monitoring sites are funded and operated by the coal mines 

(Figure 3-3). WDEQ/AQD requires the collection of information documenting the 

quality of the air resource at each of the PRB mines. Each mine monitored air 

quality for a 24-hour period every six days at multiple monitoring sites through 

the end of 2001. All PM10 monitors located at the active mines are now required 

by WDEQ/AQD to sample air quality for a 24-hour period every three days 

beginning in 2002. 

There are also monitors in Sheridan, Gillette, Arvada, and Wright, Wyoming. 

WDEQ/AQD uses monitoring stations located throughout the state to anticipate 

issues related to air quality. These monitoring stations are located to measure 

ambient air quality; they are not located to measure impacts from a specific 

source. Monitors located to measure impacts from a specific source may also be 

used for trends. The extensive air quality monitoring network currently in use 

enables the WDEQ to manage the air resource using monitoring data rather than 

modeled predictions. WDEQ uses the monitoring data to pro-actively arrest or 

reverse trends towards air quality problems. When WDEQ became aware that 

particulate readings in the PRB were increasing due to increased CBNG activity 

and exacerbated by prolonged drought, the WDEQ approached the counties, coal 

mines, and CBNG industry. A coalition involving the Campbell County Board of 

Commissioners, coal companies, and regional CBNG and oil producers have made 

substantial efforts towards minimizing dust from graded roads. Measures taken 

have ranged from the implementation of speed limits to paving of heavily traveled 

roads. The coalition has utilized chemical treatments to control dust as well as 

closing roads where appropriate or necessary and rebuilding existing roads to 

higher specifications. The coalition requested money from the Wyoming State 

Legislature to fund acquisition of Rotomill (ground up asphalt) to be mixed with 

gravel for use in treating some of the roads in the PRB. The Rotomill/gravel 

mixture has been demonstrated to be effective in reducing dust; the life of the 

mixture on treated roads is estimated to be from five to six years (Bott 2006). 

Monitoring is also used to measure compliance. When monitoring shows that any 

standard has been violated, the WDEQ can take a range of enforcement actions to 

remedy the situation. Where a standard is exceeded specific to an operation, the 

enforcement action is specific to the facility. For many facilities, neither the cause 

nor the solution is simple. The agency normally uses a negotiated settlement in 

those instances. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-51 

3.4.3 Emissions of Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)

3.4.3.1 Affected Environment for NOx Emissions

Gases that contain nitrogen and oxygen in varying amounts are referred to as 

nitrogen oxides, or NOx. One type of NOx is nitrogen dioxide (NO2), a reddish 

brown gas that is heavier than air and has a pungent odor. Gaseous NO2 is highly 

reactive and combines with water to form nitric acid and nitric oxide. 

Nitrogen oxides form when fuel is burned at high temperatures. They can be 

formed naturally or by human activities. The primary manmade sources are 

motor vehicles, electric utilities, and other fuel-burning sources. According to 

EPA, motor vehicles produce about 55 percent of the manmade NOx emissions, 

utilities and industrial/commercial/residential activities each produce about 22 

percent of the manmade NOx emissions, and other sources account for the 

remaining one percent of the manmade emissions (EPA 2007b). The primary 

direct source of emissions of nitrogen oxides during coal mining operations is 

tailpipe emissions from large mining equipment and other vehicle traffic inside the 

mine permit area. 

Blasting that is done to remove the material overlying the coal (the overburden) 

can result in emissions of several products, including NO2, as a result of the 

incomplete combustion of nitrogen-based explosives used in the blasting process. 

When this occurs, gaseous, orange-colored clouds may be formed and they can 

drift or be blown off mine permit areas. 

3.4.3.1.1 Regional NOx Emissions

Annual mean NO2 concentrations have been periodically measured in the PRB 

since 1975, as discussed in Section 3.4.3.3. The annual mean NO2

concentrations recorded by those monitoring efforts have all been well below the 

100 μg/m3 standard. The highest annual mean concentration recorded to date 

was 22 μg/m3 at two separate sites between March 1996 and April 1997. 

NO2 is a product of incomplete combustion at sources such as gasoline- and 

diesel-burning engines or from mine blasting activities. Incomplete combustion 

during blasting may be caused by wet conditions in the overburden, incompetent 

or fractured geological formations, deformation of bore holes, and blasting agent 

factors. Generally, blasting-related NOx emissions are more prevalent at 

operations that use the blasting technique referred to as cast blasting (Chancellor 

2003). Cast blasting refers to a type of direct blasting in which the blast is 

designed to cast the overburden from on top of the coal into the previously mined 

area. The Eagle Butte Mine has never conducted cast blasting and does not have 

plans to begin using that blasting procedure in the future. 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-52 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

In the mid-to late-1990s, OSM received complaints from several citizens about 

blasting clouds from several mines in the PRB, including the Eagle Butte Mine. 

EPA expressed concerns that NO2 levels in some of those blasting clouds may have 

been sufficiently high at times to cause human health effects. In response to 

those concerns, several studies have been conducted, the mines have modified 

their blasting techniques, and the WDEQ has imposed blasting restrictions on 

several mines. More information about these studies and restrictions is presented 

in the following discussion. 

3.4.3.1.2 Site Specific NOx Emissions

Sources of NOx emissions at the Eagle Butte Mine include the tailpipe emissions 

from the mining equipment and the emissions from the trains used to haul the 

coal from the mine. NOx point sources at the mine include stationary engines and 

natural-gas fired heaters. 

Prior to 2001, WDEQ received reports of public exposure to blasting clouds from 

blasts at the Eagle Butte Mine from residents in the area of the mine, including a 

report of health problems potentially caused by blasting clouds outside of the 

Eagle Butte Mine permit area from one person (Emme 2007). Nearby residents 

brought concerns about blasting practices at the Eagle Butte Mine to the EQC 

several times, which resulted in the inclusion of conditions regulating blasting 

operations in the mine’s WDEQ/LQD mine permit. Control measures to limit 

public exposure to NO2 from blasting are in place and being implemented at the 

Eagle Butte Mine. These control measures are defined, in part, by conditions in 

the WDEQ/LQD Mine Permit No. 428-T5 and the provisions of the Wyoming EQC 

ruling of June 26, 2003. Since these control measures were implemented, 

WDEQ/LQD has received one report of an orange-tinged blasting cloud at the 

mine, but no visible NOx fumes left the mine permit area during that incident 

(Emme 2007). Specific blasting control measures that are used to control NOx at 

the Eagle Butte Mine are discussed in more detail in Section 3.4.3.3. 

3.4.3.2 Environmental Consequences Related to NOx Emissions

There are various compounds and derivatives in the family of nitrogen oxides, 

including NO2, nitric acid, nitrous oxide, nitrates, and nitric oxide, which may 

cause a wide variety of health and environmental impacts. According to EPA, the 

main causes of concern with respect to NOx are: 

• it is one of the main ingredients involved in the formation of ground level 

ozone, which can trigger serious respiratory problems; 

• it reacts to form nitrate particles, acid aerosols, as well as NO2, which 

also cause respiratory problems; 

• it contributes to the formation of acid rain; 

• it contributes to nutrient overload that deteriorates water quality; 

• it contributes to atmospheric particles that cause visibility impairment, 

most noticeably in national parks; 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-53 

• it reacts to form toxic chemicals; 

• one member of the NOx family, nitrous oxide or N2O, is a greenhouse gas 

that contributes to global warming; and 

• it can be transported over long distances (EPA 2007c). 

Potential health risks associated with inhalation of ground level ozone and NOxrelated particles include acute respiratory problems, aggravated asthma, 

decreases in lung capacity in some healthy adults, inflammation of lung tissue, 

respiratory-related hospital admissions and emergency room visits, and increased 

susceptibility to respiratory illnesses, including bronchitis and pneumonia (EPA 

2007d). 

Although there is no NAAQS that regulates short-term NO2 levels, there is concern 

about the potential health risk associated with short-term exposure to NO2 from 

blasting emissions. NIOSH, OSHA, and EPA have identified the following shortterm exposure criteria for NO2: 

 • NIOSH’s recommended Immediately Dangerous to Life and Health level is 

20.0 ppm (37,600 μg/m3); 

 • EPA’s Significant Harm Level, a one-hour average, is 2.0 ppm (3,760 

μg/m3); 

 • OSHA’s Short-Term Exposure Limit, a 15-minute time-weighted average, 

which was developed for workers, is 5.0 ppm (9,400 μg/m3, which must not 

be exceeded during any part of the workday, as measured instantaneously); 

 • NIOSH’s recommendation for workers is a limit of 1.0 ppm (1,880 μg/m3) 

based on a 15-minute exposure that should not be exceeded at any time 

during the workday; and 

 • EPA recommends that concentrations not exceed 0.5 ppm (940 μg/m3) for a 

10-minute exposure to protect sensitive members of the public (EPA 2003). 

A study conducted by Dr. Edward Faeder for the Black Thunder Mine (Figure 1-1) 

recommended a limit of 5.0 ppm (9,400 μg/m3) for a 10-minute exposure. 

According to EPA “...the exact concentrations at which NO2 will cause various 

health effects cannot be predicted with complete accuracy because the effects are 

a function of air concentration and time of exposure, and precise measurements 

have not been made in association with human toxicity. The information that is 

available from human exposures also suggests that there is some variation in 

individual response” (EPA 2001a). 

The WMA conducted a study beginning in August 1999 and completed in April 

2000, with participation from the WDEQ/LQD and WDEQ/AQD, because of the 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-54 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

concern with the health risk that could be potentially associated with short-term 

exposure to NOx. The study involved collection of 15-minute average NO2

concentrations in areas that are near PRB coal mining operations and that would 

be accessible to the public. It was designed to help evaluate potential exposure of 

the public to NO2 emissions resulting from blasting activity at surface coal mines. 

Six monitor locations were selected “...based on their proximity to mining activity 

and accessibility to the public. Roads adjacent to mining activity were felt to be 

areas where the public exposure would most likely occur. Locations were also 

chosen based on dominant wind direction, and to represent areas having the 

greatest chance of being impacted by several mining operations...” (WMA 2000). 

A brief summary of the findings follows: 

 • Approximately 95 percent of the valid data points were readings of 0 ppm (0 

μg/m3) NO2. 

 • The maximum 15-minute average valid values observed for each of the six 

monitors ranged from 0 to 1.65 ppm (0 - 3,102 μg/m3) NO2. 

 • Where readings greater than 0 ppm did occur, there was a strong 

correlation between NO2 readings and temperatures. This correlation 

indicates that the NO2 readings may have been inflated due to temperature 

considerations. 

The Black Thunder Mine also conducted a study designed to provide information 

on safe setback distances for blasting activities at that mine (TBCC 2002). 

Monitors for that report were located close to blasts in order to collect data for a 

modeling project; they were located within the mine permit boundary in areas that 

are not and would not be accessible to the public during mining operations and 

these areas are also cleared of employees during blasting activities. The measured 

NOx levels ranged from non-detectable to 21.4 ppm. The highest value was 

measured 361 ft from the blast. 

There are no state or federal rules that require the public or employees to stay 

back a certain distance from mine blasting operations in order to limit their 

exposure to NO2. An administrative ruling by the Wyoming EQC, which is 

discussed in Section 3.4.3.3, approved a setback of blasting operations from the 

southern boundary of the Eagle Butte Mine when prevailing winds are blowing 

toward the mine’s downwind neighbors. 

3.4.3.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

The Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would be mined as an integral part of the Eagle 

Butte Mine. FCW anticipates that the average annual coal production would be 

about 25 million tons, with or without the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Eagle 

Butte Mine’s currently approved air quality permit from the WDEQ/AQD allows up 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-55 

to 35 million tons of coal to be mined per year. According to FCW, if the mine 

acquires the additional coal in the LBA tract, production at the Eagle Butte Mine 

would continue at an average rate of 25 mmtpy for up to nine additional years 

under the Proposed Action or the BLM’s preferred tract configuration for 

Alternative 1. 

Potential NOx emissions related to mining operations at the existing Eagle Butte 

Mine are described below. Because of the similarities in mining rates and mining 

operations, the potential impacts of mining the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract have 

been inferred from the projected impacts of mining the existing coal leases as 

currently permitted. 

The WDEQ/AQD has determined that an assessment of annual NOx impacts must 

be included as part of an air quality permitting analysis for new surface coal 

mines and existing mine plans revisions. As discussed in Section 3.4.2.2, 

WDEQ/AQD issued air quality permit MD-1251 for the Eagle Butte Mine on 

October 24, 2005, and the mine was required to conduct NO2 dispersion modeling 

in their permit. Emission rates were determined for the same worst-case years 

used in the PM10 modeling. The amount of NOx emissions from blasting is related 

to the amount of ANFO utilized. NOx emission rates for 2005 and 2006 are 

expected to be 872 tpy and 871 tpy, respectively. NOx modeling closely followed 

many of the same procedures used in the PM10 analysis. Emissions were 

apportioned in a similar manner and the same meteorological data set was used. 

Emissions from neighboring mines and other types of regional sources were also 

determined and considered for 2005 and 2006. Pursuant to WDEQ/AQD 

requirements, emissions from all stationary engines and natural-gas fired heaters, 

which are considered to be NOx point sources at the mine, were considered in the 

inventory. The regional background NOx annual concentration used was 20 

μg/m3. Additional mobile sources were added to describe the railroad locomotives 

and large mining equipment on the Eagle Butte Mine site. Long-term modeling 

indicated the currently projected mine activities will be in compliance with the 

annual NOx AAQS for the life of the Eagle Butte Mine. For year 2005, the 

maximum modeled annual NOx concentration was 33.5 μg/m3 and for year 2006, 

the maximum modeled annual NOx concentration was 35.3 μg/m3 (FCW 2004a). 

Coal production in both years was assumed to be the maximum permitted 

production level of 35 million tons. The locations of the maximum-modeled NOx

concentrations for 2005 and 2006 are shown on Figures 3-6 and 3-7, respectively. 

The potential NOx impacts from mining the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract have been 

inferred to be similar to the currently permitted impacts of mining the existing 

coal leases at the Eagle Butte Mine because of the similarities in mining rates and 

mining operations. 

The average overburden thickness is greater in the LBA tract than within the 

current leases, but the thickness of the coal is about the same as in the existing 

mine area (Table 3-2). The Eagle Butte Mine has never used cast blasting 

techniques to remove overburden. If the Eagle Butte Mine acquires and mines the 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-56 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, there are no plans to change blasting procedures or 

blast sizes associated with the mining of the LBA tract. However, if the average 

annual rate of production is maintained, there would potentially be an increase in 

the frequency of blasting in order to remove the additional volume of overburden 

overlying the coal. 

One cause of incomplete combustion and formation of NO2 in the blasting clouds 

is downhole moisture. Roughly 30 years of surface mining and CBNG 

development has drawn down the water level in the coal in the general analysis 

area; however, there are discontinuous sand bodies in the overburden which are 

generally saturated. The presence of these saturated sand bodies may create 

conditions that are more favorable to the formation of NO2 when blasting is 

conducted; however, as discussed in Section 3.4.3.3, surface coal mine operators 

have developed various techniques to avoid formation of NO2 in the blasting 

clouds. These measures include the use of plastic liners within the shot holes, 

which reduces or eliminates the exposure of the blasting agents to moisture. The 

Eagle Butte Mine has utilized plastic liners in shot holes in the past and may need 

to extend that practice to mining operations on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract in 

order to avoid public exposure to blasting clouds during mining operations. 

Public exposure to emissions caused by surface mining operations is most likely 

to affect travelers on publicly accessible roads and highways that pass through 

and near the area of the mining operations and occupants of dwellings near the 

area of mining operations. As discussed in Section 3.4.2.2.1, there are a number 

of occupied dwellings, businesses, the Gillette – Campbell County Airport, and a 

public school (Rawhide Elementary School) in the area of the existing Eagle Butte 

Mine and the BLM study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (the tract as 

applied for and the additional area evaluated by BLM under Alternative 1), as 

shown in Figure 3-8. Roads, highways, and school bus stops in the vicinity of the 

Eagle Butte Mine and the LBA tract are also shown in Figure 3-8. BLM’s study 

area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, which is shown in Figure 3-8 and 

discussed in Section 2.2, includes the north half of Section 20, T.51N., R.72W, 

where the school and several occupied dwellings (Echo Subdivision) are located. 

However, BLM must consider this coal to be unsuitable for mining, based on 

SMCRA and the associated regulatory requirements (see Section 2.2). BLM’s 

study area also extends south to include a wedge of land lying between the airport 

runways. BLM’s preferred tract configuration, shown in Figure 3-8, does not 

include either the federal coal underlying the school and occupied dwellings in 

Section 20 or the federal coal located between the airport runways. 

The distance between the federal coal included in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

(as applied for or under BLM’s preferred tract configuration) and the occupied 

dwellings and the airport would be similar to, but not less than, the distance 

between the federal coal that has previously been recovered from the existing 

Eagle Butte Mine leases and the dwellings and airport. The distance between the 

coal included in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (as applied for or under BLM’s 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-57 

preferred tract configuration) would be closer to Rawhide Elementary School than 

the federal coal included in any of the existing Eagle Butte Mine leases. 

As discussed in Section 3.4.3.1.2, WDEQ received reports of public exposure to 

blasting clouds from blasting operations at the Eagle Butte Mine prior to 2001 

from residents in the area of the mine (Emme 2007). Subsequently, control 

measures to limit both emissions and public exposure to NO2 from blasting were 

included in the mining permit for the Eagle Butte Mine. Since these control 

measures were implemented, WDEQ/LQD has received one report of an orangetinged blasting cloud at the mine, but no visible NOx fumes were reported leaving 

the mine permit area during that incident (Emme 2007). 

Specific blasting control measures that are used to control NOx are discussed in 

more detail in Section 3.4.3.3. If the Eagle Butte Mine acquires the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract, they will have to amend their current permit to include the new 

lease before mining activities can proceed into the new lease area. According to 

WDEQ, permit conditions designed to control or limit public exposure to NO2 and 

flyrock from blasting operations would be no less stringent for mining operations 

on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract than the permit conditions that are in place for 

blasting operations on the existing Eagle Butte Mine leases (Emme 2007). 

If Eagle Butte Mine acquires the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, current mining 

techniques for removing coal and overburden would be expected to continue for a 

longer period of time than is shown in the currently approved air quality permit. 

Modeling for the current Eagle Butte Mine permit projected no exceedances of the 

annual NOx AAQS at a 35-mmtpy production. Therefore, air quality impacts that 

would result from mining the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract by the applicant at an 

estimated average annual coal production rate of 25 mmt should also be within 

annual AAQS limits. 

3.4.3.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the Eagle Butte West coal lease application would 

be rejected and the Eagle Butte Mine would continue to operate as currently 

permitted. A discussion of the currently permitted mining operations and 

potential impacts related to NOx emissions is included in Section 3.4.3.2.1. 

Impacts related to mining operations at the Eagle Butte Mine would continue on 

the existing mine area as permitted, but mining operations would not be extended 

onto those portions of the LBA tract that will not be affected under the current 

mining and reclamation plan. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-58 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

3.4.3.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation, and Monitoring for NOx Emissions

Several of the surface coal mines in the PRB have undertaken voluntary blasting 

restrictions to avoid NOx impact to the public. Voluntary measures that have been 

instituted, particularly when large blasts are planned include: 

 • telephone notification of neighbors (both private parties and other mining 

operations) in the general area of the mine prior to large blasts; 

 • monitoring of weather and atmospheric conditions prior to the decision to 

detonate a large blast; 

 • minimizing blast size to the extent possible; 

 • posting of signs on major public roads that enter the general mine area and 

on all locked gates accessing the active mine area; 

 • closing public roads that enter the general mine area, depending on wind 

conditions and blast location with respect to the road; and 

 • providing post-blast notification to neighbors of potential exposure to the 

blasting cloud. 

After WDEQ received reports of public exposure to NO2 from blasting operations at 

some of the PRB mines prior to 2001, measures to prevent future such incidences 

were instituted at those mines when large overburden blasts are planned. WDEQ 

has required several mines, including Antelope, North Antelope/Rochelle, Black 

Thunder, Belle Ayr, Eagle Butte, and Wyodak (Figure 1-1), to stop traffic on public 

roads during blasting due to concerns with fly rock and the “startle factor”. Other 

measures that have been instituted as mine permit requirements include: 

 • notification of neighbors and workers in the general area of the mine prior to 

a blast; 

 • blast detonation between 12:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. whenever possible to 

avoid temperature inversions and minimize inconvenience to neighbors; 

 • monitoring of weather and atmospheric conditions prior to the decision to 

detonate a blast; 

 • posting of signs on major public roads that enter the general mine area and 

on all locked gates accessing the active mine area; 

 • closing public roads when appropriate to protect the public; and 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-59 

 • establishment of safe setback distances for blasting operations from the 

mine boundary. 

Two mines in the Wyoming PRB, Black Thunder and Eagle Butte, currently have 

blasting restrictions in their mine permits to address NOx. Measures to control or 

limit both emissions and public exposure to NO2 from blasting presently being 

implemented at the Eagle Butte Mine are defined, in part, by conditions that have 

been included in the WDEQ/LQD Mine Permit No. 428-T5. These conditions 

include such procedures as: 

 • blasting of overburden within certain specified mine areas will not occur 

when the wind is blowing from the blast site toward Rawhide Village to the 

north; 

 • the mine will block traffic on U.S. Highway 14-16 and State Highway 59 for 

all overburden blasts that occur within 1,100 ft of the highway ROW, and 

traffic control points are periodically moved as mining locations change; 

 • a monitoring plan for NOx will be implemented for blasts that require traffic 

control as wind conditions warrant, and NOx monitoring will occur at the 

traffic control point that is downwind from the blast on Highway 14-16 when 

traffic is stopped; and 

 • the mine will use specific blasting methods (low-NOx techniques) that have 

been shown to reduce emissions within specified areas of the mine, 

including a 1,100 ft corridor for public highways. 

On June 26, 2003, the Wyoming EQC issued a Final Order that addresses 

procedures and notification protocols related to providing protections from 

overburden blasting within the Eagle Butte Mine area. The conditions state that 

the following procedures will be used when overburden blasting occurs within 

2,500 feet of the residences and businesses located south and west of the mine: 

 • blast size will be limited to 50,000 pounds; 

 • blasting will be conducted using the low-NOx blasting techniques that have 

been shown to reduce emissions within a 1,100 ft corridor for public 

highways; 

 • no blasting will be conducted when the prevailing winds are blowing toward 

the residences or businesses to the south and west of the mine site; 

 • if wind conditions prevent the Eagle Butte Mine from blasting for more than 

one consecutive day, then the mine can conduct blasting on the second and 

subsequent days regardless of wind conditions, if the mine notifies DEQ 

when blasting must be conducted to avoid “sleeping holes” and if 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-60 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

notifications are made to residences and businesses south and west who 

request such notification. “Sleeping holes” refers to the practice of loading 

holes but not setting off the blast until the next day, which can increase 

emissions of NOx. 

This order also placed limits of the size of the blasting that can be conducted 

within the Eagle Butte Mine Southwest Extension area (the area that was included 

in the Eagle Butte LBA Tract, which was leased to the mine in 1995) and restricts 

blasting in the Southwest Extension area under certain atmospheric conditions. 

Mine operators in the eastern PRB have also been working with blasting agent 

manufacturers to reduce NOx emissions. Efforts to eliminate NOx production have 

included use of different blasting agents, different blends of blasting agents, 

different additives, different initiation systems and sequencing, borehole liners, 

and smaller cast blasts. Operators have tried adding substances like 

microspheres and rice hulls, using different blends of ANFO and slurries and gels, 

using electronic detonation systems that can vary shot timing, different shot hole 

patterns, and using plastic liners within the shot holes. No one single procedure 

or variation has proven consistently successful due to the numerous factors that 

are believed to contribute to the production of NO2. The most successful control 

measure has been reducing the size of the cast blasting shots (Doug Emme 2003, 

Rick Chancellor 2003). The low-NOx emission blasting techniques described above 

coupled with reduced blast size have almost eliminated NOx production at the 

Eagle Butte Mine. The Eagle Butte Mine has never used cast blasting techniques 

and does not propose to use that procedure in the future. The North Antelope 

Rochelle Mine (Figure 1-1) has had success in eliminating NOx in over 75 percent 

of their cast blasting through the use of borehole liners and changing their 

blasting agent blends (Rick Chancellor 2003). 

NO2 was monitored from 1975 through 1983 in Gillette and from March 1996 

through April 1997 at four locations in the PRB. Table 3-6 summarizes the 

results of that monitoring. 

Due to public concerns about emissions of nitrogen dioxides as a result of blasting 

and a general concern of the WDEQ about levels of nitrogen dioxides due to 

development of all types in the eastern PRB, the coal mining industry instituted a 

monitoring network in cooperation with WDEQ/AQD to gather data on NO2 

beginning in 2001. Industry funded and operated the network for approximately 

three years. The 2001 through 2005 data from this regional network are 

summarized in Table 3-7. 

The WDEQ now funds and operates the NO2 monitoring network along the east 

side of the basin. Ownership of the monitoring equipment was transferred to 

WDEQ by the mines and the mines have given ongoing access to the monitoring 

sites and provide electrical power for the instrumentation. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-61 

Table 3-6. Annual Ambient NO2 Concentration Data. 

Site Gillette, WY 

Black 

Thunder 

Mine 

Belle Ayr 

Mine Bill, WY 

Year 

Percent of 

Standard1

Percent of 

Standard1

Percent of 

Standard1

Percent of 

Standard1

1975 6* 

1976 4* 1* 

1977 4* 5* 

1978 11* 

1979 11 

1980 12 

1981 14 

1982 11 

19832 17 

19963 16 16 22 22 

1 Based on arithmetic averaging of data. 

2 Monitoring discontinued December 1983, reactivated March 1996 to April 1997. 

3 Arithmetic average – actual sampling ran from March 1996 to April 1997. 

* Inadequate number of samples for a valid annual average. 

Source: (McVehil-Monnett 1997)

Table 3-7. 2001 Through 2005 Annual Mean NO2 Concentration Data.

Site Address 

2001 

(μg/m3) 

2002 

(μg/m3) 

2003 

(μg/m3) 

2004 

(μg/m3) 

2005 

(μg/m3) 

Thunder Basin National 

Grassland 6* 5 6 4 4 

Campbell County -- -- 13 8 8 

Tracy Ranch -- -- -- 8 -- 

Black Thunder Mine 5** 6 -- -- -- 

Belle Ayr Mine, Site Ba-4 14 14 13 13 13 

Antelope Mine, Site 3 7 6 8 8 9 

* Data for May through December 2001. Monitor was not operational until May 2, 2001.

** Data for the third quarter is questionable and therefore is not used in the determination of 

the annual mean for the site. 

Sources: EPA AirData and WDEQ/AQD databases (EPA 2006d, WDEQ/AQD 2006b).

As represented by Table 3-7, NO2 monitoring data are available from four 

currently active sites in the PRB. With respect to the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, 

the Thunder Basin National Grassland Site is approximately 30 miles northnortheast; the Campbell County Site is approximately 18 miles south-southwest; 

the Belle Ayr Mine Site is approximately 20 miles south-southeast; and the 

Antelope Mine Site is approximately 60 miles south. These monitoring stations 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-62 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

are maintained by WDEQ/AQD and respective mines. The WDEQ/AQD is relying 

on the on-going monitoring data and emission inventories in air quality permit 

applications to demonstrate compliance with the annual NO2 ambient air 

standard (Table 3-3). 

3.4.4 Visibility

Visibility refers to the clarity with which scenic vistas and landscape features are 

perceived at great distances. Visibility can be defined as the distance one can see 

and the ability to perceive color, contrast, and detail. Fine particulate matter 

(PM2.5) is the main cause of visibility impairment. Visual range, one of several 

ways to express visibility, is the furthest distance a person can see a landscape 

feature. Without the effects of human-caused air pollution, a natural visual range 

is estimated to be about 140 miles in the western U.S. and 90 miles in the eastern 

U.S. (EPA 2001b). 

Visibility is also expressed in terms of deciview (dv). The dv index was developed 

as a linear perceived visual change (Pitchford and Malm 1994), and is the unit of 

measure used in the EPA’s Regional Haze Rule to achieve the National Visibility 

Goal. The National Visibility Goal was established as part of the Clean Air Act in 

order to prevent any future, and remedy any existing, impairment of visibility in 

mandatory Federal Class I areas that result from manmade air pollution. The 

deciview index is a scale related to visual perception that has a value near zero for 

a pristine atmosphere. A change in visibility of 1.0 dv represents a “just 

noticeable change” by an average person under most circumstances. Increasing 

dv values represent proportionately larger perceived visibility impairment. 

3.4.4.1 Affected Environment for Visibility

An AQRV is a resource identified by a federal land manager that may be adversely 

affected by a change in air quality. Visibility is a potentially affected resource. 

The potential air pollutant effects on visibility are applied to PSD Class I and Class 

II areas. The land management agency with jurisdiction for the Class I area sets 

an LAC or LOC for each AQRV. The AQRVs reflect the land management agency’s 

policy and are not legally enforceable standards. Table 3-4 shows the distances 

from 31 PSD Class I and Class II areas in the vicinity of the PRB to the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract general analysis area. 

The Regional Haze Rule calls for improved visibility on the most-impaired days 

and no additional impairment on the least-impaired days. EPA participates in the 

IMPROVE visibility monitoring program as part of its visibility protection program. 

The IMPROVE monitoring sites were established to be representative of all Class I 

areas. Figure 3-9 shows annual averages for the 20 percent best, average, and 

worst visibility days at Badlands and Bridger Wilderness Areas from 1989 through 

2003. During that time frame, Badlands National Park has statistically shown 

improved visibility on the least impaired days and no change in visibility on the 
20

18

16

14

12

10

6

4

2

0

1989

IMPROVE Station: BADL

Visibility in Badlands National Park

8

Visibility (dv)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

20% Cleanest

Average

20% Haziest

Visibility in Bridger Wilderness

IMPROVE Station: BRID

20% Cleanest

Average

20% Haziest

2000 2001 2002 2003

20

18

16

14

12

10

6

4

2

0

1989

8

Visibility (dv)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Source: IMPROVE (2005)

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

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-63
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-64 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

average and most-impaired days. Bridger Wilderness has shown no statistically 

significant change in visibility on the least, average, or most impaired days 

(IMPROVE 2005). 

The Wyoming State Implementation Plan for Class I Visibility Protection states: 

“Wyoming’s long term strategy will focus on the prevention of any future visibility 

impairment in Class I areas that can be attributed to a source or small group of 

sources as the Federal Land Managers have not identified any current impairment 

in the State’s Class I areas due to such sources” (WDEQ/AQD 2005c). 

WDEQ/AQD prepared the 2003 Review Report on Wyoming’s Long Term Strategy 

for Visibility Protection in Class I Areas, as required by WAQSR, which calls for 

AQD to review and revise, if appropriate, the Long Term Strategy every three years. 

The 2003 Review Report is available on the WDEQ/AQD website at 

http://deq.state.wy.us/aqd/visibility.asp. 

3.4.4.2 Environmental Consequences for Visibility

3.4.4.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

The impacts to visibility from mining the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract have been 

inferred from the currently permitted impacts of mining the existing coal leases at 

the Eagle Butte Mine. The Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would be mined as part of 

the Eagle Butte Mine. FCW anticipates that the average annual coal production 

would remain at about 25 million tons, with or without the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract. Eagle Butte Mine’s currently approved air quality permit from the 

WDEQ/AQD allows up to 35 million tons of coal to be mined per year. According 

to FCW, if the mine acquires the additional coal in the LBA tract, production at 

the Eagle Butte Mine would continue at an average rate of 25 mmtpy for 

approximately up to nine additional years under the Proposed Action or the BLM’s 

preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1. 

Mining operations using the current Eagle Butte mining techniques for blasting, 

coal removal, and coal hauling, etc. would be expected to continue for a longer 

period of time than was considered in the currently approved air quality permit. 

Material movement would continue to utilize shovels and trucks in overburden 

and coal. Facilities shown in the current air quality permit would not change as a 

result of proposed mining of the LBA tract. There are no plans to change blasting 

procedures or blast sizes associated with the mining of the LBA tract; however, the 

blasting processes and required mitigation measures would be reviewed when the 

mining permit is amended to include the new lease area. The blasting plan would 

be reviewed and modified to incorporate the BACT protection measures that are 

required at that time. 

Surface coal mines are not considered to be major emitting facilities in accordance 

with Chapter 6, Section 4 of WDEQ/AQD Rules and Regulations. Therefore, the 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-65 

State of Wyoming does not require mines to evaluate their impacts on Class I 

areas; however, BLM considers such issues during leasing. 

3.4.4.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the Eagle Butte West coal lease application would 

be rejected and the Eagle Butte Mine would continue to operate as currently 

permitted for about 13.6 more years. Coal removal would not occur on the LBA 

tract. Impacts to visibility related to mining operations at the existing Eagle Butte 

Mine would not occur as a result of mining those portions of the LBA tract that 

will not be affected under the current mining and reclamation plan. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.4.4.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring for Visibility Impacts

As discussed above, fine particulate matter (PM2.5) is the main cause of visibility 

impairment. Mitigation measures being used to limit emissions of particulate 

matter are discussed in Section 3.4.2.3. 

Visibility monitoring within the State of Wyoming consists of both the WDEQ/AQD 

sponsored Wyoming Visibility Monitoring Network and the IMPROVE program. 

WDEQ has sited two visibility monitoring stations in the PRB. One of these sites 

(the Thunder Basin National Grasslands site) is 32 miles north of Gillette and 

includes a nephelometer, a transmissometer, an IMPROVE aerosol sampler, 

instruments to measure meteorological parameters (temperature, RH, wind speed, 

wind direction), a digital camera, instruments to measure ozone and instruments 

to measure oxides of nitrogen (NO, NO2, NOx). The second visibility monitoring 

station (the Cloud Peak Wilderness Area site) is located 14 miles west of Buffalo 

and includes a nephelometer, a transmissometer, an IMPROVE aerosol sampler, 

instruments to measure meteorological parameters, and a digital camera. 

These sites are being utilized to characterize the extent, frequency of occurrence, 

and magnitude of visual air quality impacts. The IMPROVE Steering Committee 

approved the incorporation of the Thunder Basin and Cloud Peak sites into the 

IMPROVE network in June 2002. Although these stations are not located in areas 

classified as Class I areas, the collected data will be comparable to monitoring 

data available from the state’s Class I areas. This information can help scientists 

determine the types and concentrations of air pollutants and their direction of 

travel in order to project visibility impacts to Class I areas. The Wyoming Visibility 

Monitoring Network was recently supplemented with the development of a website 

(http://www.wyvisnet.com/all.html) to allow public access to real-time monitored 

visibility and air quality conditions (WDEQ/AQD 2005d). 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-66 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

3.4.5 Acidification of Lakes

Atmospheric deposition of pollutants (acid rain) causes acidification of lakes and 

streams. According to EPA, sulfur dioxide and NOx, primarily derived from the 

burning of fossil fuels, are the primary causes of acid rain. Most lakes and 

streams have a pH between 6 and 8. Some lakes are more easily affected by, and 

therefore more sensitive to, acid rain than others. The response of lakes to acid 

rain is described in terms of changes to acid-neutralizing capacity, or ANC. The 

lake is the sensitive resource and ANC is the indicator. ANC is a measure of 

buffering capacity, measured in microequivalents per liter (μeq/L), which indicates 

the lake’s capacity to resist acidification from acid rain. Lakes and streams 

become more acidic (i.e., the pH value of the water in the lake goes down) when 

the water itself and its surrounding soil cannot buffer the acid rain enough to 

neutralize it. The more sensitive lakes are generally located in watersheds whose 

soils have a limited ability to neutralize acidic compounds (a lower buffering 

capacity). In areas where buffering capacity is low, acid rain also releases 

aluminum from soils into lakes and streams; aluminum is highly toxic to many 

species of aquatic organisms. 

Several regions in the U.S. were identified in a national surface water survey as 

containing many of the surface waters sensitive to acidification. They include the 

Adirondacks and Catskill Mountains in New York State, the mid-Appalachian 

highlands along the east coast, the upper Midwest, and mountainous areas of the 

western U.S. 

Scientists predict that the decrease in SO2 emissions required by the Acid Rain 

Program will significantly reduce acidification due to atmospheric sulfur. Without 

the reductions in SO2 emissions, the proportions of acidic aquatic ecosystems 

would remain high or dramatically worsen (EPA 2005c). The USDA-FS has been 

monitoring air quality in the Wind River Mountain Range in Wyoming since 1984 

and is seeing a general trend of decreasing sulfates. Nitrates, on the other hand, 

have been increasing globally. 

3.4.5.1 Affected Environment

AQRVs, including the potential air pollutant effects on the acidification of lakes 

and streams, are applied to PSD Class I and Class II areas. The land management 

agency with jurisdiction for the Class I area sets an LAC or LOC for each AQRV. 

The AQRVs reflect the land management agency’s policy and are not legally 

enforceable standards. 

Table 3-8 shows the existing ANC monitored in some mountain lakes and their 

distance from the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract general analysis area. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-67 

Table 3-8. Existing Acid Neutralizing Capacity in Sensitive Lakes. 

Wilderness Area Lake 

Background ANC 

(μeq/L) 

Distance from 

General Analysis 

Area (miles) 

Bridger Black Joe 69.0 250 

 Deep 61.0 240 

 Hobbs 68.0 255 

 Upper Frozen 5.81 260 

Cloud Peak Emerald 55.3 110 

 Florence 32.7 100 

Fitzpatrick Ross 61.4 250 

Popo Agie Lower Saddlebag 55.5 240 

1 The background ANC is based on only six samples taken between 1997 and 2001. 

Source: Argonne (2002) 

3.4.5.2 Environmental Consequences

3.4.5.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

The Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would be mined as part of the Eagle Butte Mine; 

therefore, the impacts to air quality from mining the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

have been inferred from the impacts at the currently permitted mining operation. 

FCW anticipates that average annual coal production would remain at about 25 

mmt, with or without acquisition of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Impacts to 

air quality that would result in lake acidification related to mining the tract as 

applied for or BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1 would be 

similar to the impacts under the No Action Alternative, but they would be 

extended by up to nine additional years. This would mean that mining operations 

using current Eagle Butte mining techniques for blasting, coal removal, and coal 

hauling, etc. would be continue for a longer period of time than was considered in 

the currently approved air quality permit. 

3.4.5.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the Eagle Butte West coal lease application would 

be rejected and the Eagle Butte Mine would continue to operate as currently 

permitted for about 13.6 more years. Coal removal would not occur on the LBA 

tract. Lake acidification impacts related to mining operations at the existing Eagle 

Butte Mine would not be extended onto those portions of the LBA tract that will 

not be affected under the current mining and reclamation plan. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-68 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

3.4.5.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation, and Monitoring

Mitigation and monitoring for coal mine emissions, including the emissions that 

contribute to the acidification of lakes, are discussed in Sections 3.4.2.3, 3.4.2.4., 

3.4.3.3, and 3.4.3.4. Other air quality monitoring programs that are in place in 

the PRB include WARMS monitoring of sulfur and nitrogen concentrations near 

Buffalo, Sheridan, and Newcastle, and NADP monitoring of precipitation chemistry 

in Newcastle. 

3.4.6 Residual Impacts to Air Quality

No residual impacts to air quality would occur following mining and reclamation. 

3.5 Water Resources 

3.5.1 Groundwater

3.5.1.1 Affected Environment

The Eagle Butte West LBA Tract overlies three geologic water-bearing strata that 

have been directly affected by existing mining activities and would be directly 

affected by mining the LBA tract. In descending order, these units are the recent 

alluvium, the Wasatch Formation overburden, and the mineable coal seams in the 

Tongue River Member of the Fort Union Formation, which are referred to as the 

Roland and Smith by the Eagle Butte Mine. The underlying, subcoal Fort Union 

Formation and the Fox Hills Sandstone are utilized for municipal, industrial, and 

domestic water supply by the city of Gillette, residential subdivisions, Eagle Butte 

Mine, and other nearby coal mines, but these units are not physically disturbed 

by mining activities. Both regional and site-specific baseline hydrogeologic 

environments within and around the Eagle Butte Mine are extensively 

characterized in the WDEQ/LQD mining and reclamation permit (FCW 2005a), 

which also provides groundwater monitoring data. Figure 3-2 presents the 

hydrostratigraphic units underlying the general analysis area. 

3.5.1.1.1 Recent Alluvium

Within the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, alluvial (unconsolidated, stream-laid) 

deposits primarily occupy the Little Rawhide Creek valley and the lower-most 

portion of a tributary, Prong Draw, where it joins the main stem of Little Rawhide 

Creek. The Little Rawhide Creek alluvium overlies the Wasatch Formation 

bedrock and the lithologies are very similar at the contact. The thickness of 

alluvial deposits varies from less than one ft to 22 ft, and is typically around 15 ft. 

The lithologic composition of Little Rawhide Creek alluvium varies with respect to 

the lithology of the underlying Wasatch Formation bedrock. The lithology of the 

alluvium is such that it appears to be Wasatch Formation that has been reworked 

by fluvial processes. Certain finite reaches of Little Rawhide Creek alluvial 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-69 

deposits are nearly impermeable and do not readily transmit groundwater due to 

their clayey nature. These reaches generally overlie bedrock strata comprised of 

shales, claystones, and siltstones. Conversely, certain finite reaches of the alluvial 

deposits readily transmit groundwater due to their sandy nature and these 

deposits generally overlie bedrock strata comprised of sands and sandstones (FCW 

2005a). 

Data from Eagle Butte Mine’s Little Rawhide Creek alluvial monitor wells indicate 

that alluvial groundwater flow is down-valley. Recharge to the alluvium comes 

primarily from the underlying bedrock aquifer and precipitation and streamflow 

infiltration, depending upon the season and the extent of alluvial saturation. 

Groundwater elevations fluctuate seasonally, increasing in the spring in response 

to snowmelt and precipitation runoff, and then decreasing throughout the 

remainder of the year (FCW 2005a). 

Aquifer pump testing within the current Eagle Butte Mine permit area 

downstream/downgradient of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract indicates that the 

Little Rawhide Creek alluvium has a very low hydraulic conductivity and, 

therefore, cannot be described as an aquifer in that area. Aquifer tests conducted 

within and upgradient of the LBA tract indicate that the Little Rawhide Creek 

alluvium has a low hydraulic conductivity, ranging from 0.4 ft/day to 7.2 ft/day, 

with a mean value of 4.4 ft/day, which is representative of fine sands and silt and 

clay (FCW 2005a). 

Very little alluvium is present along Prong Draw, with the majority of the valley fill 

consisting of buried, ancestral playa deposits that are overlain by a thin deposit of 

fine-grained eolian materials. The playa deposits, which are buried beneath a 

blanket of eolian materials, contain significant amounts of displacive gypsum, 

indicative of an evaporative depositional environment. Groundwater was found to 

occur within these deposits at a depth between seven and 18 ft below ground 

level. Aquifer tests were conducted to determine the hydraulic conductivity of 

these deposits and found to be very low, ranging from 0.02 ft/day to 0.18 ft/day. 

Given the dominance of clay, the very low permeability, and the limited areal 

extent of the unconsolidated valley fill deposits associated with Prong Draw; these 

deposits are not considered to be an aquifer. 

Little Rawhide Creek alluvial groundwater quality varies greatly. TDS 

concentrations range from around 2,000 mg/L to 20,000 mg\L. The alluvial 

water type is generally a magnesium/sodium-sulfate or a magnesium/calciumsulfate. The sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) values range from 0.94 to 5.48, and 

have a mean value of 3.29. In general, the groundwater in the saturated Little 

Rawhide Creek alluvium is poor quality and unsuitable for domestic consumption 

or irrigation, and it is considered marginal to unsuitable for livestock use. These 

poor water quality characteristics are indicative of limited groundwater circulation 

due to the low permeability of the fine-grained alluvial deposits (FCW 2005a). 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-70 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

The shallow groundwater that occurs beneath Prong Draw is also of poor quality. 

In the upper reaches of the drainage, the TDS concentration is over 3,000 mg/L 

and is a calcium-sulfate type water, which seems to reflect the gypsum-rich valley 

fill materials. In the lower reaches of the drainage, the groundwater quality has 

characteristics of CBNG-produced, sodium-bicarbonate type water. 

The low hydraulic conductivities, limited areal extent of saturation, and poor water 

quality indicate that the alluvium does not exhibit aquifer characteristics adequate 

for agricultural or domestic use. There is currently no known use of alluvial 

groundwater in or near the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Within the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract, Little Rawhide Creek and its alluvial aquifer have not been 

disturbed or impacted by surface coal mining activities at the adjacent Eagle Butte 

Mine to date. 

3.5.1.1.2 Wasatch Formation

Within the PRB, the Wasatch Formation (the strata lying above the mineable coal 

seams, also called the overburden) generally consists of interbedded sands, silts, 

and clays with occasional discontinuous deposits of coal and carbonaceous 

material. This description basically holds true for the area within and around the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. The Wasatch strata range in cohesion from 

unconsolidated (i.e., loose sands and silts) to lithified (sandstones, siltstones, 

shales, and coal stringers). Any of the deposits may be water bearing, although the 

sands and sandstones possess a greater potential for groundwater yield. These 

sands and sandstones are generally discontinuous and separated laterally and 

vertically by the finer-grained siltstone and shale deposits. The discontinuous 

nature of the deposits produces considerable variability in groundwater elevations 

both laterally and vertically. The hydraulic connection between sandstone lenses 

is tenuous due to intervening shale aquitards; thus, groundwater movement 

through the Wasatch Formation overburden is limited. Because the water-bearing 

units within the Wasatch Formation are not continuous, the Wasatch is not 

considered to be a regional aquifer. However, Wasatch sandstones do provide 

limited amounts of groundwater for livestock and domestic uses on a local scale, 

provided the water quality is suitable. 

Another geologic unit that may be considered a part of the Wasatch Formation is 

scoria, also called clinker or burn. It consists of sediments that were baked, 

fused, and melted in place when the underlying coal burned spontaneously. 

These burned sediments collapsed into the void left by the burned coal. Scoria 

can be a very permeable aquifer and can extend laterally for miles in the eastern 

PRB. The occurrence of scoria is site specific, typically occurring in areas where 

coal seams crop out at the surface. The hydrologic function of scoria is to provide 

infiltration of precipitation and recharge to laterally contiguous overburden and 

coal beds. Scoria outcrop areas occur within the northern portion of the Eagle 

Butte Mine’s current permit area. Scoria does not occur on the LBA tract as 

applied for or on the BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-71 

Small, localized deposits do occur in the extreme northwest corner of the 

additional area evaluated by BLM under Alternative 1, in Sections 18 and 19, 

T.51N., R.72W. 

Recharge to the Wasatch Formation in the PRB is predominately from the 

infiltration of precipitation and lateral movement of water from adjacent scoria 

bodies. Regionally, groundwater is discharged from the Wasatch Formation by 

evaporation and transpiration, pumping wells, vertical leakage into the underlying 

coal seams, drainage into mine excavations, and seepage into the overlying 

alluvium along stream courses. Overburden in the vicinity of the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract is recharged naturally by precipitation infiltration into exposed 

sand and sandstone bedrock outcrop areas and infiltration of surface water runoff 

beneath drainages. Additional, artificial recharge occurs where reservoirs have 

been constructed for ranching operations and for storage of CBNG discharge 

water. Locally, groundwater flow in the Wasatch Formation is generally from the 

west and south toward the north where the water discharges into the Little 

Rawhide Creek alluvial groundwater system (FCW 2005a). Overburden sand 

bodies within the Wasatch Formation were the most influential groundwater 

aquifers in the Eagle Butte Mine area prior to mining in that they provided the 

most regionally extensive recharge areas for the underlying coal seams and 

discharged water to Little Rawhide Creek (FCW 2005a). 

For the Wasatch Formation as a whole in the PRB, the discontinuous nature of 

the water bearing units results in low overall hydraulic conductivity and low 

groundwater flow rates. Martin et al. (1988) reported that hydraulic conductivities 

within the Wasatch range from 10-4 ft/day to 102 ft/day, and the mean value, 

based on 203 tests, was 0.2 ft/day. The mean hydraulic conductivity from 70 

aquifer tests using wells completed in sandstone in the Wasatch overburden was 

0.35 ft/day, while that from 63 aquifer tests using wells completed in siltstone 

and claystone in the Wasatch was 0.007 ft/day (Rehm et al. 1980). 

The Wasatch Formation overburden sand bodies appear to be relatively extensive 

within the general analysis area. Thick sand layers were encountered in the 

Wasatch Formation overburden during exploration drilling conducted in 2002 and 

2004 by the Eagle Butte Mine in the general analysis area (refer to Section 3.3). 

These discontinuous sand bodies are generally saturated. Five overburden 

monitoring wells (numbers 345398OW, 344403OW, 350395OW, 357398OW, and 

357402OW) were completed in the saturated overburden sands at that time, the 

locations of which are shown in Figure 3-10. A geologic cross section that 

illustrates the areal extent and continuity of the overburden sand layers in the 

general analysis area is depicted in Figure 3-11. During drilling, the open-hole, 

airlift water production from these five monitoring wells ranged from 25 gpm to 

225 gpm (as illustrated in Figure 3-11). The overburden sand bodies are in 

contact with the overlying Little Rawhide Creek alluvial deposits, although it does 

not appear that the saturated overburden sand bodies are in hydraulic 

communication with the mineable coal zones (referred to as the Roland and Smith 
T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

16

1

2 1

11

3

10

4

9

5

8

6

7

12

13

24

25

36

11

14

23

26

35

10

15

22

27

34

9

21

28

33

8

17

20

29

32

7

18

19

30

31

12

13

24

25

36

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

NSERV2

NSERV1

RHV2004(C)

RHV2002(C)

GT2101(C)

GT2007(U)

GT2005(C)

GT2002(O)

GT2001(C)

GNH3(A)

GN6(C)

EBM390072B(C)

EBM390072A(O)

EB1605(B)

DW1703(O) EB1603(B)

DEQ2001(C)

DEQ1702(C)

DEQ1701(C)

D66LG2(O)

D66LG1(O)

D66LG(C)

D59-1(C)

D490NN(C)

D414NB(C)

D338-2(C)

D338(O)

D266(O)

D201C(C)

D187(O)

D186FD(C)

D106YY(O)

C493IM(O)

C363LA(C)

C217Z(O)

C217(C)

BAN1A(O)

AVF8-4(A)

AVF7-9(A)

AVF7-8(A)

AVF7-4(A)

AVF7-2(A)

AVF6-1(A)

AV5-2(A)

AV4-2(A)

AV3-2(A)

AV2-1(A)

45206OW(O)

430061W(O)

41212OW(O) 41206OW-B(O) 41206OW-A(O)

D490NN1(A)

344403OW(O)

345398OW(O)

350395OW(O)

357398OW(O)

357402OW(O)

BAN1(O)

LEGEND

0 2500 5000 10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Eagle Butte Mine

Permit Boundary

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract

as Applied for

Monitoring Well

Water Supply Well

Alluvium

Overburden

Underburden

Monitoring Well Aquifer

Completion Description

Coal

(B)Backfill

(C)

(U)

(O)

Additional Area Evaluated (A)

Under Alternative 1

Area Added Under BLM's Preferred

Tract Delineation for Alternative 1

Figure 3-10. Locations of Currently Active Groundwater Monitoring and Water Supply Wells at the Eagle

Butte Mine.

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

3-72 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application
SCALE: HORZ. 1'' = 3000', VERT. 1'' = 300'

344403OW

345398OW

350395OW

(225 gpm)

(30 gpm)

2000

4440434042404140404039403840

ELEVATION (ft-msl)

000

COAL

(25 gpm)

8000 4000 6000

COAL

DISTANCE (ft)

CROSS SECTION A-A'

10000 12000

COAL

4540

A

357398OW

357402OW

(75 gpm)

14000 16000 18000

COAL

20000 22000

4440434042404140404039403840

COAL

A'

(150 gpm)

4540

Sand/SandstoneClayClaystone

344403OW

350395OW

T.

51N.

T.

50

N.

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

345398OW

1

25

36

6

32

30

31

27

33

4

A

5

29

3

34

28 26

2

35

1

2536

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

357402OW

A'

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

357398OW

19

13

24

18 17

20

16

21

1423

15

22

13

24

Existing Eagle Butte MineFederal Coal LeasesEagle Butte West LBA Tract as

Applied forAdditional Area Evaluated

Under Alternative 1

Area Added Under BLM's Preferred

Tract Delineation for Alternative 1

Borehole Number 357402OWBorehole

Figure 3-11. Geologic Cross Section of the Wasatch Formation Overburden in the Area of the Eagle Butte

West LBA Tract.

SCALE: 1" = 10,000'

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application CROSS SECTION LOCATION MAP LEGEND

3-73
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-74 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

coal beds by FCW), but rather, are perched above a shale/claystone layer that 

overlies the coal, effectively separating the two aquifers in the general analysis 

area. 

Aquifer pumping tests were conducted in 1980, 1986, and 1998 to help determine 

the aquifer characteristics of the overburden sands in the Eagle Butte Mine area. 

The test results indicate that the hydraulic characteristics of the Wasatch sands 

are highly variable. Hydraulic conductivity values range from approximately 0.02 

ft/day to 3.3 ft/day and storage coefficients indicate the sands are predominately 

unconfined aquifers (FCW 2005a). In 2005, aquifer pumping tests were 

conducted on the five overburden monitoring wells that were recently installed in 

the general analysis area (Figure 3-10). Like the lithology of the overburden in the 

LBA tract, the hydraulic characteristics of the saturated sands are areally 

inconsistent. The hydraulic conductivity values ranged from approximately 0.1 

ft/day to 100 ft/day. 

The overburden aquifer’s saturated thickness is also highly variable, ranging from 

just a few feet in Eagle Butte Mine’s current permit area to over 200 ft in the 

western portion of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Due to the discontinuous 

nature of the deposits, premine overburden groundwater flow in the vicinity of the 

Eagle Butte Mine generally followed the topography, which was basically to the 

north. Groundwater discharge would then occur wherever saturated overburden 

sands were in hydraulic communication with the overlying Little Rawhide Creek 

alluvial deposits. Groundwater movement in the overburden has since been 

affected locally by the mining operations in the area. Current monitoring well data 

indicate that overburden groundwater in the Eagle Butte Mine area still flows from 

south to north and discharges into the mine’s open pits and the Little Rawhide 

Creek alluvial system (FCW 2005b and Hydro-Engineering 2006). Groundwater 

levels measured in 2005 in the five recently installed overburden monitoring wells 

located immediately north, west, and south of the proposed lease area (Figures 3-

10 and 3-11) varied from about 25 ft to 120 ft below land surface. 

The quality of groundwater in the Wasatch Formation aquifer in the Eagle Butte 

Mine area is somewhat variable (FCW 2005a). Baseline groundwater samples 

were collected in 2004 and 2005 from the five recently installed overburden 

monitoring wells. The water quality at all five sites is characterized as a calciumsulfate type and the average TDS concentrations range from 1,390 mg/L (at well 

357398OW) to 4,121 mg/L (at well 344404OW). The median TDS for the Wasatch 

Formation for the group of mines north of Gillette, as calculated by WDEQ/LQD 

based on 752 samples, is 2,326 mg/L (Ogle et al. 2006). Groundwater from all 

five overburden monitoring wells in the general analysis area meets only 

WDEQ/Water Quality Division’s (WQD’s) Class III use suitability classification 

(suitable for livestock and wildlife use) due to excessive concentrations of TDS, 

sulfate, and/or iron. The groundwater quality observed in the overburden sand 

aquifer in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract area is typical of that observed in the 

overburden throughout the existing Eagle Butte Mine area. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-75 

3.5.1.1.3 Roland-Smith/Wyodak-Anderson Coal

The Tongue River Member of the Fort Union Formation contains the mineable coal 

zones; the coal beds are often separated by partings into two or more units. As 

discussed in Section 3.3.1.1, the mineable coal zones are variously referred to as 

the Anderson and Canyon, Wyodak-Anderson, and Wyodak coal beds in the 

eastern PRB. At the Eagle Butte Mine they are referred to as the Roland and 

Smith coal beds or coal seams. In the Eagle Butte Mine area, the Roland Coal 

seam ranges from zero to 70 ft thick, with an average thickness of 40 ft. The 

Smith Coal seam in places reaches thicknesses of over 100 ft, with an average 

thickness of 70 ft. 

The Roland and Smith seams are generally present within the Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract; however, the Roland seam is not present in all areas. The total coal 

thickness ranges from 33.4 ft to 133.1 ft, with overburden thickness ranging from 

182.9 to 459.2 ft. in the proposed lease area. The parting (dark brown to black 

carbonaceous clay and clayey coal) between the Roland and Smith seams ranges 

from one ft to 13 ft thick, where both seams are present. In general, exploration 

drill holes in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for and in the BLM’s 

preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1 had a total of more than 100 ft of 

coal present. A general description of the coal seam aquifer is presented as 

follows. 

The Fort Union coal seams are considered regional aquifers because they are 

water bearing and laterally continuous throughout large areas. Historically, the 

Fort Union coal seams have been a source of groundwater for domestic and 

livestock uses in the eastern PRB. However, due to the one to three degree westnorthwest dip of the coal beds, the coal generally becomes too deep to be an 

economical source of water within a couple of miles west of the PRB surface coal 

mines, including Eagle Butte Mine. 

Hydraulic conductivity within the coal seams is highly variable and reflective of 

the amount of fracturing the coal has undergone, as unfractured coal is virtually 

impermeable. Field tests indicate that the coal has a low to moderate 

transmissivity with a range of roughly three orders of magnitude, with localized 

zones of moderately high transmissivity due to increased fracturing. The yield of 

groundwater to wells and mine pits is smallest where the permeability of the coal 

is derived primarily from localized unloading fractures. The highest permeability 

is imparted to the coal by tectonic fractures. Due to their pronounced surface 

expression, these tectonic fractures are often referred to as “lineaments”. Coal 

permeability along lineaments can be increased by orders of magnitude over that 

in the coal fractured by unloading only. Hydraulic conductivity values, using a 

mean saturated thickness of 100 ft, range from 0.1 to 9.0 ft/day in the Eagle 

Butte Mine area (FCW 2005a). 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-76 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Under premining conditions, water in the coal was confined in places within the 

Eagle Butte Mine permit area and unconfined in others, depending upon whether 

or not an aquiclude (a claystone/shale stratigraphic layer) was present to separate 

the coal from the overlying Wasatch Formation sand lenses. 

Recharge to the coal occurs principally by infiltration in the clinker outcrop areas 

along the eastern flank of the Powder River structural basin. Secondary vertical 

recharge from the overburden also occurs. Prior to mining in the Eagle Butte 

Mine area, groundwater in the areally continuous coal seams flowed down dip to 

the northwest, with local variations caused by hydrologically significant lithologic 

features, including a “no-coal zone” and a paleo-erosional cut-out within the 

overlying Wasatch Formation. The no-coal zone, which is in the northern portion 

of the existing Eagle Butte Mine permit area (in Sections 16 and 21, T.51N., 

R.72W.), is an area where the coal has been replaced with a dominantly 

claystone/shale material of very low permeability that acts as a groundwater dam. 

Groundwater in the coal seams flowed around and over the feature, thus causing 

groundwater to discharge upward into the Little Rawhide Creek alluvial aquifer 

system. The Wasatch cut-out feature is basically where a sand paleo-channel was 

deposited directly over the coal, permitting direct hydraulic communication 

between the coal and overburden aquifers and the Little Rawhide Creek alluvium. 

These local variations play a significant part in the groundwater and surface water 

regimes for Little Rawhide Creek in the Eagle Butte Mine area. Except for the 

limited areas where the coal’s premining potentiometric surface indicated recharge 

upward to Little Rawhide Creek, the movement of groundwater in the Fort Union 

Formation coal zone and the Wasatch Formation overburden was primarily down 

dip (FCW 2005a). 

Site-specific water-level data collected from monitoring wells by Eagle Butte Mine 

and other Gillette area coal mining companies and presented in the GAGMO 20-

year report (Hydro-Engineering 2001) indicate that the groundwater flow 

directions in the mineable coal zones (Roland-Smith/Wyodak-Anderson) have 

been greatly influenced by surface mine dewatering and groundwater discharge 

associated with CBNG development. Groundwater level declines observed near 

active mining areas prior to 1994 were likely due to mine dewatering alone and the 

direction of groundwater flow as toward the mine excavations. By year 2000, 

groundwater level decline rates had dramatically increased because drawdown 

caused by widespread CBNG development west of the mines was overlapping with 

drawdowns caused by mining operations. The extent of drawdown in the coal 

west of the mines that is attributable to mine dewatering can no longer be defined 

due to much greater drawdown in the coal caused by CBNG development (HydroEngineering 2001). The coal seam water level contours presented in the GAGMO 

2005 Annual Report (Hydro-Engineering 2006) depict the groundwater flow 

direction in the Eagle Butte Mine area to be entirely west-northwest, away from 

the open pits. Roughly 30 years of surface mining and CBNG development has 

resulted in complete dewatering of the coal seams in localized areas, particularly 

near the mines’ open pits and where the coal seams are structurally highest. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-77 

Groundwater samples collected from monitoring wells within and around the 

existing Eagle Butte Mine permit area (Figure 3-10) indicate that the TDS 

concentrations in the coal seam water is generally lower than the TDS 

concentrations in the alluvial or overburden groundwater. The composition of 

groundwater in the coal is fairly uniform and there are no seasonal or long-term 

trends. The predominant cation is sodium, while the predominant anion is 

bicarbonate. Those wells located closer to the coal-scoria contact have much 

higher sulfate concentrations. In the general analysis area, TDS concentrations 

range 874 mg/L to 3,316 mg/L, and average approximately 1,700 mg/L. This 

compares to a median TDS of 1,412 mg/L calculated by WDEQ/LQD for the group 

of mines north of Gillette, based on 1,598 samples collected from the coal aquifer 

(Ogle et al. 2006). The average and mean values are calculated differently and are 

not directly comparable, with the average value more likely to be influenced by a 

few high values. Coal groundwater is typically only suitable for livestock and 

wildlife watering purposes because certain constituent concentrations commonly 

exceed many suitability criteria for domestic uses, and the water may have a high 

salinity and sodium hazard, which makes it unsuitable for agricultural uses. 

3.5.1.1.4 Subcoal Fort Union Formation

As discussed in Section 3.3.1.1, the Fort Union Formation is divided into three 

members: the Tongue River Member, the Lebo Member, and the Tullock Member. 

The mineable coal seams occur within the Tongue River Member. The subcoal 

Fort Union Formation consists primarily of lithified sands and shales, and is 

divided into three hydrogeologic units: the upper Tongue River aquifer, the Lebo 

confining layer, and the Tullock aquifer (Law 1976). Of the three units, the 

Tullock is the most prolific in terms of groundwater yield. 

Mining does not directly disturb the hydrogeologic units below the mineable coal, 

but many PRB mines use them for industrial water supply wells. In a few cases, 

there have been drawdowns in the subcoal aquifer due to leakage into mine pits, 

dewatering, and CBNG development (BLM 2001a). 

Transmissivities are generally higher in the deeper Tullock aquifer than in the 

shallower Tongue River aquifer. The average transmissivity for the Tullock, as 

reported by OSM (1984), is 290 ft2/day. Many mines in the PRB have watersupply wells completed in this interval (Martin et al. 1988), which is also utilized 

for municipal, industrial, and domestic water supply by the City of Gillette and 

residential subdivisions. 

Data from drilling water supply wells at Eagle Butte Mine indicate that the 

subcoal Fort Union Formation is rather impermeable above a depth of about 670 

ft below ground level. The Eagle Butte Mine uses two wells completed in the 

Tullock aquifer (NSERV1 and NSERV2) at depths of 900 to 1,000 ft for its water 

supply (Figure 3-10). 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-78 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

The water quality of the subcoal Fort Union Formation is generally suitable for 

domestic use and may be suitable for irrigation, depending upon TDS 

concentrations and site-specific SAR values. TDS concentrations measured in 

various subcoal Fort Union Formation water supply wells in the eastern PRB 

range from 230 mg/L to 520 mg/L. Well NSERV1 is sampled periodically and the 

water quality meets WDEQ/AQD Class I standards (WDEQ 2005); it is a sodium 

bicarbonate type with TDS concentrations of approximately 280 mg/L and a pH of 

8.0 (FCW 2004b and 2005b). 

3.5.1.2 Environmental Consequences

3.5.1.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

Surface coal mining impacts the quantity of the groundwater resource in two 

ways: 1) the coal aquifer and any aquifers present in the overburden are removed 

from the mined areas during and replaced with unconsolidated backfill after the 

coal is removed, and 2) water levels in the coal and overburden aquifers adjacent 

to the mine pits are depressed as a result of seepage into and dewatering from the 

open excavations in the area of coal and overburden removal. 

If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased under the Proposed Action or the 

BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1, the area of coal removal and 

reclamation would increase, which would result in an increase in the area of 

mining-related impacts to groundwater quantity. Currently approved mining will 

remove the Wasatch Formation overburden, Fort Union Formation interburden 

(where present), and coal on the existing leases at the Eagle Butte Mine and 

replace these stratified units with backfill material composed of an unlayered 

mixture of the shale, siltstone, and sand that makes up the existing Wasatch 

Formation overburden and Fort Union Formation interburden (where present). 

The existing leases currently include approximately 5,524 acres. Mining the LBA 

tract as a maintenance lease would extend the area of overburden and coal 

removal by about 2,395 acres under the Proposed Action up to about 2,415 acres 

under BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1. 

If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased and mined, the coal and overburden 

aquifers within the tract would be completely dewatered and removed and the area 

of drawdown caused by coal and overburden removal would be extended further to 

the west of the active mine area. In general, the extent that drawdowns would 

propagate away from the mine pits would be a function of the water-bearing 

properties of the aquifer materials. In materials with high transmissivity and low 

storativity, drawdowns would extend further from the pit face than in materials 

with lower transmissivity and higher storage capacity. While there would be 

variations in hydrologic properties, the time the pits are open, the distance from 

mining and the dewatering that has already occurred as a result of previous 

mining and CBNG development, the area subject to lower water levels would 

increase roughly in proportion to the increase in area affected by mining. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-79 

In general, due to the variable lithologic makeup of the Wasatch Formation 

overburden (discontinuous sandstone and sand lenses in a matrix of siltstone and 

shale), drawdowns in the overburden are variable and do not extend great 

distances from the active mine pits. Overburden water levels are currently being 

monitored by Eagle Butte Mine at 18 monitoring wells (Figure 3-10). Historical 

data do not indicate that mine dewatering has necessarily caused water levels in 

the overburden to be depressed in direct proportion to distance and direction from 

the active pits or to the time since mine dewatering began. The maximum 

drawdown observed is approximately 60 ft at a single well located about 500 ft 

from an active pit. Drawdown measured at all of the other active overburden 

monitoring wells ranges from about 32 ft to two ft, and none of these wells are 

located more than 4,000 ft from an open pit (Hydro-Engineering 2006, FCW 

2005b). 

In 1998, Eagle Butte Mine used the numerical groundwater flow model 

MODFLOW to predict the extent of the life-of-mine drawdowns in the local 

overburden aquifer system attributable to mining the existing leases (WWC 1998). 

The results of the groundwater modeling are reported in Appendix 4.6-3, Section 

4.6 of the Eagle Butte Mine Permit 428-T5 (FCW 2005a). Based on the 1998 

modeling, the predicted five ft drawdown contour in the overburden aquifer over 

the life of the Eagle Butte Mine extends approximately two miles south and two 

miles west of the current mine permit boundary. The five ft drawdown contour in 

the Wasatch overburden sand aquifer over the life of the Eagle Butte Mine if the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased and mined is therefore predicted to extend a 

radius of approximately two miles beyond the areas of overburden removal. This 

extrapolation serves as a general approximation of the potential impacts, based on 

previous experience, but it does not take into account variations in hydrologic 

properties, the time the pits are open, and the dewatering that has occurred as a 

result of previous mining. More precise predictions of the extent of drawdowns 

would be required in order to amend the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract into the 

WDEQ/LQD permit area, if the Eagle Butte Mine acquires the Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract. 

Water level drawdowns propagate farther and in a more consistent manner in the 

coal seam aquifers than in the overburden due to the regional continuity and 

higher transmissivity of the coal seams. Drawdowns in the coal aquifers are 

primarily a function of distance from the pit, although geologic and hydrologic 

barriers and boundaries such as crop lines, fracture zones, and recharge sources 

can also influence drawdowns. Drawdowns within the coal from 1980 to 1990 in 

the Eagle Butte Mine area were fairly rapid and inversely proportional to the 

distances between the monitoring wells and the active pit. By 1995, the rate of 

drawdown had declined and drawdown was probably being caused by both mine 

pit dewatering and CBNG production. The extent of coal-mining related 

drawdown in the coal (the five ft drawdown contour) in 1995 was approximately 

two miles west and from one to 2.5 miles south of Eagle Butte Mine’s active pit. 

At that time, a maximum of approximately 160 ft of drawdown had occurred 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-80 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

adjacent to the mine’s active pit (Hydro-Engineering 1996). Since 1995, BLM and 

state monitoring wells located at varying distances west of the mines’ groundwater 

monitoring networks have recorded an increased rate of drawdown in the coal as a 

result of CBNG production. By year 2000, the five ft drawdown contour extended 

approximately four to five miles south of the Eagle Butte Mine and could no longer 

be defined to the west due to the much larger drawdown caused by CBNG 

development (Hydro-Engineering 2001). In 2000, monitoring wells located 

immediately adjacent to the active pit had recorded around 180 ft of drawdown; 

however, drawdowns extrapolated by Hydro-Engineering (2001) using BLM and 

state monitoring well data exceeded 200 ft at a distance of over four miles west of 

the mine pit. As of 2004, minimal additional drawdown had occurred immediately 

adjacent the advancing pit, although an additional 100 ft of drawdown had 

occurred in the vicinity of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (Hydro-Engineering 

2004). As of 2005, dewatering by existing mining and CBNG development 

activities in the area of the Eagle Butte Mine had nearly completely drained 

groundwater from the coal seams, particularly near the open mine pits and where 

the coal seams are structurally highest (Hydro-Engineering 2006). The direction 

of groundwater flow within the LBA tract is now to the west-northwest rather than 

toward the Eagle Butte Mine’s open pits to the east. Groundwater level 

monitoring data are included in the annual progress reports that Eagle Butte Mine 

submits to the WDEQ/LQD, as well as in the GAGMO annual reports. 

In 1991, the numerical flow model MODFLOW was used to predict the extent of 

water level drawdown in the Roland and Smith coal aquifers attributable to mining 

the existing leases at the Eagle Butte Mine. The results of the groundwater 

modeling are reported in Section 3.5, Appendix 3.5-10, of the Eagle Butte Mine 

428-T5 Permit (FCW 2005a). In 1995, the Eagle Butte Mine acquired the Eagle 

Butte LBA Tract, which is called the Southwest Extension Amendment Area in the 

Eagle Butte Mine permit document. In 1998, the coal aquifer drawdown estimates 

were updated in order to address the impacts of mining the Eagle Butte LBA Tract 

in the WDEQ/LQD mine permit. The 1998 predictions were extrapolated by 

extending the life-of-mine five ft drawdown contour to the west and south by the 

dimensions of the Eagle Butte LBA Tract. (The coal seams are not areally 

continuous east and north of the mine.) This method of prediction was approved 

by the WDEQ/LQD in light of the extensive drawdowns associated with offsite 

CBNG development. It would have been difficult or impossible to verify a new 

model predicting impacts due to surface coal mining only and track its predictions 

against measured drawdowns (FCW 2005a). 

The predicted extent of coal-mining related drawdown (five ft contour) in the 

Roland and Smith coal seams over the life of the Eagle Butte Mine if the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract is mined is shown on Figure 3-12. The life-of-mine 

drawdown shown in this figure extends the predicted 1998 life-of-mine five ft 

drawdown contour westward by the dimensions of the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract. This extrapolation serves as a general approximation of the potential 

impacts, based on previous experience, but it does not take variations in 

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-82 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

hydrologic properties, the time the pits are open, the distance from mining and 

dewatering that has occurred as a result of previous mining and CBNG 

development into account. More precise predictions of the extent of drawdowns 

may be required in order to amend the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract into the 

WDEQ/LQD permit area, if the Eagle Butte Mine acquires the Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract. 

The subcoal aquifers (i.e., Tullock Member of the Fort Union Formation and Lance 

Formation-Fox Hills Sandstone) are not removed or disturbed by mining, so they 

are not directly impacted by coal mining activity. The Eagle Butte Mine has two 

water supply wells completed in the Tullock aquifer below the Roland and Smith 

coal seams. If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased by the applicant, water 

would be produced from these wells for a longer period of time, but FCW would 

not require additional sub-coal wells to mine the LBA tract. 

As noted above, the existing layers of sediment and rock in the area of coal 

removal would be replaced by generally homogeneous, unconsolidated backfill 

material, which would recover as a single hydrostratigraphic unit. The backfill 

unit created in the LBA tract area would be in hydraulic communication with the 

undisturbed coal, overburden, and adjacent mine backfill aquifer system. 

Premining recharge areas, described in Section 3.5.1.1, would not be disturbed by 

mining. Surface infiltration recharge rates for the backfill materials should be 

equivalent to or somewhat greater than infiltration recharge through undisturbed 

overburden, due primarily to the generally flatter topography resulting in less 

surface runoff. 

The hydraulic properties of the backfill aquifer, based on the results of aquifer 

testing at mines in the PRB, are quite variable although they are generally equal to 

or greater than the undisturbed overburden and coal aquifers (Van Voast et al. 

1978 and Rahn 1976). To date, not all of the backfilled materials have reached an 

adequate saturated thickness to be aquifer tested at the Eagle Butte Mine, but two 

backfill monitoring wells (EB1603 and EB1605) were tested in 2000. The backfill 

at these two well locations (Figure 3-10) is approximately 180 ft and 190 ft thick 

and the saturated thickness at that time was approximately 78 ft and 90 ft, 

respectively. Hydraulic conductivity values were determined to be 1.1 ft/day and 

2.1 ft/day (FCW 2005a), which is comparable to the hydraulic conductivity values 

for the undisturbed overburden and coal seams within the Eagle Butte Mine area. 

These data provide an indication that the backfill would readily resaturate as 

postmining potentiometric elevations recover in the surrounding undisturbed 

aquifers, and that wells completed in the backfill (including in the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract) would be capable of supplying sufficient yields to wells 

constructed for livestock watering uses. 

Mining and reclamation also impacts groundwater quality; the TDS concentration 

in the water resaturating the backfill is generally higher than the TDS 

concentration in groundwater from the coal seam aquifer prior to mining. This is 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-83 

due to the exposure of fresh mineral surfaces to groundwater that moves through 

the backfill. Research conducted by Van Voast and Reiten (1988), who analyzed 

data from the Decker and Colstrip Mine areas in Montana, indicates that upon 

initial saturation, mine backfill is generally high in TDS concentration and 

contains soluble salts of calcium, magnesium and sodium sulfates. As the backfill 

is resaturated, the soluble salts are leached by groundwater inflow and TDS 

concentrations tend to decrease with time, indicating that the long term 

groundwater quality in mined and off-site lands would not be compromised (Van 

Voast and Reiten 1988). Using data compiled from 10 surface coal mines in the 

eastern PRB, Martin et al. (1988) concluded that backfill groundwater quality 

improves markedly after the backfill is leached with one pore volume of water. 

Clark (1995) conducted a study to determine if the decreases predicted by 

laboratory studies actually occur onsite. In the area of the West Decker Mine near 

Decker, Montana, his study found that dissolved solids concentrations increased 

when water from an upgradient coal aquifer flowed into a backfill aquifer, and 

apparently decreased along an inferred path from a backfill aquifer to a 

downgradient coal aquifer. 

Groundwater quality within the backfill at the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would 

be expected to be similar to groundwater quality measured in existing wells 

completed in the backfill at the Eagle Butte Mine. To date, two wells (EB1603 and 

EB1605) have been installed to monitor water levels and water quality in the 

backfill at the Eagle Butte Mine. Water quality in these two backfill monitoring 

wells have been and continue to be sampled on a quarterly schedule. TDS 

concentrations in samples collected from well EB1603, from 2000 through 2004, 

have ranged from 4,281 to 4,822 mg/L, with a geometric mean of 4,497 mg/L. 

TDS concentrations in samples collected from well EB1605, from 2000 through 

2004, have ranged from 5,286 to 6,072 mg/L, with a geometric mean of 5,804 

mg/L (Hydro-Engineering 2006). WDEQ/LQD calculated a median TDS 

concentration of 5,016 mg/L for the backfill aquifer in the northern group of 

mines, which includes the Eagle Butte Mine and adjacent mines (Figure 1-1), 

based on 429 samples (Ogle et al. 2006). The average and mean values are 

calculated differently and are not directly comparable, with the average value more 

likely to be influenced by a few high values. 

TDS concentrations observed to date in samples from these two Eagle Butte Mine 

backfill monitoring wells are generally higher than those from the undisturbed 

Roland and Smith coal seams or Wasatch Formation overburden. However, water 

quality samples from most of the mine’s alluvial monitoring wells and at least two 

overburden monitoring wells have higher TDS concentrations (FCW 2004b and 

2005b). Postmining groundwater quality would be expected to improve after one 

pore volume of water moves through the backfill. In general, the mine backfill 

groundwater TDS can be expected to range from 3,000 to 6,000 mg/L, similar to 

the Wasatch Formation aquifer, and meet Wyoming Class III standards for use as 

stock water. 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-84 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Changes to the premining hydraulic characteristics of the alluvial aquifer and the 

quality of alluvial groundwater are expected to be minor after final reclamation, 

because Eagle Butte Mine would be required to maintain the essential hydrologic 

functions of Little Rawhide Creek and its alluvial groundwater system (as is 

currently required for the already-approved mining operations affecting Little 

Rawhide Creek). See additional discussion in Section 3.5.1.3. 

As discussed in Chapter 2, the Proposed Action and Alternative 1 assume that this 

LBA tract would be leased as a maintenance tract to an existing mine. As 

discussed above, there have been drawdowns in the coal and overlying aquifers as 

a result of the existing approved mining and the existing CBNG development in 

the vicinity of the LBA tract. As of May 2006, the level of groundwater in the 

Roland and Smith coal beds in the general analysis area had already been lowered 

to near the base of the coal as a result of dewatering by existing mining and CBNG 

development activities in the area. The potential overlapping impacts of the 

existing mining activities with other proposed activities are discussed in 

Chapter 4. 

3.5.1.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the Eagle Butte West coal lease application would 

be rejected and coal removal would not occur on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 

Impacts to groundwater resources related to existing approved mining and CBNG 

development, described above, would continue as permitted on the existing Eagle 

Butte Mine leases. Mining operations would not be extended onto portions of the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract that will not be affected under the current mining and 

reclamation plan. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.5.1.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring

In order to obtain a mining and reclamation permit, the Eagle Butte Mine was 

required to evaluate regional and site-specific baseline hydrogeologic 

environments within and around the mine and use a groundwater flow model to 

predict the extent of water level drawdown in the Wasatch Formation overburden 

and Roland and Smith coal aquifers that would occur as a result of mining the 

existing leases at the Eagle Butte Mine. Results of these studies are included in 

the WDEQ/LQD mine permit (FCW 2005a). If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is 

leased and mined, the permit for the Eagle Butte Mine would have to be amended 

to include the tract, and these studies would be revised accordingly. 

As discussed in Section 3.5.3.3, SMCRA and Wyoming State Statutes require mine 

operators to provide the owner of a water right whose water source is interrupted, 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-85 

discontinued, or diminished by mining with water of equivalent quantity and 

quality. 

The surface coal mines, including Eagle Butte Mine, are required to monitor water 

levels and water quality in the overburden, coal, interburden, underburden, and 

backfill. Groundwater monitoring wells installed by Eagle Butte Mine within and 

around the current permit area have been used to evaluate groundwater 

conditions since 1974. A total of 139 wells have historically been installed for 

monitoring purposes at the Eagle Butte Mine. Most monitor wells were installed 

between 1975 and 1992 and used for long-term monitoring purposes before either 

being removed by mining operations or discontinued. Wells for which monitoring 

has been discontinued are still in place and may be reincorporated into the 

monitoring network in the future. Additional wells have been installed as mining 

has progressed. Currently, there are 56 wells in and surrounding the mine permit 

area that are actively being monitored by FCW: 12 in the alluvium, 22 in the 

overburden, 19 in the coal, two in the mine backfill, and one in the aquifer below 

the coal. The locations of these monitoring wells are shown on Figure 3-10. 

The Eagle Butte Mine’s WDEQ/LQD mine permit requires the mine to maintain 

the essential hydrologic functions of Little Rawhide Creek and its alluvial 

groundwater system that were identified prior to mining. In order to meet this 

requirement, the stream-laid alluvial materials are salvaged and stockpiled during 

mining and would be replaced upon final reclamation. This requirement would be 

extended to include mining operations on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, if it is 

leased. 

As stated in Sections 3.5.1.1.1 and 3.5.1.1.2, overburden sand bodies within the 

Wasatch Formation provide recharge for the Little Rawhide Creek alluvial 

groundwater system, which in turn contributes to Little Rawhide Creek 

streamflow. In order to maintain the hydrologic balance between the overburden 

sand aquifers and Little Rawhide Creek, and to restore the essential hydrologic 

functions of the Little Rawhide Creek AVF, WDEQ/LQD determined that discharge 

from the overburden aquifers to the alluvium must be reestablished after mining 

(FCW 2005). Eagle Butte Mine therefore committed, as part of their existing 

permit, to reconstructing a sand body aquifer during reclamation to replace a 

hydrologically significant overburden sand aquifer removed during mining. The 

majority of the general backfill is siltstones and shales, but sand within the 

overburden was selectively used for the reconstructed sand body, which is 

therefore expected to exhibit aquifer characteristics similar to the premining sand 

body. Eagle Butte Mine also committed to replacing the alluvial deposits along 

Little Rawhide Creek that were in contact with the overburden sand aquifer prior 

to mining in order to maintain the premining hydrologic balance and support the 

postmining land uses (FCW 2005a). Eagle Butte Mine’s current hydrologic 

restoration plan includes a reconstructed sand body aquifer that will be in 

hydraulic communication with a saturated, undisturbed sand body along the 

western limit of mining and an infiltration pond within the reconstructed Little 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-86 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Rawhide Creek stream channel. If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is acquired by 

the Eagle Butte Mine and the proposed lease area is amended into the 

WDEQ/LQD permit area, more extensive reconstruction of hydrologically 

significant overburden sand body aquifers and the Little Rawhide Creek alluvial 

aquifer may be required in order to maintain the premining hydrologic balance 

and support the postmining land uses. 

3.5.2 Surface Water

3.5.2.1 Affected Environment

The existing Eagle Butte Mine permit area and the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract are 

located within the Little Rawhide Creek and Dry Fork Little Powder River 

watersheds. The majority of the mine’s permit area lies within the Little Rawhide 

Creek drainage basin and only the extreme eastern portion of the permit area is 

drained by the Dry Fork Little Powder River. Little Rawhide Creek and its 

tributary, Prong Draw, drain the general analysis area for the Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract. Little Rawhide Creek flows from south to north and empties into 

Rawhide Creek about three miles north of the LBA tract. Rawhide Creek is a 

tributary to the Little Powder River, which joins the Powder River near Broadus, 

Montana. Surface water features in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract and the 

surrounding areas prior to all mining disturbance are displayed in Figure 3-13. 

The main channel of Little Rawhide Creek is within the eastern portion of the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, which is inside the current Eagle Butte Mine permit 

area (Figure 3-13). Little Rawhide Creek is currently diverted from its natural 

channel by Diversion No. 6 to facilitate mining within the current Eagle Butte 

Mine permit area. Little Rawhide Creek Diversion No. 6 was constructed in 1981. 

The diversion channel begins inside the LBA tract area, immediately downstream 

of the Highway 14-16 crossing in the NW1⁄4SE1⁄4 of Section 20, T.51N., R.72W., 

then runs to the northeast until it empties into a reservoir located in the Rawhide 

Mine permit area. Little Rawhide Creek Diversion No. 6 is shown in Figure 3-13. 

Other surface runoff control structures (e.g., reservoirs and diversion channels) 

have been constructed on Little Rawhide Creek’s ephemeral tributaries within the 

current Eagle Butte Mine permit area. 

Gently rolling topography characterizes the drainage basin of Little Rawhide Creek 

within and upstream of the LBA tract. Near the headwaters, the stream channel 

elevation is about 4,500 ft. The channel elevation is about 4,300 ft where it enters 

the LBA tract, about 4,260 ft where the Little Rawhide Creek Diversion No. 6 

begins, and approximately 4,100 ft at the confluence with Rawhide Creek. The 

channel slope, or gradient, from the headwaters to the diversion is approximately 

23 ft per mile (0.004 ft/ft), and from there to the mouth of the stream the channel 

gradient is about 15 ft per mile (0.003 ft/ft). Little Rawhide Creek has a total 

drainage area of approximately 34.1 square miles. At the upstream end of the 
5

8

17

6

7

18

1

12

13

2

11

14

3

10

15

4

9

16

24

25

36

14

23

26

35

15

22

27

34

16

21

28

33

20

29

32

19

30

31

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

T.

52

N.

T.

51

N.

16

4

9

16

5

8

17

6

7

18

1

12

13

2

11

14

3

10

15

4

9

24

25

36

23

26

35

22

27

34

21

28

33

28

20

29

32

19

30

31

R. 72 W. R. 71 W.

T.

52

N.

T.

51

N.

Rawhide

Creek

Little

Powder River

Dry

1

12

13

2

11

14

3

10

15

4

9

16

5

8

17

6

7

18

20

29

32

19

30

31

24

25

36

23

26

35

22

27

34

21

28

33

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

1

12

13

2

11

14

3

10

15

4

9

16

4

9

16

5

8

17

6

7

18

21

28

33

20

29

32

19

30

31

24

25

36

23

26

35

22

27

34

21

28

33

R. 72 W. R. 71 W. GILLETTE

Little Rawhide

Creek

Fork

Little

Moyer Springs

Powder

River

Little

Powder

River

Rawhide

Creek

EB-12

EB-2

EB-11

Little Rawhide

Creek

Diversion #6 Prong

Draw

EB-2

EB-1

Prong

East

LEGEND

Eagle Butte Mine Permit Boundary

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as Applied for

5000 10000 Active Surface Water Monitoring Site

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

0 20000

Ephemeral or Intermittent Stream

Perennial Stream

Surface Water Monitoring Site, Discontinued in 1981

Surface Water Monitoring Site, Discontinued in 1985

Additional Area Evaluated Under Alternative 1

Area Added Under BLM's Preferred

Tract Delineation for Alternative 1

Figure 3-13. Surface Water Features Within and Adjacent to the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract.

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-87
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-88 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

diversion, approximately where the stream leaves the LBA tract, the drainage area 

is about 21.2 square miles. 

Prong Draw flows diagonally across the LBA tract from southwest to northeast and 

joins with the main channel of Little Rawhide Creek near the eastern boundary of 

the LBA tract (Figure 3-13). The average channel gradient through the LBA tract 

is 0.006 ft/ft, with a total drop of about 85 ft. Prong Draw drains about 59 

percent of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract and has a total drainage area of 

approximately 3.4 square miles. No natural topographic depressions, internally 

drained areas, or playas exist within the general analysis area. No springs occur 

within the general analysis area. 

Seven reservoirs used for livestock watering and storage of groundwater 

discharged from CBNG wells are currently located on the BLM study area for the 

LBA tract (the tract as applied for and the additional area evaluated under 

Alternative 1). Two of these reservoirs are located on Little Rawhide Creek and the 

other five are located on Prong Draw and its tributaries. 

The Little Rawhide Creek valley includes areas underlain by both alluvium and 

colluvium and exhibits a winding course. It is bounded on its sides by slope 

wash, fan deposits, and bedrock outcrops. There is evidence of abandoned 

meander scars within the valley, which range in width from 250 ft to 1,350 ft. In 

the general analysis area, numerous man-made modifications (e.g., 

impoundments and diversion dikes) have been constructed along the main 

channel and tributaries to Little Rawhide Creek. The width and depth of the 

channel varies considerably, primarily due to the effects of these channel 

modifications. The stream alternately forms pools and constrictions along its 

length. The pools average about 50 ft in length and the constricted “riffle” areas 

average about 200 ft in length. The pools are important with respect to the 

interaction between surface water and groundwater and for use by livestock and 

wildlife in dry months. Upstream from the impoundments and diversions, the 

channel is as much as 20 ft wide and filled with soft silts and clays high in organic 

matter that obscure the natural channel geometry. In areas well upstream of the 

channel modifications the channel is normally about two to six ft wide and about 

1.5 ft deep and is often partially or totally covered with cattails or grasses. 

Numerous impoundments have also been constructed along the Prong Draw 

channel, most of which are associated with the storage of groundwater discharged 

by CBNG development. 

Eagle Butte Mine established a surface water monitoring network in 1974 to 

assess the pre- and during-mining surface water quantity and quality 

characteristics of Little Rawhide Creek. Continuously recording discharge gaging 

stations, sites EB-1 and EB-2, were established in March 1974. Site EB-1 was 

deactivated in 1985 and site EB-12 was established south of the Eagle Butte Mine 

permit boundary to replace EB-1. Site EB-2 was moved to its current location in 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-89 

1990 to accommodate Rawhide Mine advances. The locations of these surface 

water monitoring sites are depicted on Figure 3-13. 

Flow in the stream is influenced by the in-channel impoundments; however, the 

storage capacity of those impoundments is relatively small. Streamflow 

hydrographs recorded at gaging stations EB-1 and EB-2 indicate that Little 

Rawhide Creek streamflow during baseline conditions (pre-1977) was 

characterized by wide fluctuations on a seasonal and annual basis. Due to the 

short duration, high intensity nature of summer storms in this area, flow events 

were typically of short duration and sharply peaked. Flow typically occurred 

rapidly in response to large storm events, and then tapered off to no flow within a 

few days. The larger storms produced enough runoff to fill the channel 

impoundments and recharged the alluvium along Little Rawhide Creek, resulting 

in a prolonged period of flow due to alluvial groundwater seepage. 

Before mining and CBNG development activities commenced in this part of the 

PRB, streamflow above (upstream of) a point roughly in the center of Section 29, 

T.51N., R.72W. was more ephemeral in nature, generally occurring only in direct 

response to precipitation and snowmelt runoff events. However, downstream of 

that point, stream baseflow was sustained by groundwater discharging from 

underlying bedrock and alluvial aquifers, thus making the stream more 

intermittent in nature. The annual discharge volumes of Little Rawhide Creek 

recorded at site EB-12 (upstream site) over the 21-year period of record (1985-

2005) is 148 ac-ft. The annual discharge volumes of Little Rawhide Creek 

recorded at site EB-2 (downstream site) over the 32-year period of record (1974-

2005) is 403 ac-ft. 

Prior to the relatively recent effects from the surface discharge of groundwater 

associated with CBNG development and drought conditions in northeastern 

Wyoming (Curtis 2004), streamflow in Little Rawhide Creek was of short duration 

and exhibited temporal patterns similar to precipitation events. Under current 

conditions, discharges from CBNG development in the Little Rawhide Creek 

drainage basin have altered the frequency and duration of streamflow events in 

the main stream and most of its tributaries. Annual streamflow at site EB-2 from 

2001 through 2005 is 28.6 ac-ft; only 9.6 percent of the 32-year mean. Annual 

precipitation amounts have been considerably below normal since the spring of 

2000 (Curtis 2004), which has resulted in below normal streamflows. In 2004, 

Eagle Butte Mine’s meteorological monitoring station recorded only 8.1 inches of 

precipitation, which is 47 percent of the annual average. Concurrently, 

streamflow recorded at site EB-12 has been considerably higher than at site EB-2 

six of the last seven years, which is the reverse of baseline/natural conditions. 

The mean annual discharge at site EB-12 from 2001 through 2005 is 101 ac-ft; 68 

percent of the 21-year mean. This anomalous streamflow condition is attributable 

to the augmentation from CBNG groundwater discharge outfalls that are located 

relatively near site EB-12. In addition, streamflow between these two gaging 

stations is being lost by discharge to the alluvium and underlying overburden 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-90 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

aquifers. Shallow impoundments along the stream channel that are located 

immediately upstream and downstream of site EB-12 presently hold water yearround, although water does not flow continuously within the channel 

downstream. Streamflow recorded at these two gaging sites from October 2000 

through August 2005 indicate that flow occurred at site EB-12 on approximately 

67 percent of the days that the site was operational, compared to approximately 

32 percent of the days that site EB-2 was operational. 

Eagle Butte Mine has not monitored the streamflow of Prong Draw; however, 

surface runoff flood estimates for the drainage were computed and are included in 

the mine permit (FCW 2005a). 

Little Rawhide Creek is listed in the WDEQ/WQD Surface Water Classification List 

as a Class 3B stream that is not protected for drinking water or as a fishery, but is 

protected for other aquatic life, recreation, wildlife, agriculture, industry, and 

scenic value. All other ephemeral streams draining the existing Eagle Butte Mine 

permit area and LBA general analysis area are categorized as Class 4 streams 

(where it has been determined that aquatic life uses are not attainable) 

(WDEQ/WQD 2005). 

Eagle Butte Mine has monitored the water quality of Little Rawhide Creek in the 

vicinity of the mine since 1972. Eagle Butte Mine, in compliance with WDEQ/LQD 

permit requirements, currently collects quarterly water quality samples from Little 

Rawhide Creek at sites EB-2 and EB-12 (Figure 3-13) and includes the analyses in 

the mine’s annual reports. Based on these historical water quality analyses, water 

from Little Rawhide Creek varies temporally, but is generally not suitable for 

domestic or agricultural uses. An improvement in quality is generally noted in the 

spring, which can be attributed to the flushing and dilution effect from snowmelt 

and rainfall runoff. Water from Little Rawhide Creek is usually unsuitable for 

domestic or irrigation uses due to excessive concentrations of TDS and sulfate, 

but suitable for livestock and wildlife use. The TSS concentration is typically less 

than 30 mg/L, which is relatively low for an ephemeral/intermittent stream, but 

may be due to low-flow conditions at the time of sampling and the numerous 

impoundments along the stream channel upstream of the monitoring stations that 

act to trap suspended solids. High TSS concentrations can be expected from 

floods caused by large thunderstorms. 

Prior to 1982, water quality samples collected downstream of the Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract at Sites EB-1 and EB-2 had TDS concentrations that averaged around 

6,000 mg/L and the predominant ions were calcium, magnesium, and sulfate. 

The average TDS concentration of all water samples collected in recent years 

(between 1999 and 2005) decreased to approximately 3,300 mg/L and the sodium 

and bicarbonate ion concentrations, in general, increased relative to the calcium, 

magnesium, and sulfate ion concentrations. This shift in water quality may be 

attributed to the fact that water sampled at site EB-2 is a blend of natural surface 

flow, treated mine discharge water, and CBNG discharge water. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-91 

Water quality samples were collected monthly at station EB-12 in 1985 when that 

monitoring station was first established. During that year, the water was 

consistently a magnesium-sulfate type and the TDS concentration ranged from 

4,650 to 8,330 mg/L. The TDS concentration of all water samples collected at this 

location in recent years (between 1999 and 2005) has ranged from 1,505 to 

12,724 mg/L and averaged 2,930 mg/L. Not only does the TDS concentration 

vary seasonally and with flow, the chemical composition of the water has been 

relatively inconsistent over this period of time. For example, the predominant 

anions are sulfate or bicarbonate, the former being the predominant anion of most 

samples; however, the concentration of bicarbonate relative to sulfate has 

generally increased over time. The predominant cations were typically magnesium 

or sodium, with the ionic concentration of sodium increasing over time. The 

surface discharge of coal seam groundwater, which is rich in sodium and 

bicarbonate, from CBNG development in the area is apparently affecting the 

stream’s natural water quality. 

Because of the lack of regular natural streamflow in Prong Draw, water quality 

data are not available. Surface water samples were collected from a similar 

tributary, East Prong Little Rawhide Creek, as part of Eagle Butte Mine’s 

Southwest Extension permit amendment application, and it is likely that the 

surface water quality in Prong Draw would be similar to that in this tributary of 

Little Rawhide Creek. The natural surface flow in East Prong is magnesiumsulfate type water, with TDS concentrations ranging from under 100 mg/L to 

approximately 600 mg/L. The lower TDS value reflects water quality during major 

runoff events, which would be of suitable chemical quality for irrigation. 

3.5.2.2 Environmental Consequences

3.5.2.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

Changes in surface runoff characteristics and sediment discharges would occur 

during mining of the LBA tract as a result of the destruction and reconstruction of 

drainage channels as mining progresses and the use of sediment control 

structures to manage discharges of surface water from the mine permit area. 

Erosion rates could be high on the disturbed areas because of vegetation removal. 

However, both state and federal regulations require treatment of surface runoff 

from mined lands to meet effluent standards. Generally, the surface runoff 

sediment is deposited in ponds or other sediment control devices inside the permit 

area before the surface runoff water is allowed to leave the permit area. 

Since the LBA tract would be mined as an extension of the existing mine under 

the Proposed Action or Alternative 1, there would not be a large increase in the 

size of the area that is disturbed and not reclaimed at any given time as a result of 

leasing the tract. The presence of disturbed areas creates a potential that 

sediment produced by large storms (i.e., greater than the 10-year, 24-hour storm) 

could potentially adversely impact areas downstream of the mining operation. 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-92 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

This potential for adverse downstream impacts would be extended if the LBA tract 

were leased. 

Following reclamation, the loss of soil structure would act to increase runoff rates. 

However, the general decrease in average slope in reclaimed areas, as discussed in 

Section 3.2.2, would tend to counteract the potential for an increase in runoff. 

Soil structure would gradually reform over time, and vegetation (after successful 

reclamation) would provide erosion protection from raindrop impact, retard 

surface flows, and control runoff at approximately premining levels. 

There may periodically be substantial streamflow in Little Rawhide Creek within 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Sections of Little Rawhide Creek and East Prong 

Little Rawhide Creek are currently diverted within the existing Eagle Butte Mine 

permit area. During mining of the LBA tract, hydrologic control would likely 

consist of building another diversion channel for the main stream around the 

open pit area. Because most of the LBA tract is drained by Prong Draw, an 

ephemeral tributary of Little Rawhide Creek, runoff within the tract would not be 

expected to be substantial. In addition to diverting Little Rawhide Creek, 

hydrologic control during mining would most likely consist of allowing surface 

runoff to accrue to the mine pit where it would be treated and discharged 

according to the standards of the WDEQ/WQD. A need for large flood control 

reservoirs is not anticipated for the LBA tract. 

The impacts described above would be similar for both the Proposed Action and 

the BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1, and they are similar 

to the expected impacts for the currently permitted mining operation. 

3.5.2.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the Eagle Butte West coal lease application would 

be rejected; coal removal and associated disturbance of Little Rawhide Creek and 

Prong Draw would not occur on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. The impacts to 

surface water resources described above would continue on the existing mine 

permit area as a result of currently approved mining and CBNG development. 

Impacts related to mining operations at the Eagle Butte Mine would not be 

extended onto portions of the LBA tract that will not be affected under the current 

mining and reclamation plan. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.5.2.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring

In accordance with SMCRA and Wyoming State Statutes, the Little Rawhide Creek 

stream channel would be restored after surface mining operations are completed 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-93 

on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Surface water flow, quality, and sediment 

discharge would approximate premining conditions. The drainages that intersect 

the permit area would be reclaimed to exhibit channel geometry characteristics 

similar to the premining characteristics. The Little Rawhide Creek stream channel 

would be restored in approximately the same location as the natural channel and 

its hydrologic functions, including the alluvial groundwater-surface water 

interaction would be restored. (See additional discussion in Section 3.5.1.3.) 

Other WDEQ/LQD permit requirements for the existing Eagle Butte Mine include 

constructing sediment control structures to manage discharges of surface water 

from the mine permit area; treatment of all surface runoff from mined lands as 

necessary to meet effluent standards; and restoration of stock ponds and inchannel impoundments disturbed during mining. These requirements would be 

extended to include the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract when the mine permit is 

amended to include the tract. 

Monitoring requirements for the existing Eagle Butte Mine include a monitoring 

program to assure that sediment ponds would always have adequate space 

reserved for sediment accumulation, collection of streamflow and water quality 

data from Little Rawhide Creek at sites EB-2 and EB-12 on a quarterly basis, and 

compliance with EPA’s NPDES permits. These requirements would be extended to 

include the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract when the mine permit is amended to 

include the tract. 

3.5.3 Water Rights

3.5.3.1 Affected Environment

The Wyoming SEO administers water rights in Wyoming. Water rights are granted 

for both groundwater and surface water appropriations. Prior to development of 

water resources associated with energy development, water appropriations (either 

groundwater or surface water) in the PRB were typically for livestock use. 

Currently, mining companies and CBNG development companies hold the majority 

of the water rights in the general analysis area. 

Records of the SEO have been searched for groundwater rights within a three-mile 

radius of the BLM study area for Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (the tract as applied 

for under the Proposed Action and the additional area evaluated by BLM under 

Alternative 1). This information is required for WDEQ permitting. A summary of 

the most recent search is provided below. A more detailed listing of the non-coal 

mine related groundwater rights within a three-mile radius of the LBA tract is 

presented in the supplementary information document for this EIS, which is 

available on request. 

For the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, SEO data indicate that, as of October 2004, 

there were 1,312 permitted water wells within three miles of the tract, of which, 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-94 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

300 were owned by coal mining companies. The other 1,012 non-coal mine 

related, permitted water wells, which include 788 wells permitted for uses related 

to CBNG development and 224 wells permitted for non-coal and non-CBM uses, 

are permitted for the following uses: 

• 393 stock and CBNG 

• 296 CBNG only 

• 69 monitoring 

• 63 miscellaneous, stock, and CBNG 

• 52 miscellaneous 

• 41 stock only 

• 39 domestic only 

• 24 miscellaneous and CBNG 

• 14 domestic and stock 

• 5 stock, CBNG, and reservoir supply 

• 3 industrial 

• 2 CBNG and reservoir supply 

• 2 industrial and miscellaneous 

• 2 stock, miscellaneous, dewatering, and CBNG 

• 1 irrigation and domestic 

• 1 miscellaneous and dewatering 

• 1 miscellaneous, dewatering, stock, wildlife, and CBNG 

• 1 miscellaneous and domestic 

• 1 stock, CBNG, and monitoring 

• 1 stock and miscellaneous 

• 1 stock, miscellaneous, monitoring, and CBNG 

SEO records have been searched for surface water rights within a three-mile 

radius of the BLM study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (the tract as 

applied for and the additional area evaluated under Alternative 1). Like the 

groundwater rights, this information is also required for WDEQ permitting. A 

summary of the most recent search is provided below. A more detailed listing of 

the non-coal mine related surface water rights is presented in the supplementary 

information document for this EIS. 

For the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, SEO records indicate that as of October 

2004, there were 16 non-coal mine related, permitted surface water rights within 

the search area. These surface water rights were permitted for the following uses: 

• 8 miscellaneous 

• 7 stock 

• 1 miscellaneous and industrial 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-95 

3.5.3.2 Environmental Consequences

3.5.3.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

As discussed above, Wyoming SEO records indicated that a total of 1,312 

permitted water wells were located within three miles of the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract in October 2004. As discussed above, 300 of these wells are owned by coal 

mining companies and are used for groundwater monitoring and water supply. 

The majority of the remaining 1,012 non-coal mine related wells are permitted for 

multiple uses. Approximately 78 percent are permitted either for CBNG 

development only or for CBNG development and other uses; 58 percent are 

permitted either for livestock use only or for livestock and other uses; 15 percent 

are permitted either for miscellaneous only or for miscellaneous and other uses; 

seven percent are either permitted for monitoring only or for monitoring and other 

uses; and five percent are either permitted for domestic only or for domestic and 

other uses. 

Private water supply wells in this area have been impacted by past surface coal 

mining as well as CBNG development and it is likely that some of the privately 

permitted water wells listed in Section 3.5.3.1 would be impacted (either directly 

by removal of the well or indirectly by water level drawdown) by future approved 

mining operations occurring on existing coal leases at the Eagle Butte or adjacent 

mines or on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 

None of the 224 wells permitted for non-coal and non-CBNG uses listed in Section 

3.5.3.1 that are located within the expanded five-ft drawdown contour associated 

with mining the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (Figure 3-12) have completion depths 

that indicate they produce water from the Roland or Smith coal seams. It is 

therefore unlikely that any additional private water wells completed in either the 

Roland or Smith coal seams would be affected if the LBA tract is leased and 

mined. 

Due to the areally discontinuous nature and varied hydraulic properties of the 

water-bearing units within the Wasatch Formation overburden, the extent and 

degree of water level drawdowns in the overburden would be variable. There may 

be private water supply wells completed in the local overburden aquifer that would 

be affected if the tract is leased and mined. If the Eagle Butte Mine acquires the 

LBA tract, the mine’s WDEQ/LQD permit would be amended to include the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract and the extent of the life-of-mine drawdowns in the local 

overburden aquifer system attributable to mining the proposed lease area would 

be evaluated. 

3.5.3.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the Eagle Butte West coal lease application would 

be rejected and coal removal would not occur on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-96 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

The impacts to water rights associated with existing approved mining and CBNG 

development would continue to occur. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.5.3.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring

SMCRA and Wyoming regulations require surface coal mine operators to provide 

the owner of a water right whose water source is interrupted, discontinued, or 

diminished by mining with water of equivalent quantity and quality. This required 

mitigation is considered to be part of the Proposed Action and Alternative 1. The 

most probable source of replacement water would be one of the aquifers 

underlying the coal. For example, the subcoal Fort Union Formation aquifers are 

not removed or disturbed by coal mining and would therefore be a potential source 

of replacement water. 

If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased, the mine operator would be required 

to update the list of potentially impacted private water supply wells and predict 

impacts to those wells within the five-ft drawdown contour as part of the 

permitting process. The operator would be required to commit to replacing those 

water supplies that are determined to be affected by mining with water of 

equivalent quality and quantity. 

3.5.4 Residual Impacts

The area of coal and overburden removal and replacement of overburden and 

associated groundwater drawdowns would be increased under the Proposed 

Action or BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1 compared with the 

area of coal and overburden removal and overburden replacement and associated 

groundwater drawdowns for the existing Eagle Butte Mine. The postmining 

backfill may take in excess of 100 years to reach equilibrium water levels and 

water quality. Less time would be required near the mining boundaries. 

Monitoring data from wells completed in existing backfilled areas in the PRB 

suggest that there would be an adequate quantity of water in the backfill to 

replace current use, which is for livestock. Water quality in the backfill would 

generally be expected to meet the Wyoming Class III standards for use as stock 

water, which was the primary pre-mining use of water from the coal seams. 

The area of overburden sand body aquifer and Little Rawhide Creek alluvial 

aquifer removal and reconstruction would be increased under the Proposed Action 

and BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1, compared with the area 

of overburden sand body and alluvial aquifer removal and replacement for the 

existing Eagle Butte Mine. The time required to reconstruct and resaturate the 

post-mining aquifers in order to restore the essential hydrologic functions of Little 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-97 

Rawhide Creek and its alluvial aquifer system would be increased, but no residual 

impacts would occur. 

3.6 Alluvial Valley Floors 

3.6.1 Affected Environment

Prior to leasing and mining, AVFs must be identified because, under SMCRA, 

mining on AVFs is prohibited unless the affected AVF is undeveloped rangeland 

that is not significant to farming or if the affected AVF is of such small acreage 

that it would have a negligible impact on a farm’s agricultural production. These 

restrictions also apply to AVFs that are downstream of the area of disturbance but 

might be affected by disruptions in streamflow. AVFs that are determined not to 

be significant to agriculture can be disturbed during mining but must be restored 

as part of the reclamation process. 

WDEQ regulations define AVFs as unconsolidated stream-laid deposits where 

water availability is sufficient for subirrigation or flood irrigation agricultural 

activities. Guidelines established by OSM and WDEQ/LQD for the identification 

of AVFs require detailed studies of geomorphology, soils, hydrology, vegetation, 

and land use. These studies are used to identify 1) the presence of 

unconsolidated stream-laid deposits, 2) the possibility for artificial flood irrigation, 

3) past and/or present flood irrigation, and 4) apparent subirrigated areas and the 

possibility for natural flood irrigation. Areas that are identified as AVFs following 

these studies are evaluated for their significance to farming by WDEQ/LQD. 

The reach of Little Rawhide Creek within and adjacent to the existing Eagle Butte 

Mine permit area has been investigated for the presence of AVFs. These AVF 

studies were conducted as part of the WDEQ/LQD mine permitting process for the 

purpose of recovering coal in the mine’s existing leases. As a result of these 

studies, Little Rawhide Creek and a small portion of Prong Draw at its confluence 

with Little Rawhide Creek were declared an AVF non-significant to farming by the 

WDEQ/LQD (FCW 2005a). Little Rawhide Creek and its alluvial valley lie within 

the eastern portion of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, which is inside Eagle Butte 

Mine’s existing permit area. Therefore, the entire reach of Little Rawhide Creek 

within the BLM study area for the LBA tract (the tract as applied for and the 

additional area evaluated under Alternative 1) has been declared an AVF nonsignificant to farming by the WDEQ/LQD. Approximately 83 acres of declared 

AVF lie within the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for, and an additional 45 

acres of declared AVF lie within the additional area evaluated by BLM under 

Alternative 1. Approximately 84 acres of declared AVF lie within the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract under BLM’s preferred tract configuration. 

Eagle Butte Mine conducted AVF investigations on the undeclared portion of 

Prong Draw within and adjacent to the LBA tract in the summer of 2004. These 

studies included identifying and mapping stream-laid deposits, assessing the 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-98 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

extent of subirrigation, evaluating alluvial groundwater availability and quality, 

evaluating natural and artificial flood irrigation, and identifying the stream’s 

essential hydrologic functions. These studies concluded that the AVF 

characteristics of Prong Draw are negligible and it does not meet the regulatory 

definition of an AVF because the stream-laid deposits are very limited in areal 

extent and support little or no natural subirrigation or flood irrigation activities, 

and the quality of groundwater that occurs in the alluvial deposits is unsuitable 

for agricultural use. Surface water quantity is insufficient to support agricultural 

activities, further supporting the contention that the portion of Prong Draw within 

the LBA tract is not an AVF. Formal declarations of the presence or absence of an 

AVF, its significance to agriculture, and the appropriate perimeter (areal extent) 

would be made by the WDEQ/LQD as part of the mine permitting process if the 

LBA tract is leased and proposed for mining. 

3.6.2 Environmental Consequences

3.6.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

If either the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for or BLM’s preferred tract 

configuration under Alternative 1 is mined by the applicant as an extension of 

existing operations, the mining operations would affect between 83 and 84 acres 

of declared AVF along Little Rawhide Creek. Mining activity would not be 

restricted in the AVF areas because the WDEQ/LQD has declared them not to be 

significant to farming. Portions of Little Rawhide Creek upstream and 

downstream of the LBA tract have been affected by previous mining operations at 

the Eagle Butte Mine. 

As indicated above, the WDEQ/LQD has not made a formal AVF declaration for 

Prong Draw or evaluated its significance to agriculture. However, it is unlikely 

that mining activity would be precluded by the presence of an AVF significant to 

farming in those areas due to the absence of irrigated agricultural development. 

No direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts are anticipated to off-site AVFs through 

mining of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Streamflows in drainages within the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would be diverted around the active mining areas in 

temporary diversion channels, captured in flood control reservoirs above the pit, 

or allowed to flow into the mine pit and routed through settling ponds. If flood 

control impoundments and/or settling ponds are used, it would be necessary to 

evacuate them following major runoff events to provide storage volume for the next 

flood. Consequently, disruptions to streamflows that might supply downstream 

AVFs are expected to be negligible. Groundwater and surface runoff intercepted 

by the mine pits would be routed through settling ponds to meet state and federal 

quality criteria, and the pond discharges would likely increase the frequency and 

amount of flow in these streams, thereby increasing surface water supplies to 

downstream AVFs. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-99 

3.6.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the Eagle Butte West coal lease application would 

be rejected and coal removal and associated impacts to the Little Rawhide Creek 

AVF would not occur on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. The impacts to the Little 

Rawhide Creek AVF associated with existing approved mining operations would 

continue to occur. Impacts related to mining operations at the Eagle Butte Mine 

would not be extended onto those portions of the Little Rawhide Creek AVF within 

the LBA tract that will not be affected under the current mining and reclamation 

plan. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.6.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring

As discussed above, AVFs must be identified because SMCRA generally does not 

allow impacts to AVFs that are determined to be significant to agriculture. AVFs 

that are determined not to be significant to agriculture or that were permitted to 

be affected prior to the effective date of SMCRA can be disturbed during mining 

but must be restored as part of the reclamation process. The determination of 

significance to agriculture is made by WDEQ/LQD, and it is based on specific 

calculations related to the production of crops or forage on the AVF and the size of 

the existing agricultural operations on the land of which the AVF is a part. For 

any designated AVF, regardless of its significance to agriculture, it must be 

demonstrated that the essential hydrologic functions of the valley will be 

protected. Downstream AVFs must also be protected during mining. These 

measures are required by regulation and are therefore considered to be part of the 

Proposed Action and Alternative 1 for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 

As stated in Section 3.5.1.2, WDEQ/LQD has determined that, in order to restore 

the essential hydrologic functions of Little Rawhide Creek and its AVF, discharge 

from the Wasatch Formation overburden sand aquifer to the alluvial aquifer must 

be reestablished after mining. Eagle Butte Mine’s current hydrologic restoration 

plan includes a reconstructed sand body aquifer that is in hydraulic 

communication with a saturated, undisturbed sand body along the western limit 

of mining and an infiltration pond within the reconstructed Little Rawhide Creek 

stream channel. The current reclamation plan was designed to maintain the 

premining acreage of subirrigated vegetation along Little Rawhide Creek that has 

been or will be disturbed by mining. If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is acquired 

by the Eagle Butte Mine, the newly-leased area would be amended into the 

WDEQ/LQD permit area. More extensive reconstruction of hydrologically 

significant overburden sand body aquifers and the Little Rawhide Creek alluvial 

aquifer may be required in order to maintain the premining hydrologic balance, 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-100 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

restore the essential hydrologic functions of Little Rawhide Creek and its AVF, and 

support the postmining land uses. 

3.6.4 Residual Impacts

No residual impacts to AVFs would occur following mining. 

3.7 Wetlands 

3.7.1 Affected Environment

Waters of the U.S. is a collective term for all areas subject to regulation by the COE 

under Section 404 of the CWA. Waters of the U.S. include special aquatic sites, 

wetlands, and jurisdictional wetlands. Special aquatic sites are large or small 

geographic areas that possess special ecological characteristics of productivity, 

habitat, wildlife protection or other important and easily disrupted ecological 

values (40 CFR 230.3). Wetlands are a type of special aquatic site that includes 

“those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a 

frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal 

circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in 

saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, 

and similar areas” [33 CFR 328.3(a)(7)(b)]. 

There are effectively three categories of wetlands: 

• Jurisdictional wetlands, which are defined as those wetlands which are 

within the extent of COE regulatory review. They must contain three 

components: hydric soils, a dominance of hydrophytic plants, and wetland 

hydrology. Navigable, non-isolated wetlands and other Waters of the U.S. 

are considered jurisdictional by the COE. 

• Non-jurisdictional wetlands, which are non-navigable, isolated intrastate 

wetlands (e.g., playas) and other Waters of the U.S. These wetlands are not 

considered to be jurisdictional as a result of Supreme Court rulings [Solid 

Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. United States Army Corps of 

Engineers, January 9, 2001 and consolidated cases Rapano v. United States

and Carabell v. United States (known as the “Rapanos” decision), June 19, 

2006]. 

• Functional wetlands, which are areas that contain only one of the three 

criteria listed under jurisdictional wetlands. The USFWS used this 

categorization in producing the NWI maps. These maps were produced 

using aerial photo interpretation, with limited field verification. 

Several types of wetland systems are present within the general analysis area. 

These wetland systems are limited in size; however, the vegetation in these 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-101 

environments is highly productive and diverse, and provides habitat for many 

wildlife species. Further, the systems as a whole play important roles in 

controlling floodwaters, recharging groundwater, and filtering pollutants (Niering 

1985). 

A preliminary wetlands inventory, based on USFWS NWI mapping and vegetation 

mapping in the field, was conducted in 2004. The wetland analysis area includes 

the BLM study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (the tract as applied for 

and the additional lands evaluated by BLM under Alternative 1) and a 1⁄4-mile 

disturbance buffer around the tract sufficient to mine and reclaim the tract as a 

part of the existing Eagle Butte Mine operation (approximately 4,172 acres). A 

formal wetland delineation has been confirmed by the COE for the portion of the 

wetland analysis area (947.94 acres) that is within the current Eagle Butte Mine 

permit area. A formal jurisdictional wetland survey for the portion of the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract that is outside of the current Eagle Butte Mine permit area 

has not yet been completed. 

Current field conditions may not be representative of the field conditions in the 

future. Wetland areas previously mapped by the USFWS NWI have been recently 

altered due to CBNG-related water production within and upstream of the wetland 

analysis area. The NWI maps were consulted prior to the initiation of the 

preliminary wetlands field survey; however, the boundaries of the existing 

potential jurisdictional wetlands vary to a greater or lesser extent from the 

boundaries shown on the NWI maps. Due to the ephemeral nature of CBNG 

dewatering activities, the boundaries, and therefore wetland areas, are likewise 

ephemeral. A formal jurisdictional wetland delineation survey would be conducted 

and submitted to the COE for verification as part of the mining and reclamation 

permit process, if the tract is leased. 

Wetlands occur in a variety of forms within the wetland analysis area. Palustrine 

wetlands, defined by their close association with emergent herbaceous marshes, 

swales, and wet meadows, support a variety of lush plant life and occur 

sporadically along drainages and a few small closed depressions. These areas are 

supported by the saturated soils along the water courses of Little Rawhide Creek 

and its tributaries that are adequately supplied with surface runoff, discharged 

CBNG waters, and groundwater discharged from Wasatch Formation sand body 

aquifers (Section 3.5.1.1.2). The identified potential jurisdictional wetlands within 

the wetland analysis area, as identified by NWI mapping, include RiverineEmergent Marsh and Riverine-Wet Meadow. 

Within the entire wetland analysis area, the preliminary inventory identified a 

total of approximately 50.38 acres of Waters of the U.S., including a total of 49.85 

acres of jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. Approximately 37.53 of those acres are 

jurisdictional wetlands that occur along the watercourses of Little Rawhide Creek 

and its tributaries. The 12.32 acres of jurisdictional other Waters of the U.S. that 

did not qualify as jurisdictional wetlands consist primarily of the open water that 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-102 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

is held within the linear upland drainage channels and in-channel impoundments 

and intermittent pools. The non-jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. contained in the 

wetland analysis area (approximately 0.53 acre) consists of small, isolated 

depressions where CBNG discharge water has ponded. 

3.7.2 Environmental Consequences

3.7.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

Based on USFWS NWI mapping and vegetation mapping in the field that was 

completed in 2004, a maximum of approximately 37.5 acres of jurisdictional 

wetlands would be disturbed if the entire BLM study area for the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract (the tract as applied for and the additional area evaluated by BLM 

under Alternative 1) is leased and subsequently mined. 

If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased, a formal wetland inventory would be 

conducted as part of the mining and reclamation permit process, thus verifying 

the areas of jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional wetlands, as well as the other 

Waters of the U.S. A formal wetland delineation has been confirmed by COE for 

that portion of the wetland analysis area for the proposed LBA tract that lies 

within Eagle Butte Mine’s current permit area, but a formal wetlands inventory 

covering the entire LBA tract has not yet been submitted to COE for verification. 

This wetland inventory would be submitted to COE for verification as part of the 

mining and reclamation permit process. In Wyoming, once the delineation is 

verified by the COE, it would be made a part of the mine permit document. The 

reclamation plan would then be revised to incorporate replacement of at least 

equal types and number of jurisdictional wetlands. 

Non-jurisdictional wetlands would be restored as required by the authorized 

federal or state agency or private surface owner as specified in the mining and 

reclamation permit, which would have to be approved by WDEQ/LQD before 

mining operations could be conducted on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, if it is 

leased. 

During the period of time after mining and before replacement of wetlands, all 

wetland functions would be lost. The replaced wetlands may not duplicate the 

exact function and landscape features of the premine wetlands, but replacement 

plans would be evaluated by COE and replacement would be in accordance with 

the requirements of Section 404 of the CWA as determined by COE. 

As a result of court directives, playas are no longer identified as jurisdictional 

Waters of the U.S. under Section 404 of the CWA. These non-jurisdictional 

wetland features, having significant biological and hydrological features, are not 

present within the preliminary wetland analysis area. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-103 

3.7.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the Eagle Butte West coal lease application would 

be rejected and coal removal would not occur on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 

The impacts to wetlands on the existing Eagle Butte Mine leases would occur as 

currently permitted. Impacts to wetlands related to mining operations at the 

Eagle Butte Mine would not occur on those portions of the LBA tract that will not 

be affected under the current mining and reclamation plan. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.7.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring

The presence of jurisdictional wetlands on a mine property does not preclude 

mining. A wetland delineation must be completed according to approved 

procedures (COE 1987) and submitted to the COE for verification as to the 

amounts and types of jurisdictional wetlands present. There are special required 

permitting procedures to assure that after mining there will be no net loss of 

wetlands. COE requires replacement of all impacted jurisdictional wetlands in 

accordance with Section 404 of the CWA. 

Section 404 does not cover non-jurisdictional or functional wetlands; however, 

Executive Order 11990 requires that all federal agencies protect all wetlands. 

Mitigation for impacts to non-jurisdictional wetlands located on the tract will be 

specified during the permitting process as required by the authorized state or 

federal agency (which may include Wyoming DEQ, the Office of Surface Mining 

and Reclamation, or the Federal Surface Managing agency, if any federal surface 

is included in the tract) or the private surface owner. The surface on the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract as applied for and under BLM’s preferred tract configuration 

for Alternative 1 is privately owned. WDEQ/LQD allows and sometimes requires 

mitigation of non-jurisdictional wetlands affected by mining, depending on the 

values associated with the wetland features. If any playas with hydrologic 

significance are located within the tract that is leased, WDEQ/LQD would also 

require their replacement. 

Reclaimed wetlands are monitored using the same procedures used to identify 

pre-mining jurisdictional wetlands. 

3.7.4 Residual Impacts

Replaced wetlands (jurisdictional or functional) may not duplicate the exact 

function and landscape features of the premining wetland, but all wetland 

replacement plans would be approved by COE, which has special required 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-104 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

permitting procedures to assure that there will be no net loss of wetlands after 

mining. 

3.8 Soils 

3.8.1 Affected Environment

Numerous baseline soil surveys associated with surface mining operations and oil 

field development have been conducted in the eastern PRB. Soil surveys of 

Campbell County, Wyoming, including the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract soils 

analysis area, have also recently been conducted by the NRCS (Prink et al. 2004). 

The Eagle Butte West LBA Tract soils analysis area (2,373 total acres) is the BLM 

study area for the tract (the LBA tract as applied for and the additional area 

evaluated under Alternative 1). Soil surveys were completed in 2005 by James 

Nyenhuis to an Order 1-2 resolution. The inventories included field sampling and 

observations at the requisite number of individual sites, and laboratory analysis of 

representative collected samples. Soils within the analysis area were identified by 

series, which consist of soils that have similar horizons in their profile. 

Soils vary depending upon where and how they were formed. Major factors 

involved in the formation of soils include whether or not the material was 

transported and how the material was weathered during transportation. Four 

primary soil formation processes causing different soil types were noted in this 

area: 1) soils developing predominantly in thin residuum from sandstone or shale 

on upland ridges, 2) soils developing predominantly in slopewash, colluvium, or 

alluvial fan deposits from mixed sources on gently sloping uplands, 3) soils 

developing predominantly in coarse-textured alluvium or sandy eolian deposits on 

rolling uplands, and 4) drainage soils developing in mixed stream-laid alluvium on 

terraces and channels, and in fine-textured playa deposits in depressions and 

closed basins. 

The soil depths and types on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract soils analysis area 

are similar to soils currently being salvaged and utilized for reclamation at the 

adjacent Eagle Butte Mine and other mines in the eastern PRB. Additional more 

detailed information about the soil types on the LBA tract is included in the 

supplemental information document, which is available on request. The sitespecific soil surveys have located hydric soils and/or inclusions of hydric soils, 

which are one component used in identifying wetlands. Areas with soils that are 

not suitable to support plant growth include sites with high alkalinity, salinity, or 

clay content. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-105 

3.8.2 Environmental Consequences

3.8.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

Removal and replacement of soils during mining and reclamation would cause 

changes in the soil resources. In reclaimed areas, soil chemistry and soil nutrient 

distribution would generally be more uniform and average soil quality would be 

improved because soil material that is not suitable to support plant growth would 

not be salvaged for use in reclamation. This would result in more uniform 

vegetative productivity on the reclaimed land. 

The Eagle Butte West LBA Tract baseline soils analysis indicates that the amount 

of suitable soil that would be available for redistribution on all disturbed acres 

within the soils analysis area during reclamation would vary from an average 

depth of 0.67 ft to an average depth of 5.0 ft. The replaced soil would support a 

stable and productive vegetation community adequate in quality and quantity to 

support the planned postmining land uses (wildlife habitat and rangeland). 

There would be an increase in the near-surface bulk density of the soil resources 

on the LBA tract after reclamation. As a result, the average soil infiltration rates 

would generally decrease, which would increase the potential for runoff and soil 

erosion. Topographic moderation following reclamation would potentially decrease 

runoff, which would tend to offset the effects of decreased soil infiltration capacity. 

The change in soil infiltration rates would not be permanent because revegetation 

and natural weathering action would form a new soil structure in the reclaimed 

soils, and infiltration rates would gradually return to premining levels. The 

reclaimed landscape would contain stable landforms and drainage systems that 

would support the postmining land uses. Reconstructed stream channels and 

floodplains would be designed and established to be erosionally stable. 

Direct biological impacts to soil resources on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

would include short-term to long-term reduction in soil organic matter, microbial 

populations, seeds, bulbs, rhizomes, and live plant parts for soil resources that 

are stockpiled before placement. 

Potential impacts to soil resources on the LBA tract after final reclamation under 

the Proposed Action or Alternative 1 are quantified as follows. Under the currently 

approved mining and reclamation plan, approximately 6,076 acres of soil 

resources will be disturbed in order to mine the coal in the existing leases at the 

Eagle Butte Mine (Table 3-1). If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased, 

disturbance related to coal mining would directly affect from approximately 2,395 

to 2,415 additional acres of soil resources on and adjacent to the LBA tract under 

the Proposed Action or under BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1, 

respectively (Table 3-1). Average soil thickness would be about 24 inches across 

the entire reclaimed surface. The types of soils and the quantities of the soil 

resource included in the LBA tract as applied for and in BLM’s preferred tract 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-106 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

configuration under Alternative 1 are similar to the soils on the existing leases at 

the Eagle Butte Mine. As discussed in Section 3.0, the estimates of recoverable 

coal, associated disturbance, and mine life shown in Table 3-1 assume that U.S. 

Highway 14-16 is not moved. 

3.8.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the Eagle Butte West coal lease application would 

be rejected and coal removal and the associated disturbance and impacts to soils 

would not occur on from 2,395 additional acres (Proposed Action) up to 2,415 

additional acres (BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1). Coal 

removal and the associated soil removal and replacement would occur on the 

existing Eagle Butte Mine leases as currently permitted (as summarized in Table 

3-1). Impacts to soils related to mining operations at the Eagle Butte Mine would 

not be extended onto portions of the LBA tract that will not be affected under the 

current mining and reclamation plan. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.8.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring

Soils suitable to support plant growth would be salvaged for use in reclamation. 

Soil stockpiles would be protected from disturbance and erosional influences. Soil 

material that is not suitable to support plant growth would not be salvaged. Soil 

or overburden materials containing potentially harmful chemical constituents 

(such as selenium) would be specially handled. 

At least four ft of suitable overburden would be selectively placed on the graded 

backfill surface below the replaced soil to meet guidelines for vegetation root 

zones. After soil is replaced on reclaimed surfaces, revegetation would reduce 

wind erosion. The mine would construct sediment control structures as needed to 

trap eroded soil. 

Regraded overburden would be sampled for compliance with root zone criteria. 

Vegetation growth would be monitored on reclaimed areas to determine if soil 

amendments are needed. 

These measures are required by regulation and are therefore considered to be part 

of the Proposed Action and Alternative 1 for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-107 

3.8.4 Residual Impacts

Existing soils would be mixed and redistributed, and soil-forming processes would 

be disturbed by mining. This would result in long-term alteration of soil 

characteristics. 

3.9 Vegetation 

3.9.1 Affected Environment

The Eagle Butte West LBA Tract vegetation analysis area (2,373 total acres) is the 

BLM study area for the LBA tract (the tract as applied for and the additional area 

evaluated under Alternative 1). Part of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract vegetation 

analysis area is located within the current Eagle Butte Mine permit boundary 

(Figure 3-1). Consequently, portions of the analysis area were previously mapped 

and sampled in accordance with the current WDEQ/LQD mine permitting 

requirements. The balance of the vegetation assessment was completed by 

Habitat Management, Inc. of Gillette, Wyoming in 2004. The vegetation 

communities in this area were appraised and mapped to provide a preliminary 

assessment. 

The vegetation within the analysis area consists of species common to eastern 

Wyoming and consistent with vegetation that occurs within the adjacent Eagle 

Butte Mine permit area. A total of five vegetation types have been preliminarily 

identified and mapped within the Eagle Butte West LBA vegetation analysis area. 

Water and disturbed areas were also mapped. The vegetation types include 

Agricultural Pasture 1, Sagebrush/Grassland, Agricultural Pasture 2, Grassland, 

and CBNG Impacted Bottomland. Table 3-9 presents the acreage and percent of 

the analysis area encompassed by each vegetation type. Additional more-detailed 

information about the vegetation types within the LBA tract is included in the 

supplemental information document, which is available on request. 

In terms of total acres of occurrence in the vegetation analysis area, the 

predominant vegetation types are Agricultural Pasture 1 (36.1 percent), 

Sagebrush/Grassland (27.6 percent), and Agricultural Pasture 2 (11.9 percent). 

Common plant species on these types include crested wheatgrass, smooth brome, 

needleandthread, threadleaf sedge, Sandberg bluegrass, western wheatgrass, and 

cheatgrass brome. Shrub/subshrub species are absent or a minor component of 

the Agricultural Pasture 1 vegetation community. Dominant shrubs in the 

Sagebrush/Grassland and Agricultural Pasture 2 vegetation communities include 

silver sagebrush and Wyoming big sagebrush. Lichen can make a substantial 

contribution to ground cover within the Sagebrush/Grassland type, particularly in 

dry years. Disturbed Area, Open Water, CBNG-Impacted Bottomland, and 

Grassland cumulatively occupy approximately 24 percent of the vegetation 

analysis area. CBNG-Impacted Bottomlands and Disturbed Areas were identified 

and mapped but not quantitatively sampled in this study. The CBNG-Impacted 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-108 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Table 3-9. Vegetation Types Identified and Mapped Within the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract Vegetation Analysis Area. 

Vegetation Type Acres Percent of Area 

Agricultural Pasture 1 850.3 36.1 

Sagebrush/Grassland 651.6 27.6 

Disturbed Area 389.7 16.5 

Agricultural Pasture 2 280.6 11.9 

Grassland 134.9 5.7 

CBNG-Impacted Bottomland 31.5 1.3 

Open Water (Reservoir) 19.2 0.8 

Total 2,357.8 100.0

Source: Nyenhuis 2005 

Bottomlands community would be characterized during a formal jurisdictional 

wetland inventory. The common species in the Grasslands community, which 

occupies about 5.7 percent of the vegetation analysis area, include western 

wheatgrass, Sandberg bluegrass, cheatgrass brome, needle and thread, green 

needlegrass, and prairie Junegrass. Shrubs and subshrubs are essentially absent 

from the Grassland community and plains pricklypear cactus is found in varying 

densities. In addition to the five vegetation communities, there are also two 

domestic shelterbelts associated with the two residences that are within the 

vegetation analysis area containing a total of approximately 310 trees. Roughly 12 

mature cottonwood trees also occur around the perimeter of the stock reservoir 

that is located within the southern portion of the additional area evaluated by 

BLM under Alternative 1, but outside of BLM’s preferred tract configuration under 

Alternative 1. 

3.9.2 Environmental Consequences

3.9.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

Under the currently approved mining and reclamation plan, approximately 6,076 

acres of vegetation will be disturbed in order to mine the coal in the existing leases 

at the Eagle Butte Mine. Under the Proposed Action, mining of the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract would progressively remove the native vegetation on 2,395 

additional acres on and near the LBA tract. Under BLM’s preferred tract 

configuration for Alternative 1, mining of the LBA tract would progressively remove 

the native vegetation on up to 2,415 additional acres on and near the LBA tract. 

Vegetation removal on the LBA tract under both alternatives is presented as the 

additional mine disturbance area in Table 3-1. As discussed in Section 3.0, the 

estimates of recoverable coal, associated disturbance, and mine life shown in 

Table 3-1 assume that U.S. Highway 14-16 is not moved. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-109 

Short-term impacts associated with the removal of vegetation from the Eagle Butte 

West LBA tract would include increased soil erosion and habitat loss for wildlife 

and livestock. Potential long-term impacts include loss of habitat or loss of habitat 

carrying capacity for some wildlife species as a result of reduced plant species 

diversity or reduced plant density for some species, particularly big sagebrush, on 

reclaimed lands. However, grassland-dependent wildlife species and livestock 

would benefit from the increased grass cover and production. 

Reclamation, including revegetation of these lands, would occur 

contemporaneously with mining on adjacent lands, i.e., reclamation would begin 

once an area is mined. Estimates of the time elapsed from soil stripping through 

reseeding of any given area range from two to four years. This would be longer for 

areas occupied by stockpiles, haulroads, sediment-control structures, and other 

mine facilities. Some roads and facilities would not be reclaimed until the end of 

mining. No new life-of-mine facilities would be located on the LBA tract under the 

Proposed Action or Alternative 1 because the LBA tract would be mined as an 

extension of an existing mine using existing facilities. 

Grazing restrictions prior to mining and during reclamation would remove up to 

100 percent of the LBA area from livestock grazing. This reduction in vegetative 

production would not seriously affect livestock production in the region, and longterm productivity on the reclaimed land would return to premining levels within 

several years following seeding with the approved final seed mixture. There would 

not be a substantial restriction of wildlife use of the area throughout the 

operations. 

In an effort to approximate premining conditions, the applicant would plan to 

reestablish vegetation types that are similar to the premine types during the 

reclamation operation. Reestablished vegetation would be dominated by species 

mandated in the reclamation seed mixtures (to be approved by WDEQ). The 

majority of the approved species are native to the LBA tract. Initially, the 

reclaimed lands would be primarily a mixture of prairie grasslands with 

graminoid/forb-dominated areas. An overall reduction in species diversity, 

especially for the shrub component, would occur. At least 20 percent of the native 

vegetation area would be reclaimed to native shrubs at a density of one per square 

meter as required by current regulations. Estimates for the time it would take to 

restore shrubs, including sagebrush, to premining density levels range from 20 to 

100 years. As indicated previously, sagebrush is a component of both the 

Sagebrush/Grassland and Agricultural Pasture 2 vegetation communities, which 

occupy about 40 percent of the vegetation analysis area. Following completion of 

reclamation (seeding with the final seed mixture) and before release of the final 

reclamation bond (a minimum of 10 years), a diverse, productive, and permanent 

vegetative cover would be established on the LBA tract. The decrease in plant 

diversity would not seriously affect the potential productivity of the reclaimed 

areas, and the proposed postmining land use (wildlife habitat and rangeland) 

should be achieved even with the changes in vegetation composition and diversity. 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-110 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Native vegetation from surrounding areas would gradually invade and become 

established on the reclaimed land. 

Following reclamation bond release, management of the privately owned surface 

areas would revert back to the private surface owners, who would have the right to 

manipulate the reclaimed vegetation. 

A reduction in sagebrush would result in a long term reduction of habitat for some 

species and may delay use of the reclaimed area by shrub-dependent species, 

such as the sage-grouse. An indirect impact of this vegetative change could be 

decreased big game habitat carrying capacity. 

On average, roughly 200 to 300 acres of surface would be disturbed per year of 

mining if the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased and mined, regardless of which 

alternative is selected. By the time mining ceases, over 75 percent of these 

disturbed lands would have been reseeded. The remaining 25 percent would be 

reseeded during the following two to three years as the life-of-mine facilities area is 

reclaimed. 

The reclamation plan for the existing Eagle Butte Mine includes steps to control 

invasion by weedy (invasive nonnative) plant species because WDEQ/LQD rules 

and regulations require surface coal mine operators to control and minimize the 

introduction of noxious weeds until bond release, in accordance with federal and 

state requirements. As a result, there are few occurrences of noxious weeds in the 

mine area. The reclamation plan for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would also 

include steps to control invasion from such species. 

Wyoming, including the PRB, has been experiencing drought conditions for the 

past seven or eight years. The climatic record of the western U.S. suggests that 

droughts have occurred in the past and could occur periodically during the life of 

the mine. Droughts tend to hamper revegetation efforts because lack of sufficient 

moisture reduces germination and could damage newly established plants. Sameaged vegetation is more susceptible to disease than plants of various ages. Severe 

thunderstorms could also adversely affect newly seeded areas. Once a stable 

vegetative cover is established, however, these events would have similar impacts 

as would occur on native vegetation. 

Changes expected in the surface water network on the LBA tract as a result of 

mining and reclamation would affect the reestablishment of vegetation patterns on 

the reclaimed areas to some extent. The postmining maximum overland slope 

would be 20 percent, in accordance with WDEQ policy. The average reclaimed 

overland slope on the LBA tract would not be known until WDEQ’s technical 

review of the permit revision application is complete. No major changes in the 

average overland slope are predicted. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-111 

There would be no net loss of jurisdictional wetlands. They would be restored 

under the jurisdiction of the COE (Section 3.7). Non-jurisdictional and functional 

wetlands would be restored in accordance with the requirements of the surface 

landowner or as required by WDEQ/LQD. 

3.9.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the Eagle Butte West coal lease application would 

be rejected and coal removal and the associated disturbance and impacts to 

vegetation would not occur on from 2,395 to 2,415 acres that would be disturbed 

under the Proposed Action or BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1, 

respectively. Coal removal and the associated vegetation removal and replacement 

would occur on the existing Eagle Butte Mine leases as currently permitted (as 

summarized in Table 3-1). Impacts to vegetation related to mining operations at 

the Eagle Butte Mine would not be extended onto portions of the LBA tract that 

will not be affected under the current mining and reclamation plan. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.9.3 Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Plant Species, and 

BLM Sensitive Species

Refer to Appendices E and F. 

3.9.4 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring

Reclaimed areas would be revegetated as specified in the approved mine plan 

using reclamation seed mixtures which would be approved by WDEQ. The 

majority of the species would be native to the LBA tract. At least 20 percent of the 

native vegetation area would be reclaimed to native shrubs at a density of one per 

square meter as required by current regulations. Shrubs would be selectively 

planted in riparian areas. 

WDEQ/LQD Rules and Regulations require that: 

• Permit applications for surface coal mines include a description of any 

weeds or other plants listed by the local Weed and Pest Control District as 

harmful (Chapter 2, Section 2(a)(vi)(C)(2)); and 

• Surface coal mine operators control and minimize the introduction of 

noxious weeds in accordance with federal or state requirements (Chapter 4, 

Section 2(d)(xiv)). 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-112 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

In accordance with these requirements, the Eagle Butte Mine works with the 

Campbell County Weed and Pest Department and conducts an active noxious 

weed control program on their existing coal leases and would be required to 

continue those practices if they acquire a lease for the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract. 

Detailed wetland mitigation plans would be developed and approved by COE 

during the permitting stage to ensure no net loss of jurisdictional wetlands occurs 

within the total disturbance area (Section 3.7). Non-Jurisdictional and functional 

wetlands would be restored in accordance with the requirements of the surface 

landowner or as required by WDEQ/LQD, as discussed in Section 3.7. 

Revegetation growth and diversity would be monitored until the final reclamation 

bond is released (a minimum of 10 years following seeding with the final seed 

mixture). Erosion would be monitored to determine if there is a need for corrective 

action during establishment of vegetation. Controlled grazing would be used 

during revegetation to determine the suitability of the reclaimed land for postmining land uses. 

3.9.5 Residual Impacts

Reclaimed vegetative communities may never completely match the surrounding 

native plant community. 

3.10 Wildlife 

3.10.1 General Setting

This section discusses the affected environment and potential environmental 

consequences to wildlife in general. The subsequent sections address the 

potential impacts to specific groups of wildlife species. 

3.10.1.1 Affected Environment

Background information on wildlife in the vicinity of the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract was drawn from several sources, including the South Powder River Basin 

Coal FEIS (BLM 2003a), WGFD and USFWS records, and personal contacts with 

WGFD and USFWS biologists. Site-specific data for the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract general analysis area were obtained from several sources, including 

WDEQ/LQD mine permit applications and annual wildlife monitoring reports for 

the applicant and nearby coal mines. Baseline and annual wildlife monitoring 

surveys have been conducted for the adjacent Eagle Butte Mine since the mid1970s. A majority of the proposed lease area has previously been surveyed during 

these baseline and annual wildlife surveys because the required survey area 

extends beyond the mine permit area. FCW initiated baseline investigations in 

2004 expressly for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Site-specific surveys for the 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-113 

tract and adjacent area would be a part of the mine permitting process if the tract 

is leased. 

The topography within the vicinity of the LBA tract is generally level to gently 

rolling, dissected by locally shallow gullies and the broader meandering floodplain 

of Little Rawhide Creek, an intermittent stream. The steepest terrain is located in 

the extreme northwestern corner of the BLM study area, outside of the tract as 

applied for or BLM’s preferred tract configuration (Figure 3-1). Unmined lands 

surrounding the LBA tract are characterized by low rolling hills with a prominent 

ridgeline immediately to the west. Surface mine lands, both active and reclaimed, 

dominate the landscape adjacent to the LBA tract’s eastern edge. Elevations 

range from approximately 4,240 to 4,560 feet above sea level. 

In an undisturbed condition, the major vegetation types in the general analysis 

area would provide habitat for many species. Vegetation types tend to occur in a 

mosaic across the landscape; therefore, many wildlife species can be expected to 

utilize more than one habitat type. Predominant wildlife habitat types classified 

on the LBA tract and adjacent area correspond with the major plant communities 

defined during the vegetation baseline survey. As discussed in Section 3.9, they 

consist primarily of seeded grassland (Agricultural Pasture 1 and 2), Grassland, 

and Sagebrush/Grassland vegetation types. Various, relatively small parcels of 

crested wheatgrass pasture occur throughout the area. As a result of oil and gas 

development, there are networks of road and well-pad disturbance areas 

overlaying much of the Sagebrush/Grassland and Grassland vegetation areas, as 

well as tank batteries and pipeline disturbance with varying degrees of recovering 

vegetative cover. No designated crucial or unique habitats are present. 

Seeded grassland (Agricultural Pasture 1 and 2 vegetation types combined) is the 

largest overall habitat type (48 percent) within the vegetation analysis area. It is 

dominated by crested wheatgrass, but older seedings have a mixture of less 

dominant native plant species and, with the passage of time, these seedings begin 

to resemble sagebrush grassland again. The predominant native habitats are 

Sagebrush/Grassland and Grassland types (26.6 percent and 5.7 percent, 

respectively). Bottomland grassland or streamside bottomland habitat is limited 

to a narrow band along limited reaches of Little Rawhide Creek. Trees are present 

within residential windbreaks and around an impoundment located within the 

BLM study area, but outside of the tract as applied for or BLM’s preferred tract 

configuration under Alternative 1 (Section 3.9). 

Little Rawhide Creek passes through the eastern portion of the LBA tract from 

south to north and its tributary, Prong Draw, passes through the central portion 

of the tract from southwest to northeast (Figure 3-13). Under natural conditions, 

Little Rawhide Creek is classified as an intermittent stream and its tributaries, 

including Prong Draw, are all ephemeral streams. Essentially all water courses in 

the study area are currently receiving discharge water from CBNG development. 

At least seven distinct in-channel impoundments are located on the Eagle Butte 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-114 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

West LBA Tract as applied for and three others are located on the additional area 

evaluated under Alternative 1. Due to the discharge water from CBNG 

development, streamflow occurrence is more persistent and these shallow 

impoundments along Little Rawhide Creek and Prong Draw are seldom completely 

dry, resulting in an increase in habitat for waterfowl, shorebirds, and aquatic 

species. 

Eagle Butte Mine’s approved WDEQ/LQD mine permit allows disturbance of the 

Little Rawhide Creek channel. Approximately 3.5 miles of the natural channel has 

been diverted to-date within the Eagle Butte Mine’s current permit area. FCW 

would propose another diversion of Little Rawhide Creek if they acquire a lease for 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 

3.10.1.2 Environmental Consequences

3.10.1.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased under the Proposed Action or BLM’s 

preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1, coal mining operations at the Eagle 

Butte Mine would be extended by up to nine years. Impacts to wildlife that would 

be caused by mining the LBA tract would be addressed as part of the review of the 

mine permit application by the WGFD and the WDEQ/LQD when the mining and 

reclamation permit is amended to include the LBA tract. 

Mining directly and indirectly impacts local wildlife populations. These impacts 

are both short-term (until successful reclamation is achieved) and long-term 

(persisting beyond successful completion of reclamation). The direct impacts of 

surface coal mining on wildlife occur during mining and are therefore short-term. 

They include road kills by mine-related traffic, restrictions on wildlife movement 

created by fences, spoil piles, and pits, and displacement of wildlife from active 

mining areas. Displaced animals may find suitable habitat that is not occupied by 

other animals, occupy suitable habitat that is already being used by other 

individuals, or occupy poorer quality habitat than that from which they were 

displaced. In the second and third situations, the animals may suffer from 

increased competition with other animals and are less likely to survive and 

reproduce. If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased and mined, the direct 

impacts related to mine traffic and mine operations would be extended within the 

general analysis area by up to nine years. 

The indirect impacts are longer term. After the LBA tract is leased, mined, and 

reclaimed, alterations in the topography and vegetative cover, particularly the 

reduction in sagebrush density, would cause a decrease in carrying capacity for 

some species and a decrease in vegetative diversity. Sagebrush would gradually 

become reestablished on the reclaimed land, but the topographic changes would 

be permanent. Microhabitats may be reduced on reclaimed land due to flatter 

topography, less diverse vegetative cover, and reduction in sagebrush density. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-115 

3.10.1.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the Eagle Butte West coal lease application would 

be rejected and the impacts to wildlife and wildlife habitat associated with coal 

removal described above would not occur on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 

Wildlife habitat on from 2,395 to 2,415 additional acres (under the Proposed 

Action and BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1, respectively) 

would not be disturbed. Mining operations and associated impacts to wildlife and 

wildlife habitat would continue as currently permitted on the existing Eagle Butte 

Mine coal leases but would not be extended onto portions of the LBA tract that will 

not be affected under the current mining and reclamation plan. 

3.10.2 Big Game

3.10.2.1 Affected Environment

The two big game species that are common in suitable habitat throughout the 

general analysis area are pronghorn (Antilocapra americana) and mule deer 

(Odocoileus hemionus). White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) are occasionally 

observed and there have been isolated reports of elk sightings. No crucial big game 

habitat or migration corridors are recognized by the WGFD in this area. 

Pronghorn are by far the most common big game species in this area. This 

species is most abundant in the sagebrush grassland or mixed-grass prairie 

habitats. Reclaimed grassland constitutes only a small portion of the available 

habitat around the PRB mines, although pronghorn are observed during all 

seasonal surveys in these areas. Home range for pronghorn can vary between 400 

acres to 5,600 acres, according to several factors including season, habitat 

quality, population characteristics, and local livestock occurrence. Typically, daily 

movement does not exceed six miles. Pronghorn may make seasonal migrations 

between summer and winter habitats, but migrations are often triggered by 

availability of succulent plants and not local weather conditions (Fitzgerald et al. 

1994). The WGFD has classified the general analysis area as primarily 

winter/yearlong pronghorn range, which means that a population or a portion of a 

population of animals makes general use of this habitat on a year-round basis and 

that there is a significant influx of additional animals onto this habitat from other 

seasonal ranges in the winter. The entire general analysis area is within the 

WGFD Gillette Herd Unit. In post-season 2005, the WGFD estimated the Gillette 

Herd Unit to be 17,400 animals, with an objective of 11,000 (WGFD 2006). 

Mule deer use nearly all habitats, but prefer sagebrush grassland, rough breaks, 

and riparian bottomland. Browse is an important component of the mule deer’s 

diet throughout the year, comprising as much as 60 percent of total intake during 

autumn, while forbs and grasses typically make up the rest of their diet (Fitzgerald 

et al. 1994). Mule deer are frequently observed on Eagle Butte Mine reclaimed 

lands. In certain areas of the state, this species tends to be more migratory than 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-116 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

white-tailed deer, traveling from higher elevations in the summer to winter ranges 

that provide more food and cover. However, monitoring indicates that mule deer 

are not very migratory in the vicinity of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. The 

WGFD has classified a majority of the general analysis area as being out of normal 

mule deer use range, which means an area that does not contain enough animals 

to be an important habitat or is a habitat that is of limited importance to a 

species. The entire area is located within the WGFD Powder River Mule Deer Herd 

Unit. No crucial mule deer ranges or migration corridors are present on or within 

several miles of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Crucial range is defined as any 

particular seasonal range or habitat component that has been documented as the 

determining factor in a population’s ability to maintain and reproduce itself at a 

certain level. The WGFD estimated the 2005 post-season mule deer for the herd 

unit at 53,000, which is near the current objective of 52,000 (WGFD 2006). 

White-tailed deer are generally managed separately by the WGFD in the Central 

Herd Unit. White-tailed deer prefer riparian habitats and are therefore seldom 

observed in the general analysis area due to the lack of that particular habitat. 

The WGFD classifies the entire general analysis area as out of the normal whitetailed deer use range. White-tailed deer are occasionally recorded along Rawhide 

Creek and the Little Powder River to the north but have rarely been recorded in 

the general analysis area. 

The nearest elk population is in the Fortification Unit, approximately 15 miles to 

the west of the general analysis area. None of the general analysis area is 

classified by the WGFD as within normal elk use range. The LBA tract does not 

include the types of terrain or vegetation that would provide security cover for elk. 

Although there have been isolated sightings of elk in the general area, no elk have 

been observed recently within the general analysis area. 

3.10.2.2 Environmental Consequences

3.10.2.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

Under the Proposed Action and the BLM’s preferred tract configuration under 

Alternative 1, big game would be displaced from portions of the Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract to adjacent ranges during mining. Pronghorn would be most affected; 

however, no areas classified as crucial pronghorn habitat occur on or within two 

miles of the LBA tract. Mule deer would not be substantially impacted, given their 

infrequent use of these lands and the availability of suitable habitat in adjacent 

areas. White-tailed deer are not usually found in the area but are occasionally 

observed to the north. None of the land within the general analysis area is 

considered by WGFD to be an elk use area and no elk have been observed within 

the general analysis area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract in recent years. 

Big game displacement would be incremental, occurring over several years, which 

would allow for gradual changes in distribution patterns. Big game residing in the 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-117 

adjacent areas could be impacted by increased competition with displaced 

animals. Noise, dust, and associated human presence would cause some localized 

avoidance of foraging areas adjacent to mining activities. On the existing coal 

leases, however, big game have continued to occupy areas adjacent to and within 

areas of active mining disturbance, suggesting that some animals may become 

habituated to such disturbances. 

Big game animals are highly mobile and can move to undisturbed areas. There 

would be restrictions on big game movement on or through the tract due to the 

construction of fences, spoil piles, and pits related to mining. During winter 

storms, pronghorn may not be able to negotiate these barriers. WDEQ guidelines 

require fencing to be designed to permit pronghorn passage to the extent possible. 

Following reclamation, topographic moderation and changes in vegetation may 

result in a long-term reduction in big game carrying capacity. 

3.10.2.2.2 No Action Alternative

The impacts to big game under the No Action Alternative would be similar to the 

impacts described in Section 3.10.1.2.2, above. 

3.10.3 Other Mammals

3.10.3.1 Affected Environment

A variety of small and medium-sized mammal species occur in the vicinity of the 

general analysis area, although not all have been observed on the LBA tract. These 

include predators and furbearers, such as coyote (Canis latrans), red fox (Vulpes 

vulpes), bobcat (Lynx rufus), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), long-tailed weasel 

(Mustela frenata), badger (Taxidea taxus), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), raccoon 

(Procyon lotor), and beaver (Castor canadensis). Prey species include various 

rodents [including mice, rats, voles, gophers, ground squirrels, chipmunks, and 

black-tailed prairie dogs (Cynomys ludovicianas)] and lagomorphs (jackrabbits and 

cottontails). These prey species are cyclically common and widespread throughout 

the region. Porcupines (Erethizon dorsatum) and bats [such as hoary (Lasiurus 

cinereus) and big brown (Eptesicus fuscus)] also have habitat in the vicinity. The 

prey species are important for raptors and other predators. 

The black-tailed prairie dog was added to the list of candidate species for federal 

listing on February 4, 2000 (USFWS 2000a). The USFWS has since removed the 

black-tailed prairie dog from the list of candidate species (USFWS 2002a), but 

continues to encourage the protection of prairie dog colonies for their value to the 

prairie ecosystem and the myriad of species that rely on them (USFWS 2004). 

The black-tailed prairie dog is a highly social, diurnally active, burrowing 

mammal. Aggregations of individual burrows, known as colonies, form the basic 

unit of prairie dog populations. Found throughout the Great Plains in shortgrass 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-118 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

and mixed-grass prairie areas (Fitzgerald et al. 1994), the black-tailed prairie dog 

has declined in population numbers and extent of colonies in recent years. The 

three major impacts that have influenced black-tailed prairie dog populations are 

the initial conversion of prairie grasslands to cropland in the eastern portion of its 

range from approximately the 1880s-1920s; large-scale control efforts conducted 

from approximately 1918 through 1972, when an Executive Order was issued 

banning the use of compound 1080; and the introduction of sylvatic plague into 

North American ecosystems in 1908 (USFWS 2000b). In Wyoming, this species is 

primarily currently found in isolated populations in the eastern half of the state 

(Clark and Stromberg 1987). USFWS recently estimated that about 125,000 acres 

of black-tailed prairie dog occupied habitat exists in Wyoming (USFWS 2000b). 

Many other wildlife species, such as the black-footed ferret, swift fox, mountain 

plover, ferruginous hawk, and burrowing owl may be dependent on the blacktailed prairie dog for some portion of their life cycle (USFWS 2000b). 

The species is considered a common resident in eastern Wyoming, utilizing 

shortgrass and mid-grass habitats (Luce et al. 1999). Prairie dogs construct 

extensive burrow systems in fine- to medium-textured upland soil types. 

According to USDA-FS observations on the Thunder Basin National Grassland, 

the largest concentrations of prairie dog colonies in the vicinity of the eastern PRB 

surface coal mines are found east of the coal burnline, which is outside and east 

of the area of surface coal mining (Tim Byer, personal communication 

9/11/2003). The large prairie dog complexes in this area east of the coal burnline 

have recently been drastically impacted by outbreaks of plague. The prairie dog 

colonies west of the burnline, including the areas near the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract, are generally smaller and less densely concentrated. These colonies have 

not been affected by plague. 

Surveys have been conducted to locate prairie dog colonies on and within one mile 

of the BLM study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (the tract as applied for 

and the additional area evaluated by BLM under Alternative 1). One prairie dog 

town was found within this survey area. This small town (approximately one acre 

in area) is located just over 3⁄4-mile north of the BLM study area (Figure 3-14). 

Additional discussion of prairie dog colonies identified in the vicinity of the Eagle 

Butte Mine area is included in the Biological Assessment (Appendix E) of this EIS. 

3.10.3.2 Environmental Consequences

3.10.3.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

Medium-sized mammals (such as lagomorphs, coyotes, and foxes) would be 

temporarily displaced to other habitats by mining, potentially resulting in 

increased competition and mortality. However, these animals would rebound as 

forage is developed or small mammal prey species recolonize the reclaimed areas. 

Direct losses of small mammals would be higher than for other types of wildlife 

because the mobility of small mammals is limited and many would retreat into 
SCHIERMEISTER

RAWHIDE

SCHOOL

SATELLITE

BARBOUR

5

8

17

6

7

18

1

12

13

2

11

14

3

10

15

34 35 36 31 32

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

T.

52

N.

T.

51

N.

16

6

7

18

1

12

13

2

11

14

3

10

15

4

9

36

35 33 34

31

R.72W. R.71W.

T.

52

N.

T.

51

N.

1

12

13

2

11

14

3

10

15

5

8

17

6

7

18

20

29

32

19

30

31

24

25

36

23

26

35

22

27

34

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N. 1

12

13

2

11

14

3

10

15

4

9

16

6

7

18

19

30

31

24

25

36

23

26

35

22

27

34

21

28

33

GILLETTE R. 72 W. R. 71 W.

GRAMS

RAWHIDE

FH5b FH5a

GHO5

SH4b

GHO1

RTH2

GHO7a

RTH3b

FH8b

BO4a

GHO4/

RTH10a

SH9/

RTH19

BO7a

BO4b

BO7b

RAWHIDE

SCHOOL

H8a

SH6e

RTH11

SH4e

H3d

SH6a/

RTH18

SH4d

GHO2c

GHO2b

SH6d

H3c

FH5e

RTH14d

RTH10b

GE2/

FH4b FH4a

FH5c/

RTH4b

FH5d

FH8c

FH8a

GHO2a

H7

SH6b/

GHO9a

SH6c/

GHO9b

SEO4

RTH8e

SH2d

SH4a/

RTH13

RTH7

FH1a

RTH8d

FH1b

RTH8c H3a

H3b

RTH3c/

GE4

RTH3a

SH4c

RTH10c/

GH07b

SH3b/

RTH14c/

GHO3b

SH2c

RTH1b

RTH1a

GHO3a/

RTH14a

SH2b

RTH4a/

SH2a

H2

SH3a/

RTH14b

FHlc/RTH8a

FHld/RTH8b

RTH20

FH3

RTH10d

SH7

MEADOWLARK

BO6

BO5

Rawhide

Creek

Powder River

Dry

Little

Rawhide

Creek

Fork

Little

Little

Powder

River

Rawhide

Creek

RTH8f

GHO2d

H8b

SH12

Prong Draw

Eagle Butte Mine

Permit Boundary

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract

as Applied for

H

BO

GHO

SH

RTH

FH

GE

Active Sage-Grouse Lek

and Three Mile Radius

Former Raptor Nest

Existing Raptor Nest

Historical Sage-Grouse Lek

(Inactive for 10 Consecutive Years)

Northern Harrier

Burrowing Owl

Great Horned Owl

Swainson's Hawk

Red-Tailed Hawk

Ferruginous Hawk

Golden Eagle

Prairie Dog Town

Two-Mile Wildlife

Study Area Boundary

B

SEO

PF

M

Unknown Buteo Species

Short-eared Owl

Prairie Falcon

Merlin

LEGEND

0 16000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

4000 8000

Additional Area Evaluated

Under Alternative 1

Area Added Under BLM's Preferred

Tract Delineation for Alternative 1

Former Location of Nearby

Active Sage-Grouse Lek

Figure 3-14. Raptor Nest Sites, Sage-Grouse Leks, and Prairie Dog Towns Within and Adjacent to the

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract.

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-119
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-120 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

burrows when disturbed. Therefore, populations of such prey animals as voles, 

ground squirrels and mice would decline during mining. However, these animals 

have a high reproductive potential and would tend to re-occupy and adapt to 

reclaimed areas quickly. A research project on habitat reclamation on mined 

lands within the PRB for small mammals and birds concluded that reclamation 

objectives to encourage recolonization by small mammal communities are being 

achieved (Shelley 1992). That study evaluated sites at five separate mines. 

Black-tailed prairie dogs would not be affected by leasing and mining the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract because no colonies are currently present on or within 3⁄4 

mile of the BLM study area for the tract. 

3.10.3.2.2 No Action Alternative

The impacts to small mammals under the No Action Alternative would be similar 

to the impacts described in Section 3.10.1.2.2, above. 

3.10.4 Raptors

3.10.4.1 Affected Environment

The raptor species expected to occur in suitable habitats in the general analysis 

area include the golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), ferruginous hawk (Buteo regalis), 

red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), Swainson's hawk (Buteo swainsoni), roughlegged hawk (Buteo lagopus), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), American kestrel 

(Falco sparverius), prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus), great horned owl (Bubo 

virginianus), burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), and short-eared owl (Asio 

flammeus). The bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) is a migrant and winter 

resident as discussed in the Biological Assessment (Appendix E) of this EIS. 

Those species that commonly nest in the general analysis area are the golden 

eagle, red-tailed hawk, Swainson’s hawk, northern harrier, burrowing owl, and 

great horned owl. The short-eared owl and ferruginous hawk occasionally nest in 

the area. Habitat is limited for those species that nest exclusively in trees or on 

cliffs, but several species are adapted to nesting on the ground, creek banks, 

buttes, or rock outcrops. 

Figure 3-14 shows the locations of raptor nests identified since monitoring began 

for Eagle Butte Mine in an area that includes the BLM study area for the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract (the tract as applied for and the additional area evaluated 

by BLM under Alternative 1). Over time, natural forces have destroyed many 

nests, while others have been relocated for mitigation or removed by mining 

activities. In some cases, nests have been created to mitigate nest sites that were 

impacted by mining operations at this mine. 

During surveys that were completed in 2004 by TWC, a total of five raptor species 

(golden eagle, northern harrier, red-tailed hawk, Swainson’s hawk, and burrowing 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-121 

owl) were currently nesting on the raptor survey area, which includes the BLM 

study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract and a two-mile radius. In the past, 

the great horned owl, ferruginous hawk, and short-eared owl have also been 

identified as nesting within or adjacent to the raptor survey area. The 2004 

survey identified 28 intact raptor nests in the survey area, 10 of these nests were 

active. No active nests were observed in 2004 on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

as applied for or on the BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1. 

One active northern harrier nest and one active red-tailed hawk nest were 

documented on the additional area evaluated under Alternative 1. There are no 

intact ferruginous hawk nests within the BLM study area, but five nests are 

located within one mile of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. These nests have not 

been active since at least 2000. One intact, unoccupied Swainson’s hawk/redtailed hawk nest is present on the additional area evaluated by BLM under 

Alternative 1. No other intact raptor nests were present on the BLM study area for 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 

3.10.4.2 Environmental Consequences

3.10.4.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

Mining the LBA tract would not impact regional raptor populations; however, 

individual birds or pairs may be impacted. Mining activity could cause raptors to 

abandon nests. USFWS recommends a one-mile buffer around all ferruginous 

hawk nests. No intact ferruginous hawk nests are within the BLM study area for 

the LBA tract (the tract as applied for and the additional area evaluated by BLM 

under Alternative 1), but five nests are located within one mile of the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract. These nests have not been active since at least 2000. 

USFWS and WDEQ/LQD approval would be required before mining would occur 

within buffer zones for active raptor nests. The Eagle Butte Mine annually 

monitors territorial occupancy and nest productivity on and around their existing 

leases. Raptor nesting activity has previously occurred in active mining and 

construction areas and the applicant mine has successfully executed state-of-theart mitigation techniques to protect nest productivity. 

Mining near raptor territories would minimally impact availability of raptor forage 

species. At the applicant mine, lack of nesting habitat for many raptor species 

that nest in trees or on cliffs, not a lack of forage area, has been determined to be 

the most important limiting factor. During mining, nesting habitat is created by 

the excavation process (highwalls), as well as through enhancement efforts (nest 

platforms, nest boxes, and tree plantings). 

3.10.4.2.2 No Action Alternative

The impacts to raptor species under the No Action Alternative would be similar to 

the impacts described in Section 3.10.1.2.2, above. 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-122 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

3.10.5 Upland Game Birds

3.10.5.1 Affected Environment

Four upland game bird species are known to occur in suitable habitats in the 

general analysis area. These species are sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus), 

mourning doves (Zenaida macroura), sharp-tailed grouse (Tympanuchus 

phasianellus), and gray partridge (Perdix perdix). 

Sage-grouse are a large upland game bird considered a “landscape species”, 

annually using widespread areas of sagebrush habitats. This grouse is referred to 

as both sage-grouse and greater sage-grouse, and the terms are interchangeable. 

Sage-grouse are found in sagebrush shrub-land habitat, and sagebrush is 

essential for sage-grouse during all seasons of the year. During winter, sagegrouse feed almost exclusively on sagebrush leaves and buds. Suitable winter 

habitat requires sagebrush above snow. Sage-grouse tend to select wintering sites 

where sagebrush is 10-14 inches above the snow. Population and habitat 

analyses suggest that wintering habitat can be as limiting as mating and breeding 

habitats. Breeding occurs on strutting grounds (leks) during late March and April. 

Leks are generally situated on sites with low vegetation and little or no sagebrush, 

broad ridge tops, grassy openings, and disturbed sites such as burns, abandoned 

well locations, airstrips or roads. However, often there are areas of denser 

sagebrush near the lek that are used for foraging, loafing, and hiding cover (WGFD 

2003). Approximately two-thirds of hens nest within three miles of the lek where 

they were bred. The rest of the hens usually nest within 15 miles of the lek. Sagegrouse typically nest under tall sagebrush, but may use other large shrubs. 

Sagebrush stands used for nesting range in height from eight to 18 inches, with 

individual plants reaching up to 32 inches tall. Both new spring herbaceous 

growth and residual cover are important in the understory for nesting sage-grouse 

(WGFD 2003). Hens move their brood immediately upon hatching from the nest 

site to brood-rearing areas. Sites used during the first 10-14 days after hatching 

are typically within 1.5 miles of the nest. The vast majority of chick mortality (87 

percent of total brood loss in four studies conducted in Wyoming) occurs during 

this period. After the first 10 days, broods may have dispersed five or more miles 

from the nest. As summer progresses and food plants mature and dry, sagegrouse move to areas still supporting succulent herbaceous vegetation. They 

continue to rely on adjacent sagebrush for protection from weather and predators, 

and for roosting and loafing. Sage-grouse normally move off late brood-rearing 

habitat onto transitional fall habitat before moving onto winter range (WGFD 

2003). 

On and after July 2, 2002, the USFWS received three petitions requesting that the 

greater sage-grouse be listed as endangered across its entire range. Following a 

12-month status review of the best available scientific and commercial information 

on the species, the USFWS found that listing was not warranted at this time. 

However, the USFWS continues to have concerns regarding sage-grouse 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-123 

population status, trends and threats, as well as concerns for other sagebrush 

obligates (USFWS 2005). USFWS indicated the need for continued efforts to 

conserve sage-grouse and sagebrush habitat on a long-term basis. USFWS 

encouraged continued development and implementation of conservation strategies 

throughout the grouse’s range. 

On September 11, 2003, the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission announced 

that the 2003 hunting season for sage-grouse in Johnson, Sheridan, and 

Campbell Counties would be closed, following the deaths of 11 sage-grouse in 

northeastern Wyoming from West Nile virus in August and early September of that 

year. According to a press release, the commission took this action because the 

incidence of infection is much higher in northeastern Wyoming than the rest of 

the state and the area is on the fringe of sage-grouse range with marginal, 

fragmented habitat (WGFD September 11, 2003 press release). Recent lek, or 

strutting ground, count data indicate that Wyoming’s sage-grouse populations 

increased slightly in 2004 and 2005. Lower incidences of West Nile virus 

mortalities were documented in 2004 and 2005, primarily the result of cooler 

temperatures that reduced mosquito populations. Sage-grouse hunting seasons 

were consequently reopened in 2004 (Christiansen 2004). 

In May 2002, the USFWS office in Cheyenne, Wyoming released a list entitled Coal 

Mine List of 40 Migratory Bird Species of Management Concern in Wyoming, which 

replaced the previous Migratory Birds of High Federal Interest List. The greater 

sage-grouse is included on the new list. The presence of sage-grouse and sagegrouse sign are included in the annual sage-grouse surveys that are conducted in 

the spring as required by WDEQ/LQD. 

Eagle Butte Mine conducts surveys to identify new sage-grouse leks and sagegrouse lek attendance at previously identified leks in the spring as part of the 

annual wildlife surveys that are conducted for the mine. These surveys and 

baseline inventories, which include the mine’s permit area and a one-mile 

perimeter, were initiated in the mid-1970s when the mine was initially permitted. 

As a result, most of the area included in the proposed Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

has been included in previous annual survey areas. 

It is unlikely that the sage-grouse are yearlong residents in the area for the 

following reasons: 

• As discussed in Section 3.9, the Sagebrush/Grassland vegetation type, 

which is characterized by the moderate to heavy presence of Wyoming big 

sagebrush, occupies about 28 percent of the BLM study area for the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract. Sagebrush is also present within the Agricultural 

Pasture 1 vegetation type. 

• The lands included in the BLM study area have been included in annual 

wildlife monitoring for the Eagle Butte Mine since 1986. No confirmed sage-
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-124 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

grouse nests have been discovered during at least the last 14 years of 

annual monitoring. One suspected nesting attempt was recorded in 1998 

(McKee 2007). 

• Specific surveys for sage-grouse broods were conducted twice annually from 

1993 through 2002 for the Eagle Butte Mine, including the portion of Little 

Rawhide Creek that is located within the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. No 

sage-grouse or their sign (e.g., droppings, feathers) were recorded along the 

drainage during those surveys. The only documentation of the presence of 

sage-grouse broods since 1993 occurred three miles northeast of the LBA 

tract as applied for or BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 

1 (McKee 2007). 

Four historic and two active sage-grouse leks have been monitored within the 

wildlife study area (Figure 3-14). The two active leks have had displaying males 

within the last ten years. The locations of three of the four historic leks were 

previously disturbed by mining operations at the Eagle Butte and Rawhide Mines. 

Each active lek is generally surveyed three times each breeding season. 

The two active sage-grouse leks are the Barbour lek and the Rawhide School 

Satellite lek. The Barbour lek, located at the western edge of the Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract, was first documented in 1984 during Eagle Butte Mine baseline 

surveys. The peak number of males was 28 in 1991. No males were recorded in 

surveys conducted between 1994 and 2000. Breeding activities shifted 

approximately 1,000 ft southwest of the original lek in 2001. Twenty-four males 

were observed on the strutting ground in 2001, but numbers declined through 

2005 (FCW 2005b). Two sage-grouse were spotted in the general vicinity of the 

Barbour lek on two separate occasions in 2004 and no sage-grouse were recorded 

on the Barbour lek in 2005 (FCW 2005b). The Rawhide School Satellite lek was 

first discovered in 2001. At least 16 males were in attendance at that time. Peak 

male attendance declined during each of the four subsequent years and no birds 

were observed in the vicinity of the lek in 2005 (FCW 2005b). The fact that neither 

lek has been consistently active over time suggests that one or both locations 

could be satellites to other, larger leks located beyond the survey area (FCW 

2005b). 

The three historic strutting grounds that were removed in conjunction with mining 

activities at Eagle Butte and Rawhide Mines were the Grams, Rawhide, and 

Meadowlark leks. No males were in attendance at these three grounds at least 

one year prior to lek disturbance. No grouse have been observed at the historic 

Rawhide School lek since at least 1988 (WGFD data), though it was not checked 

every year. Figure 3-14 shows the location of the two active leks and the four 

historic lek sites. 

As discussed above, research has indicated that most hens (approximately twothirds) will nest within three miles of the lek where they were bred. The three-mile 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-125 

radius around the Barbour and Rawhide School Satellite leks extends onto the 

LBA tract as proposed (Figure 3-14). The three-mile radius around another lek, 

the Schiermeister lek also extends onto the LBA tract. The Schiermeister lek, 

which is located east of Eagle Butte Mine’s active mining operation just outside of 

the wildlife study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (Figure 3-14), was active 

in 2004 and 2005 (FCW 2005b). There is limited potential for use of the LBA tract 

by nesting sage-grouse hens due to the relatively small amount of nesting habitat 

(sagebrush) on the tract. As discussed above, no sage-grouse broods were 

recorded during at lease 16 years of brood surveys on the portion of Little Rawhide 

Creek that is located within the tract. 

Mourning doves are a migrant and relatively common in the area during 

migration, particularly near sites with water sources and trees and in the summer 

for breeding and nesting. This species is a relatively common breeding bird in 

Campbell County and may be found in a variety of habitat types. Mourning doves 

were observed on the survey area in 2004 and 2005 (FCW 2005b). 

Sharp-tailed grouse were observed in 2004 approximately one mile southeast of 

the LBA tract, but these sightings were infrequent, occurring only during the 

winter. The nearest sharp-tailed grouse lek is over six miles northeast of the 

survey area. 

Gray (or Hungarian) partridge, an introduced species, have been infrequently 

observed on reclaimed areas, sagebrush shrublands, upland grassland, and 

cultivated lands in the vicinity of the LBA tract. In some years this species is 

occasionally encountered while in other years partridge appear to be totally 

absent. Hungarian partridge were not observed on the survey area in2004 and 

2005 (FCW 2005b). 

3.10.5.2 Environmental Consequences

3.10.5.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

Overall, the sage-grouse population has been steadily declining in Wyoming and 

across the rest of the west. A study prepared by the Western Association of Fish 

and Wildlife Agencies estimated that sage-grouse populations in western North 

America declined at an overall rate of 2.0 percent per year from 1965 to 2003 

(Connelly et al. 2004). The decline rate was larger from 1965 to 1985, with 

populations stabilizing and some increasing from 1986 to 2003. For Wyoming, 

this study estimated that sage-grouse populations declined at an average rate of 

9.66 percent from 1968 to 1986, and at an average rate of 0.33 percent per year 

from 1987 to 2003. Population lows were reached in the mid-1990s and there has 

been some gradual increase in numbers since that time (Connelly et al. 2004).

The Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is within the Northeast Wyoming Local SageGrouse Working Group (NWLSWG) Area, which includes portions of the WGFD 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-126 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Sheridan and Casper regions and the Thunder Basin National Grassland, which is 

located south of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Sage-grouse monitoring has 

occurred within the NWLSWG Area since 1967. Within this area, sage-grouse 

population trends have exhibited a cyclical pattern, with each successive peak of a 

cycle being lower than the preceding peak. This suggests a long term population 

decline since at least 1967 (Figure 3-15). 

Figure 3-15. Average Male Sage-Grouse Lek Attendance Within the Northeast 

Wyoming Local Working Group Area (1967-2005). 

(Source: USFS 2006) 

Population trends within the NWLSWG Area appear to be mirroring statewide 

trends in Wyoming, although the average number of males per lek in the 

NWLSWG Area, including in the Thunder Basin National Grassland, has typically 

been lower than those observed state wide (Figure 3-16). Since 1996, sage-grouse 

populations within the state and in northeast Wyoming have fluctuated but 

exhibited an overall increase, with a recent peak in male lek attendance occurring 

in 2000 or 2001. 

The causes of the range-wide decline in sage-grouse population levels are not 

completely understood, but they may be influenced by local conditions. However, 

habitat loss due to disturbance of leks, nesting and brood-rearing areas as a 

result of increasing development, drought, and the potential for West Nile virus, as 

well as loss of population connectivity are key threats to this species (Braun 1998, 

Wisdom et al. 2002, Naugle et al. 2004). 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-127 

Figure 3-16. Average Male Sage-Grouse Lek Attendance Statewide, Within the 

Northeast Wyoming Local Working Group Area, and Within the 

Thunder Basin National Grasslands (1996-2005). 

(Source: USFS 2006) 

Some potential impacts of mineral development (including coal mining and oil and 

gas development) on sage-grouse include: (1) direct habitat loss and fragmentation 

from mine, well, road, pipeline, transmission and power line construction, (2) 

alteration of plant and animal communities, (3) increased human activity which 

could cause animals to avoid the area, (4) increased noise, which could cause 

animals to avoid an area or reduce their breeding efficiency, (5) increased 

motorized access by the public leading to legal and illegal harvest, (6) direct 

mortality associated with water evaporation ponds and production pits, and (7) 

reduced water tables resulting in the loss of herbaceous vegetation. Some of these 

impacts are short-term and related to specific periods of activity. In some cases, 

mineral development may result in positive effects, which may include increased 

forb production, habitat diversity, and additional water sources. Some impacts 

may be long-term (30 years or more), and rehabilitation of impacted habitats may 

take many years to complete (WGFD 2003). In the case of sage-grouse lek 

attendance near the Eagle Butte Mine, the decline in attendance preceded 

physical mining disturbance and thus may not be attributable to mine-related 

activities (McKee 2007). 

Areas of suitable habitat for nesting and strutting grounds are needed to sustain 

sage-grouse populations. One recent study suggests that availability of winter 

habitat may also affect sage-grouse populations (Naugle et al. 2006). During 

mining, there is a short-term loss of potential nesting habitat and potential 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-128 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

disturbance to breeding activities, especially when mining operations occur in 

proximity to sage-grouse leks. Following reclamation, there may be a long term 

loss of nesting and winter habitat, depending on the amount of sagebrush that is 

restored relative to the amount of sagebrush that is present before mining. 

Sagebrush is a component of both the Sagebrush/Grassland and Agricultural 

Pasture 2 vegetation communities, which occupy about 40 percent of the 

vegetation analysis area. WDEQ/LQD reclamation standards call for restoration 

of sagebrush on at least 20 percent of the reclaimed area. Estimates for the time 

it would take to restore shrubs, including sagebrush, to premining density levels 

range from 20 to 100 years. Until sagebrush returns to its premining density 

levels, there would be a reduction in sage-grouse nesting habitat and winter 

habitat on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 

If mining activities disturb a lek, sage-grouse would have to use an alternate lek or 

establish a new lek site for breeding activities. There is currently one active sagegrouse strutting ground (Barbour lek) located at the edge of the Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract; however, long-term monitoring at the Barbour lek suggests that it may 

be a satellite site to a larger source lek beyond the wildlife monitoring area, as it 

only appears to be used during years when regional grouse populations are high 

(McKee 2007). Fidelity to lek sites has been well documented (WGFD 2003), but 

monitoring of sage-grouse activities has indicated that the birds may change lek 

sites. 

As discussed in Section 3.10.5.1, the Barbour, Rawhide School Satellite, and 

Shiermeister leks are located within three miles of the BLM study area for the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, which is where two-thirds of the hens that were bred 

at those leks would be expected to nest. If the LBA tract is leased and mined, 

potential nesting habitat for grouse that were bred at those leks would be affected 

by the mining activity on the tract. However, as also previously discussed, no 

confirmed sage-grouse nests or sage-grouse broods have been recorded in the 

vicinity of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract since 1994. The noise associated with 

mining operations may also disrupt sage-grouse breeding and nesting. 

There is some evidence that grouse populations do repopulate areas after 

reclamation for the species, but there is no evidence that populations attain their 

previous levels and reestablishment in reclaimed areas may take 20 to 30 years, 

or longer (Braun 1998). Estimates for the time it would take to restore shrubs, 

including sagebrush, to premine density levels range from 20 to 100 years, which 

may delay sage-grouse repopulation in the reclaimed areas. 

Leasing and mining the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would also affect potential 

habitat for mourning doves, sharp-tailed grouse, and gray partridge; however, the 

tract does not provide unique habitat for these species. Sightings of sharp-tailed 

grouse and gray partridge are infrequent in this area. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-129 

3.10.5.2.2 No Action Alternative

Impacts to upland game birds under the No Action Alternative would be similar to 

the impacts described in Section 3.10.1.2.2, above. 

3.10.6 Other Birds

3.10.6.1 Affected Environment

USFWS uses a list entitled Migratory Bird Species of Management Concern in 

Wyoming, specifically the Coal Mine List of 40 Migratory Bird Species of 

Management Concern in Wyoming, for reviews related to existing and proposed coal 

mine leased land (USFWS 2002b). This list was taken directly from the Wyoming 

Bird Conservation Plan (Cerovski et al. 2001). The Migratory Bird Species of 

Management Concern in Wyoming replaced the Migratory Birds of High Federal 

Interest (MBHFI) list. Eagle Butte Mine previously conducted annual surveys for 

the species included on the MBHFI list and now conducts annual surveys for the 

species included on the coal mine list. The surveys, which are conducted in the 

spring and summer, include the permit area and a one-half to one mile perimeter. 

The wildlife section of the supplementary information document to this EIS, which 

is available on request, includes a tabulation of the regional status and expected 

occurrence, historical observations, and breeding records for each of the species 

on the list of Migratory Bird Species of Management Concern in Wyoming, based on 

a compilation of the results of the annual surveys conducted on and near the 

proposed lease area. Twenty-four of the listed species have historically been 

observed within the general analysis area. Species that have been recorded 

nesting in the area include the burrowing owl, Brewer’s sparrow (Spizella breweri), 

Swainson’s hawk, short-eared owl, ferruginous hawk, lark bunting (Calamospiza 

melanocorys), grasshopper sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum), upland sandpiper 

(Bartramia longicauda), loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), lark sparrow 

(Chondestes grammacus), and the vesper sparrow (Pooecetes gramineus). Other 

species observed in the area include the greater sage-grouse, long-billed curlew 

(Numenius americanus), peregrine falcon (Falcon peregrinus), bald eagle, dickcissel 

(Spiza Americana), bobolink (Dolichonyx oryzivorus), common loon (Gavia immer), 

red-headed woodpecker (Melanerpes erthrocephalus), Merlin (Falco coumbarius), 

and Spague’s pipit (Anthus spragueii). The bald eagle is only observed in the 

winter or as a migrant and the long-billed curlew, peregrine falcon, dickcissel, 

bobolink, loon, red-headed woodpecker, Spague’s pipit, and merlin have been 

observed infrequently as migrants. 

The mountain plover (Charadrius montanus) is included on the list of Migratory 

Bird Species of Management Concern in Wyoming. The mountain plover was 

designated as a proposed threatened species by the USFWS in October 2001 

(USFWS 2001). USFWS subsequently published a withdrawal of the proposed rule 

to list the mountain plover as threatened on September 9, 2003, (USFWS 2003). 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-130 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

The USFWS continues to encourage provisions that would provide protection for 

this species, as it continues to be protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act 

and as a sensitive species under BLM policy (Bureau Manual 6840.06 E. Sensitive 

Species). 

Wildlife surveys conducted at the Eagle Butte Mine since the 1970s have failed to 

detect the presence of this species in the area. The survey area, which includes 

the Eagle Butte Mine permit area and a half-mile perimeter, is inventoried for 

suitable mountain plover habitat annually. No sightings of mountain plover have 

ever been recorded in the vicinity of the LBA tract. 

The bald eagle is seasonally common and most frequently observed during the 

winter months. Bald eagles are relatively common winter residents and migrants 

in northeastern Wyoming’s PRB. No bald eagle roosting habitat is present on the 

BLM study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. No known nest sites, or 

consistent yearly concentrated prey or carrion sources for bald eagles are present 

in the area of the Eagle Butte Mine, including the BLM study area for the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract. This species is infrequently observed in the general vicinity 

of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract in the winter. Additional information about the 

observed occurrence of the bald eagle on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract can be 

found in the Biological Assessment (Appendix E). 

The burrowing owl is common and a pair of owls has nested in a small prairie dog 

town in the wildlife study area (Figure 3-14) during 10 of the last 12 years. Sagegrouse on and in the near vicinity of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract are discussed 

in Section 3.10.5, above. 

Suitable nesting habitat is scarce if not absent in the general analysis area for the 

remainder of the Migratory Bird Species of Management Concern in Wyoming; 

therefore, the other species have rarely or never been recorded. 

Under natural conditions, the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract provides limited 

waterfowl and shorebird habitat. The natural aquatic habitat, prior to CBNG 

development within the Little Rawhide Creek drainage basin, was mainly available 

during spring migration as ponds (primarily stock reservoirs) and ephemeral 

streams. Many of these water features generally got quite low or dried up during 

the summer. However, the relatively recent development of CBNG resources 

upstream and within the general analysis area has supplied the creek, its 

tributaries, and in-stream reservoirs/ponds with water nearly continuously, 

resulting in an increase in habitat for waterfowl and shorebird species. Broods of 

blue-winged teal (Anas discors), mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), northern shoveler 

(Anas clypeata), Canada goose (Branta canadensis), killdeer (Charadrius 

vociferous), and American avocet (Recurvirostra americana) were observed during 

2004 and 2005 (FCW 2005b). 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-131 

3.10.6.2 Environmental Consequences

3.10.6.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

Of the twenty-four Migratory Bird Species of Management Concern in Wyoming that 

have historically been observed in the general analysis area, the Level 1 species 

(those identified as needing conservation action) that have been recorded nesting 

in the area include the burrowing owl, Brewer’s sparrow, and Swainson’s hawk. 

Level 1 species that do not have abundant nesting habitat available in the wildlife 

study area, but have been documented to nest include the short-eared owl, greater 

sage-grouse, and ferruginous hawk. Other Level 1 species observed in the area 

include the long-billed curlew, McCown’s longspur, upland sandpiper, and bald 

eagle. 

The existing habitat for these species on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would be 

destroyed during mining. The habitat loss would be short-term for grassland 

species, but would last longer for shrub-dependent species. There are currently 

no naturally-occurring trees on the LBA tract as applied for or the BLM preferred 

tract configuration under Alternative 1. Some domestic trees are planted within 

two residential windbreaks; one of which is located on the LBA tract as applied for 

and the other is located within the northern portion of the additional area 

evaluated by the BLM under Alternative 1. A few mature cottonwood trees occur 

within the southern portion of the additional area evaluated by the BLM under 

Alternative 1 (refer to Section 3.9.1). Eagle Butte Mine’s current reclamation 

practices are designed to provide a mosaic of upland grass and sagebrush habitats 

that would potentially host most of these species. Periodic songbird surveys 

completed at the Eagle Butte Mine from 1987 through 2002 verified that the 

average number of species in collective reclaimed habitats was greater than in 

collective native habitats (FCW 2002). 

No impacts to mountain plovers are anticipated because they have not been 

observed in the vicinity of the LBA tract during wildlife surveys conducted for the 

Eagle Butte Mine that began in the 1970s, and the typical suitable habitat for this 

species is not currently present on the tract. 

Potential impacts to the bald eagle, other raptors in general, and sage-grouse, as 

well as measures in place to prevent impacts to these species from existing mining 

operations, are included in the preceding discussions or in Appendix E. 

Mining the LBA tract would have a negligible effect on migrating and breeding 

waterfowl and shorebirds. Sedimentation ponds created during mining would 

provide interim habitat for these fauna. The Little Rawhide Creek diversion 

channel would not provide the same habitat as the natural stream channel, 

although natural streamflow and the presence of CBNG discharge water would not 

be affected. Eagle Butte Mine’s current reclamation plan requires that the portion 

of the stream channel affected by currently permitted mining be reclaimed to 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-132 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

restore its premining functions and aquatic habitats. If the LBA tract is leased 

and mined, these reclamation efforts would be extended onto the portion of the 

stream affected by mining the tract. Replacement of all impacted jurisdictional 

wetlands would be required in accordance with Section 404 of the CWA (Section 

3.7). If the replaced wetlands on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract do not duplicate 

the exact function and/or landscape features of the premine wetlands, waterfowl 

and shorebirds could be beneficially or adversely affected as a result. 

3.10.6.2.2 No Action Alternative

Impacts to migratory bird species, waterfowl, and shorebirds under the No Action 

Alternative would be similar to the impacts described in Section 3.10.1.2.2, above. 

3.10.7 Amphibians, Reptiles, and Aquatic Species

3.10.7.1 Affected Environment

Wildlife surveys completed specifically for the applicant and adjacent mines, as 

well as biological research projects in the eastern PRB, have documented 

numerous other wildlife species that inhabit the region, including various 

amphibians, reptiles, and aquatic species. All these species are generally common 

inhabitants of the area. 

Under natural conditions, aquatic habitat is limited by the ephemeral nature of 

surface waters in the general analysis area. The lack of deep-water habitat and 

extensive and persistent water sources limits the presence and diversity of fish 

and other aquatic species. Fish surveys were conducted in Little Rawhide Creek 

during baseline studies for the Eagle Butte Mine in between 1977 and 1984 and 

again in 1985. The 1977-84 surveys were completed along Little Rawhide Creek 

in the northern and northwestern portion of the Eagle Butte Mine area. The 1985 

survey was completed on the portion of Little Rawhide Creek that is within the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. No fish were noted during any of these surveys. 

As discussed above, water discharged from CBNG wells has supplied Little 

Rawhide Creek and some tributaries and ponds with water nearly continuously, 

resulting in an increase in habitat for aquatic species. However, due to the nature 

of the Little Rawhide Creek hydrologic system (as explained in Section 3.5.2.1), 

only short reaches of the channel length through the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

currently contains water year-round, while the remaining channel length is dry. 

Little Rawhide Creek has not become perennial, even with the addition of CBNG 

discharge water. The in-channel reservoirs on Prong Draw hold CBNG discharge 

water throughout the year; however, Prong Draw has not become perennial either. 

Numerous reptile and amphibian species have been recorded during the various 

surveys on the Eagle Butte Mine area and adjacent lands including the LBA tract. 

These species include the tiger salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum), plains spadefoot 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-133 

(Scaohiopus bombifrons), great plains toad (Bufo cognatus), Woodhouse’s toad 

(Bufo woodhousei), boreal chorus frog (Pseudacris triseriata maculata), northern 

leopard frog (Rana pipiens), common snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina 

serpentina), western painted turtle (Chrysemys picta belli), short-horned lizard 

(Phrynosoma douglassi), prairie rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis viridis), bullsnake 

(Pituophis melanoleucas sayi), western plains garter snake (Thamnophis radix 

haydeni), and eastern yellowbelly racer (Coluber constrictor flaviventris). In 2004 

and 2005, the only reptiles or amphibians that were encountered on the LBA tract 

were the boreal chorus frog (2004 and 2005), leopard frog (2004), and western 

painted turtle (2005) (FCW 2004b and 2005b). The western painted turtle and 

common snapping turtle have also been recorded along Little Rawhide Creek 

within the eastern portion of the survey area. The scarcity of mesic habitat 

elsewhere within the survey area reduces the potential of the area to attract 

numerous species, particularly amphibians. No fish were observed in Little 

Rawhide Creek during the 2004 survey. 

3.10.7.2 Environmental Consequences

3.10.7.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

Mining the LBA tract would remove habitat for aquatic species, amphibians, and 

reptiles in a portion of Little Rawhide Creek and sections of the ephemeral 

tributaries within the proposed lease area. Although the channel and surface 

water flow would be restored during reclamation, the stream would be diverted 

and habitat for these species would be lost during the initial diversion process. 

Under natural conditions, habitat for aquatic species is limited on the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract, however, as discussed above, a variety of aquatic species and 

reptiles and amphibians have been observed on and in the vicinity of the tract. 

Under jurisdiction of Eagle Butte Mine’s current WDEQ/LQD mine permit, a 

portion of Little Rawhide Creek has been diverted in order to recover coal from the 

existing coal leases (Section 3.5.2.1). Reptiles and amphibians have been 

recorded in both unmined and diverted reaches of Little Rawhide Creek adjacent 

to and within the current permit area (McKee 2007). 

Reclamation of the stream channel and restoration of surface water flow quantity 

and quality after mining to approximate pre-mining conditions would restore 

aquatic resources of Little Rawhide Creek. 

3.10.7.2.2 No Action Alternative

Impacts to reptiles, amphibian, and aquatic species under the No Action 

Alternative would be similar to the impacts described in Section 3.10.1.2.2, above. 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-134 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

3.10.8 Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Animal Species, and 

BLM Sensitive Species

Refer to Appendices E and F. 

3.10.9 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring

Regulatory guidelines and requirements designed to prevent or reduce surface coal 

mining impacts to wildlife include: 

• fencing designed to permit pronghorn passage to the extent possible; 

• creation of raptor nests to mitigate other nest sites impacted by mining 

operations at this mine; 

• relocation of raptor nests that would be impacted by mining in accordance 

with the approved raptor monitoring and mitigation plan; 

• obtaining a permit for removal and mitigation of golden eagle nests; 

• buffer zones for protection of raptor nests; 

• restriction of mine-related disturbances from encroaching in the near 

vicinity of any active raptor nest from March until hatching; 

• restriction of disturbances near raptor nests containing nestlings to prevent 

danger to, or abandonment of, the young; 

• creation of nesting habitat through enhancement efforts (nest platforms, 

nest boxes, and tree plantings); 

• reestablishment of the ground cover necessary for the return of a suitable 

raptor prey base after mining; 

• restoration of sage-grouse habitat after mining including reestablishment of 

sagebrush and other shrubs on reclaimed lands and grading of reclaimed 

lands to create swales and depressions; 

• development of a Migratory Bird Species of Management Concern for Coal 

Mines in Wyoming Monitoring and Mitigation Plan, which must be approved 

by USFWS; 

• required use of raptor-safe power lines; 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-135 

• restoration of diverse landforms, direct soil replacement, and the 

construction of brush piles, snags, and rock piles to enhance habitat for 

wildlife; 

• restoration of habitat provided by jurisdictional wetlands; and 

• reclamation of the stream channels and restoration of surface water flow 

quantity and quality after mining to approximate pre-mining conditions. 

FCW’s current mine permit requires reconstruction of bed form features in the 

stream channel of Little Rawhide Creek, such as pools and runs, that should help 

restore the channel’s natural form and function, as well as provide habitat. 

Restoration will be achieved by salvaging sufficient material from channel terrace 

alluvium to reconstruct naturally-occurring features. Current reclamation, as well 

as future reclamation of Little Rawhide Creek by the Eagle Butte Mine would 

incorporate alluvium salvaged from the original channel. 

These measures are included in the existing mining and reclamation permit and 

would be included in the amended mining and reclamation plans, if the LBA tract 

were leased and proposed for mining. 

Baseline wildlife surveys were conducted for the Eagle Butte Mine before mining 

operations began. Annual wildlife monitoring surveys have been conducted since 

1986. These surveys are required by state and federal regulations. The Eagle 

Butte Mine also voluntarily conducts annual and/or periodic surveys for 

additional species that are not included in the monitoring required by state or 

federal regulations. The wildlife monitoring surveys cover the area included in the 

mine permit area and a perimeter beyond the permit area that varies in size 

according to the species being surveyed. As a result, a majority of the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract has been surveyed as part of the wildlife monitoring surveys for 

the Eagle Butte Mine. 

The annual monitoring program includes: 

• spring surveys for new and/or occupied raptor nests, upland game bird lek 

locations, T&E species, and migratory birds; 

• late spring surveys of raptor production for occupied nests, opportunistic 

observations of all wildlife species, T&E species, and migratory birds; 

• raptor territorial occupancy and nest productivity is surveyed annually on 

and around the existing leases; 

• summer surveys for raptors, migratory birds, and lagomorph density; 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-136 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

• voluntary winter surveys for big game on and surrounding the permit area 

(currently conducted during alternate years); 

• voluntary annual surveys for migrating and nesting waterfowl, shorebirds, 

and other water obligate avian species; 

• voluntary breeding bird surveys (previously periodic, now annual); and 

• voluntary periodic small mammal trapping (1986-2001). 

Monitoring data were collected by all of the surface coal mines in the PRB for big 

game species until 1999. At that time, the WGFD reviewed monitoring data and 

requirements for big game species on those mine sites. They concluded that the 

monitoring had demonstrated a lack of impacts to big game on existing mine sites. 

No severe mine-caused mortalities had occurred and no long-lasting impacts on 

big game had been noted on existing mine sites. The WGFD therefore 

recommended at that time that big game monitoring be discontinued on all 

existing mine sites. New mines will be required to conduct big game monitoring if 

located in crucial winter range or in significant migration corridors, neither of 

which are present within the general analysis area. Although big game surveys 

are no longer required as part of the annual wildlife monitoring program at the 

Eagle Butte Mine, FCW has voluntarily continued these surveys on a reduced but 

regular schedule. 

There is an approved raptor monitoring and mitigation plan for the Eagle Butte 

Mine. This monitoring and mitigation plan would be amended to include the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract if it is leased and proposed for mining. The amended 

raptor mitigation plan would be subject to review and approval by USFWS before 

the amended mining plan is approved. 

Mitigation plans for Migratory Bird Species of Management Concern have been 

developed in cooperation with USFWS for the existing Eagle Butte mining 

operations, and those plans would be amended to include the LBA tract. If 

additional species are documented nesting or using the area regularly, a 

mitigation plan would be developed to protect those birds and their habitat. 

3.10.10 Residual Impacts

Although the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would be reclaimed in accordance with 

the requirements of SMCRA and Wyoming statutes, there would be some residual 

wildlife impacts. The topographic moderation would result in a permanent loss of 

habitat diversity and a potential decrease in slope-dependent shrub communities. 

This would reduce the carrying capacity of the land for shrub-dependent species. 

Reclamation standards may limit replacement of habitat for some species. Some 

species, such as sage-grouse, may repopulate reclaimed areas but populations 

may not attain pre-mining levels. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-137 

3.11 Land Use and Recreation 

3.11.1 Affected Environment

The majority of the surface of the lands included in the BLM study area for the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (the tract as applied for under the Proposed Action 

and the additional area evaluated under Alternative 1) is privately owned. 

Campbell County owns the surface on approximately 15 acres in the northern 

portion of the additional area evaluated by BLM under Alternative 1. A school, 

Rawhide Elementary School, is located on these lands. Campbell County Airport 

Board owns the surface on four small parcels of land in the southern portion of 

the additional area evaluated by BLM under Alternative 1. FCW is the major 

private surface owner, but there are 15 other private surface owners in the Echo 

Subdivision, which is included in the northern portion of the additional area 

evaluated by BLM under Alternative 1. All of the surface of the lands included in 

the BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1 are owned by FCW. 

Surface ownership of the BLM study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is 

available from the Campbell County Assessor’s Office (2007) and is shown on 

Figures 3-17 and 3-18. The Campbell County lands, including the school, the 

Campbell County Airport Board lands, and the Echo Subdivision are not included 

in the BLM’s preferred tract configuration for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

under Alternative 1. 

Livestock grazing on native rangeland is the primary land use within the tract 

under the Proposed Action and the additional area evaluated under Alternative 1. 

Other uses for both public and private lands include oil and gas production, 

wildlife habitat, and recreation as well as the elementary school, airport, and 

housing subdivision discussed above. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, BLM included the coal underlying the Rawhide 

Elementary School and the Echo Subdivision in the BLM study area for the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract for geological evaluation purposes because it is underlain by 

unmined federal coal that could logically be mined if the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract is leased and mined. However, according to the regulations at 43 CFR 

3461.5(c)(1), BLM must consider the coal underlying the Rawhide Elementary 

School and Echo Subdivision as unsuitable for mining. BLM’s preferred tract 

configuration for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract does not include the coal 

underlying the Rawhide School or the Echo Subdivision. 

Areas of disturbance within and near the BLM study area for the Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract are generally associated with roads, oil and gas wells and production 

facilities, surface mine-related facilities, and ranching operations. U.S. Highway 

14-16 crosses eastern limits of the LBA tract. State Highway 59 and the Hannum 

Road (a paved county road) are located roughly a mile south of the LBA tract. 

There are residential streets in the area of the Rawhide Elementary School and the 
16

21

28

33

17

20

29

32

18

19

30

R. 72 W.

U.S. Highway 14 -16

T.

51

N.

T.

51

N.

R. 72 W.

Surface ownership

of subdivision

area detailed

in Figure 3-18

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as Applied for

Additional Area Evaluated

Under Alternative 1

Area Added Under BLM's Preferred

Tract Delineation for Alternative 1

SCALE:1"=2000'

Campbell County School District

Campbell County Airport Board

Foundation Coal West, Inc.

Twenty Mile Land Company

LEGEND

SURFACE OWNERSHIP

Figure 3-17. Surface Ownership Within the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract.

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

3-138 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application
20

U.S. Highway 14-16

SCALE:1"=500'

LEGEND

Chotvacs, Wade R. and Margi R.

Craig, Darrel E.

Edwards, Glenn Robert and Jean

Haines, Thomas D. and Joyce M.

Hurm, Dennis D.

Kehr, Tom

Miller Properties, LLC

Mines, David L.

Roe, Douglas R. and Carol M.

Tabor, Burl H. and Luraetta K.

Tolar, Jack L. and Ada R.

Foundation Coal West, Inc.

Campbell County

Edwards, Glenn Robert (Bob)

Miller, Herbert D. & Danene R.

Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph

Gilsdorf, Joseph M. & Oksanen, Karla J.

Figure 3-18. Surface Ownership Detail of Echo Subdivision Area.

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-139
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-140 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Echo Subdivision, and several unnamed two-track roads traverse and provide 

public and private access within and near the LBA tract. 

The oil and gas estate within the BLM study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract is federally and privately owned, with the majority (approximately 88 

percent) being privately owned. All of the federally owned oil and gas estate is 

leased. The ownership of the oil and gas estate for the LBA tract is shown in 

Figure 3-19. A list of the current federal oil and gas lessees is given in Table 3-10. 

According to the WOGCC records as of May 19, 2006, there were no permitted 

conventional oil and gas wells on lands included in the BLM study area for the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (the tract as applied for and the additional area 

evaluated by BLM under Alternative 1) (Figure 3-19). Four unproductive 

conventional oil wells were drilled on private leases and subsequently plugged and 

abandoned (WOGCC 2006). 

The Supreme Court has ruled that the CBNG belongs to the owner of the oil and 

gas estate (98-830). Therefore, the oil and gas lessees have the right to develop 

CBNG as well as conventional oil and gas on the LBA tract. 

According to the WOGCC records as of May 19, 2006, there were 20 CBNG wells 

that were producing, 17 plugged and abandoned, 27 were shut-in, five were 

dormant, temporarily abandoned or intended to be abandoned, three were recently 

spudded, and 10 were permitted to be drilled within the BLM study area for the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (Figure 3-19). Extensive CBNG development has 

occurred north, south, and west of the tract. CBNG wells capable of production 

on or in sections adjacent to the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract are listed in 

Appendix G. 

Additional information on the conventional oil and gas and CBNG development in 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract and surrounding area is included in Section 3.3.2. 

Certain ancillary facilities are needed to support oil and gas production. These 

support facilities may include well access roads, well pads, production equipment 

at the wellhead (which may be located on the surface and/or underground), well 

production casing (which extends from the surface to the zone of production), 

underground pipelines (which gather the oil, gas, and/or water produced by the 

individual wells and carry it to a larger transmission pipeline or collection facility), 

facilities for treating, discharging, disposing of, containing, or injecting produced 

water, central metering facilities, electrical power utilities, gas compressor 

stations, and high-pressure transmission pipelines for delivering the gas to 

market. Currently, there are some oil and gas production facilities, primarily oil 

and gas pipelines, on the LBA tract, as discussed in Section 3.15 of this EIS. It is 

unlikely that additional support facilities would be constructed on the LBA tract 

because no productive conventional oil and gas wells have been drilled on the 

tract and most of the CBNG wells that exist on the tract have been either shut in 

or plugged and abandoned due to exhausted reserves and diminished production. 
16

21

28

33

17

20

29

32

18

19

30

31

13

24

25

36

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

T.

51

N.

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

T.

51

N.

WYW130050

WYW145108

WYW112922

WYW145117

PRIVATE

PRIVATE

PRIVATE

0 1500 3000 6000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

LEGEND

Oil & Gas Ownership Boundaries

Existing Eagle Butte Mine Federal Coal Leases

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as Applied for

CBNG - Producing

CBNG - Shut-In

Oil - Plugged & Abandoned

OIL & GAS WELL TYPES

CBNG - Permitted (not yet drilled)

Note: Well locations and status were

derived from a download from the

WOGCC website on 5/19/06.

(Located by 1/4 1/4 for clarity)

CBNG - Dormant

CBNG - Notice of Intent to Plug and Abandon

CBNG - Spudded

CBNG - Plugged and Abandoned

CBNG - Temporarily Abandoned

WYW112922 Federal Oil & Gas Lease Numbers

Additional Area Evaluated Under Alternative 1

Area Added Under BLM's Preferred

Tract Delineation for Alternative 1

Figure 3-19. Oil and Gas Wells and Oil and Gas Ownership Within the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract.

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-141
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-142 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Table 3-10. Eagle Butte West LBA Tract Oil and Gas Ownership. 

Location Lease Number Lessees of Record 

T.51N., R.72W.

Section 19 

Lots 8, 10 WYW-130050 Maurice W. Brown 

Section 19 

Lot 12 WYW-145108 Devon Energy Corporation 

Section 20 

Lot 5 WYW-112922 Maurice W. Brown 

Section 29 

Lots 11, 12 WYW-145117 Lance Oil and Gas Co. Inc. 

Note: From BLM Oil & Gas Plat (4/4/06). The oil and gas rights (including CBNG) and coal rights for the above 

locations are owned by the federal government. For the rest of the LBA tract, the oil and gas rights (including 

CBNG) are privately owned, and the coal rights are federally owned.

Coal mining is a dominant land use to the north, east, and southeast of the LBA 

tract. The Buckskin, Rawhide, Eagle Butte, Dry Fork, and Wyodak Mines form a 

group of contiguous or nearly contiguous surface coal mines located in Campbell 

County (Figure 1-1). Coal production from these five active mines increased by 48 

percent between 1993 and 2005 (from approximately 44 million tons in 1994 to 65 

million tons in 2005). Three leases, including two LBA tracts (the Eagle Butte 

Tract and the West Hay Creek Tract) and one exchange tract (the Belco Exchange 

tract adjacent to the Buckskin Mine), have been issued within this group of four 

mines since decertification of the federal coal region. The Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract being evaluated in this EIS and the pending Hay Creek II lease application 

are in this group of mines (Tables 1-1 and 1-2). 

Campbell County does not have a county-wide land use plan, but is currently 

developing a comprehensive land use plan jointly with the City of Gillette (City of 

Gillette 1978 and Campbell County 2005). The Gillette area land use plan is an 

integral part of the overall plan for Campbell County and recommends general 

types of uses for the area immediately surrounding the City of Gillette (City of 

Gillette 1978). The proposed lease area does not have a designated zoning 

classification. The City of Gillette/Campbell County Comprehensive Planning 

Program (City of Gillette 1978) provides general land use goals and policies for 

state and federal coal leases in the county. 

Big game hunting is the principal recreational land use within the general analysis 

area, and pronghorn, mule deer, and white-tailed deer are present within the area 

(Section 3.10.2). On private lands, hunting is allowed only with landowner 

permission. Land ownership within the PRB is largely private (approximately 80 

percent), with some private landowners permitting sportsmen to cross and/or 

hunt on their land. There has been a trend over the past two to three decades 

towards a substantial reduction in private lands that are open and reasonably 

available for hunting. Access fees continue to rise and many resident hunters feel 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-143 

these access fees are unreasonable. This trend has created problems for the 

WGFD in their attempt to distribute and control harvest at optimal levels, as well 

as for sportsmen who desire access to these animals (WGFD 2004). 

In general, publicly owned lands (i.e., Forest Service or BLM-administered federal 

lands and state school sections) are open to hunting if legal access is available. 

Due to safety concerns, however, public surface lands contained within an active 

mining area are generally closed to the public, further limiting recreational use. 

As shown in Figures 3-17 and 3-18, no public surface lands are included in the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for or the BLM’s preferred tract 

configuration under Alternative 1. Fifteen acres of land owned by Campbell 

County are included in the additional area evaluated by BLM under Alternative 1, 

but not all of that area is currently accessible to the public. 

Recreational use on the privately owned surface is allowed only with landowner 

permission. Sport hunting in varying degrees occurs on the LBA tract. Sagegrouse, mourning dove, waterfowl, rabbit, and coyote are hunted in the vicinity, 

and some coyote and red fox trapping may occur. 

Specific details regarding big game herd management objectives within and near 

the general analysis area are contained in the WGFD’s Annual Big Game Herd 

Unit Report (WGFD 2006). The WGFD classifies the general analysis area as 

winter/yearlong (67 percent) or yearlong (33 percent) habitat for antelope. No 

crucial pronghorn habitat is recognized by the WGFD in this area. The proposed 

lease area is within pronghorn antelope Hunt Area 17, which is contained in the 

Gillette Herd Unit. In post-season 2005, the population of the Gillette Herd Unit 

was estimated to be approximately 17,400 animals, which is above the WGFD 

objective of 11,000 (WGFD 2006). 

Historical problems associated with the management of the Gillette Herd Unit 

include hunter access, over-harvest on the limited public lands, and quantifying 

landowner preferences and desires. Prior to 1997, the herd population was fairly 

stable and near the objective of 11,000 antelope. Losses from severe winters, poor 

production rates, and disease subsequently decreased the population, but it has 

recently recovered and begun to stabilize near the objective level. Hunt Area 17 

contains mostly privately owned surface lands and hunter access to the limited 

areas of public land is poor; therefore, the number of antelope is expected to 

steadily increase. If the population exceeds objective levels, more licenses will be 

needed and these may be difficult to sell in this mostly private land area. Nearly 

all landowners charge access fees for hunting and private land access is based on 

the desires and perceptions of the landowners. Increased harvest may be difficult 

to achieve because of the increased CBNG development, which is limiting rifle 

hunting on associated lands. Given the predicted harvest and average winter 

conditions, the 2006 post-season population was expected to be 18,600 antelope, 

considerably above the objective of 11,000 (WGFD 2006). 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-144 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

The WGFD has classified the majority of the general analysis area as out of 

normal mule deer use range. Crucial mule deer habitat does not occur on or 

within several miles of the general analysis area. The proposed lease area is 

located within the Powder River Mule Deer Herd Unit, which also includes Hunt 

Areas 17, 18, 23, and 26. A majority of the surface of the Powder River Herd Unit 

is privately owned. Access fees are common, resulting in heavy hunting pressure 

on accessible public lands, particularly in recent years. Between 1998 and 2002, 

the post-season objective for this mule deer herd was 52,000 and the average 

population was at that objective. The 2000 post-season population was estimated 

at near 55,000 animals. Numbers dropped to near 47,000 deer in 2001 and 2002. 

The herd has been slowly recovering toward the objective over the last several 

years. The 2005 post-season mule deer population was estimated at 53,000, just 

slightly exceeding the objective of 52,000. The 2006 post-season population was 

expected to be further above objective, given favorable weather conditions and 

predicted harvest (WGFD 2006). 

The nearest elk population is in the Fortification Unit, approximately 15 miles 

west of the general analysis area. None of the general analysis area is classified by 

the WGFD as within normal elk use range. No elk have been observed recently 

within the wildlife study area. 

White-tailed deer are currently managed separately by the WGFD in the Powder 

River and Black Hills Herd Units. White-tailed deer prefer riparian habitats and 

are therefore seldom observed in the general analysis area due to the lack of that 

particular habitat type. The WGFD classifies the entire general analysis area as 

out of the normal white-tailed deer use range. White-tailed deer are occasionally 

recorded along the Rawhide Creek/Little Powder River area several miles to the 

north but are rarely recorded in the general analysis area. 

Under natural conditions, aquatic habitat is limited by the ephemeral nature of 

surface waters in the general analysis area. The lack of deep-water habitat and 

extensive and persistent water sources limits the presence and diversity of fish 

and other aquatic species. Fish surveys were conducted in the Little Rawhide 

Creek during baseline studies for the Eagle Butte Mine in between 1977 and 1984 

and again in 1985. The 1977-84 surveys were completed along Little Rawhide 

Creek in the northern and northwestern portion of the Eagle Butte Mine area. The 

1985 survey was completed on the portion of Little Rawhide Creek that is within 

the Eagle Butte West LBA tract. No fish were noted during any of these surveys. 

3.11.2 Environmental Consequences

3.11.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

The major adverse environmental consequences of leasing and mining the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract on land use would be the reduction of livestock grazing 

(cattle and sheep), loss of wildlife habitat (particularly big game), and curtailment 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-145 

of oil and gas development while the coal is being mined and during reclamation. 

This would include removal of all existing oil and gas surface and downhole 

production and transportation equipment and facilities. Wildlife and livestock use 

would be displaced while the tract is being mined and reclaimed. Access for 

recreational and other (i.e., ranching, oil and gas development) activities would be 

restricted during mining operations. As discussed above, there are no federal 

surface lands within the BLM study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (the 

tract as applied for or the additional area evaluated by BLM under Alternative 1), 

but 15 acres of county-owned surface are included in the northern portion of the 

additional area evaluated by BLM under Alternative 1. The county-owned surface 

is not included in BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1. The 

loss of accessibility to lands within the tract is long term (during mining and 

reclamation), but is not permanent. Estimated disturbance areas for the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract under the Proposed Action, the BLM study area for the 

Eagle Butte LBA Tract, and the BLM’s preferred tract configuration under 

Alternative 1 are presented in Table 3-1. As discussed in Section 3.0, the 

estimates of recoverable coal, associated disturbance, and mine life shown in 

Table 3-1 assume that Highway 14-16 is not moved. 

Sections 3.3.2 and 3.11.1 and Appendix G of this document address producing, 

abandoned, and shut-in oil and gas (conventional and CBNG) wells in the BLM 

study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Well location information, federal 

oil and gas ownership, and federal oil and gas lessee information are presented in 

Figure 3-19 and Table 3-10. BLM manages federal lands on a multiple use basis, 

in accordance with the regulations. In response to conflicts between oil and gas 

and coal lease holders, BLM policy advocates optimizing the recovery of both coal 

and CBNG resources to ensure that the public receives a reasonable return for 

these publicly owned resources. Optimal recovery of both coal and oil and gas 

resources requires negotiation and cooperation between the oil and gas lessees 

and the coal lessees. In the past, negotiations between an applicant mine and 

some of the existing oil and gas lessees have resulted in agreements to allow 

development of both resources in the PRB. Producing CBNG wells are present on 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. In the PRB, royalties have been and would be 

lost to both the state and federal governments if the federal CBNG is not recovered 

prior to mining, or if federal coal is not recovered due to conflicts. State and 

federal governments can also lose bonus money when the costs of the agreements 

between the lessees are factored into the fair market value determinations. 

Hunting on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would be eliminated during mining 

and reclamation. Pronghorn and mule deer have been observed on and adjacent 

to the LBA tract, as have sage-grouse, mourning dove, waterfowl, rabbit, and 

coyote. 

Following reclamation, the land would be suitable for grazing and wildlife uses, 

which are the historic land uses. The reclamation standards required by SMCRA 

and Wyoming State Law meet the standards and guidelines for healthy 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-146 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

rangelands. Following reclamation bond release, management of the privately 

owned surface would revert to the private surface owner. 

3.11.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, coal removal would not occur and current land 

uses would continue on from 2,395 to 2,415 additional acres that would be 

disturbed under the Proposed Action or BLM’s preferred tract configuration for 

Alternative 1, respectively. Currently approved mining operations would continue 

on the existing Eagle Butte Mine leases (Table 3-1). Impacts to land use related to 

mining operations at the Eagle Butte Mine would not be extended onto portions of 

the LBA tract that will not be affected under the current mining and reclamation 

plan. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.11.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring

Mined areas would be reclaimed as specified in the approved mine plan to support 

the anticipated post-mining land uses of wildlife habitat and rangeland. The 

reclamation procedures would include stockpiling and replacing topsoil, using 

reclamation seed mixtures, which would be approved by WDEQ, and replacing 

stock reservoirs. 

Steps to control invasion by weedy (invasive nonnative) plant species using 

chemical and mechanical methods would be included in the amended mine plan. 

(See discussion in Section 3.9.) 

Revegetation growth and diversity would be monitored until the final reclamation 

bond is released (a minimum of 10 years following seeding with the final seed 

mixture). Erosion would be monitored to determine if there is a need for corrective 

action during establishment of vegetation. Controlled grazing would be used 

during revegetation to determine the suitability of the reclaimed land for 

anticipated post-mining land uses. 

See Section 3.3.2.3 for discussion of regulatory requirements, mitigation and 

monitoring related to oil and gas development. 

3.11.4 Residual Impacts

No residual impacts to land use and recreation are expected. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-147 

3.12 Cultural Resources 

3.12.1 Affected Environment

Cultural resources, which are protected under the National Historic Preservation 

Act of 1966, are nonrenewable remains of past human activity. The PRB, 

including the general analysis area, appears to have been inhabited by aboriginal 

hunting and gathering people for more than 13,000 years. Throughout the 

prehistoric past, the area was used by highly mobile hunters and gatherers who 

exploited a wide variety of resources. Several thousand cultural sites have been 

recorded within the PRB. 

Frison’s (1978, 1991) chronology for the Northwestern Plains divides occupations 

from early to late into the Paleoindian, Early Plains Archaic, Middle Plains 

Archaic, Late Plains Archaic, Late Prehistoric, and Protohistoric periods. Frison’s 

chronology is listed below. The Plains designation within the Early, Middle, and 

Late Archaic periods has been omitted from the list. 

• Paleoindian period (13,000 to 7,000 years B.P.) 

• Early Archaic period (7,000 to 5,000-4,500 years B.P.) 

• Middle Archaic period (5,000-4,500 to 3,000 years B.P.) 

• Late Archaic period (3,000 to 1,850 years B.P.) 

• Late Prehistoric period (1,850 to 400 years B.P.) 

• Protohistoric period (400 to 250 years B.P.) 

• Historic period (250 to 120 years B.P.) 

The Paleoindian period dates from about 13,000 to 7,000 years ago and includes 

various complexes (Frison 1978). Each of these complexes is correlated with a 

distinctive projectile point style derived from a general large lanceolate and/or 

stemmed point morphology. The Paleoindian period is traditionally thought to be 

synonymous with “big game hunters” who exploited megafauna such as bison and 

mammoth (plains Paleoindian groups), although evidence of the use of vegetal 

resources is noted at a few Paleoindian sites (foothill-mountain groups). 

The Early Archaic period dates from about 7,000 to 5,000-4,500 years ago. 

Projectile point styles reflect the change from large lanceolate types that 

characterize the earlier Paleoindian complexes to large side- or corner-notched 

types. Subsistence patterns reflect exploitation of a broad spectrum of resources, 

with a much-diminished utilization of large mammals. 

The onset of the Middle Archaic period (4,500 to 3,000 years B.P.) has been 

defined on the basis of the appearance of the McKean Complex as the 

predominant complex on the Northwestern Plains around 4,900 years B.P. (Frison 

1978, 1991, 2001). McKean Complex projectile points are stemmed variants of the 

lanceolate point. These projectile point types continued until 3,100 years B.P. 

when they were replaced by a variety of large corner-notched points (i.e., Pelican 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-148 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Lake points) (Martin 1999). Sites dating to this period exhibit a new emphasis on 

plant procurement and processing. 

The Late Archaic period (3,000 to 1,850 years B.P.) is generally defined by the 

appearance of corner-notched dart points. These projectile points dominate most 

assemblages until the introduction of the bow and arrow around 1,500 years B.P. 

(Frison 1991). The period witnessed a continual expansion of occupations into the 

interior grasslands and basins, as well as the foothills and mountains. 

The Late Prehistoric period (1,850 to 400 years B.P.) is marked by a transition in 

projectile point technology around 1,500 years B.P. The large corner-notched dart 

points characteristic of the Late Archaic period are replaced by smaller cornerand side-notched points for use with the bow and arrow. Around approximately 

1,000 years B.P., the entire Northwestern Plains appears to have suffered an 

abrupt collapse or shift in population (Frison 1991). This population shift appears 

to reflect a narrower subsistence base focused mainly on communal procurement 

of pronghorn and bison. 

The Protohistoric period (400 to 250 years B.P.) witnesses the beginning of 

European influence on prehistoric cultures of the Northwestern Plains. Additions 

to the material culture include most notably the horse and European trade goods, 

including glass beads, metal, and firearms. Projectile points of this period include 

side-notched, tri-notched, and unnotched points, with the addition of metal 

points. The occupants appear to have practiced a highly mobile and unstable 

residential mobility strategy. 

The historic period (250 to 120 years B.P.) is summarized from Schneider et al. 

(2000). The use of the Oregon Trail by emigrants migrating to the fertile lands of 

Oregon, California, and the Salt Lake Valley brought numerous pioneers through 

the state of Wyoming, but few stayed. It was not until the fertile land in the West 

became highly populated, along with the development of the cattle industry in the 

late 1860s, that the region currently comprising the state of Wyoming became 

attractive for settlement. The region offered cattlemen vast grazing land for the 

fattening of livestock, which could then be shipped across the country via the 

recently completed (1867-1868) transcontinental railroad in southern Wyoming. 

The settling of the region surrounding Gillette, Wyoming began in the late 1800s, 

after a government treaty in 1876 placed the Sioux Indians on reservations 

outside the territory. Cattlemen were the first settlers to establish themselves in 

the area, with dryland farmers entering the area after 1900. The town of Gillette 

was established by the railroad in 1891 in an effort to promote the settling of 

undeveloped areas along their rail lines. The presence of the railroad allowed for 

the greater development of the cattle industry because it facilitated shipping cattle 

from the area. Four homestead sites are located within the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract cultural resources survey area (the tract as applied for and the additional 

area evaluated by BLM under Alternative 1). The homesteads were patented in the 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-149 

early 1900s and one site (48CA1137) is still occupied. FCW currently owns all 

four properties. 

A Class III cultural resources survey is an intensive and comprehensive inventory 

of a proposed project area conducted by professional archaeologists and 

consultants. The survey is designed to locate and identify all prehistoric and 

historic cultural properties 50 years and older that have exposed surface 

manifestations. The goal of the survey is to locate and evaluate for the NRHP all 

cultural resources within the project area. Cultural properties are recorded at a 

sufficient level to allow for evaluation for possible inclusion to the NRHP. 

Determinations of eligibility are made by the managing federal agency in 

consultation with the SHPO. Consultation with the SHPO must be completed 

prior to the approval of the mining plan. 

After completion of a Class III cultural resources survey, additional investigations 

may be undertaken to complete an individual site record. If necessary, sitespecific testing or limited excavation may be utilized to collect additional data 

which will: 1) determine the final evaluation status of a site; and/or 2) form the 

basis of additional work to be conducted during implementation of a treatment 

plan if the site is determined eligible for the NRHP. A treatment plan is then 

developed for those sites that are eligible for the NRHP and are within the area of 

potential effect. Treatment plans are implemented prior to mining and can 

include such mitigation measures as avoidance (if possible), large scale 

excavation, complete recording, Historical American Building Survey/Historic 

American Engineering Record documentation, archival research, and other 

acceptable scientific practices. 

Data recovery plans are required for sites that are recommended as eligible for the 

NRHP and cannot be avoided by project development, following testing and 

consultation with the SHPO. Until consultation has occurred and agreement 

regarding NRHP eligibility has been reached, all sites recommended as eligible or 

undetermined eligibility must be protected from disturbance. Full consultation 

with the SHPO will be completed prior to approval of the mining plans. Those 

sites determined to be unevaluated or eligible for the NRHP through consultation 

would receive further protection or treatment. 

Numerous Class I (survey records review) and Class III cultural resource surveys 

associated with oil and gas field development and surface mining operations have 

been conducted in the general area. FCW contracted with ACR Consultants, Inc. 

of Sheridan, Wyoming to perform Class I and Class III surveys of the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract survey area in 2004. 

The Eagle Butte West LBA survey area has been entirely surveyed for cultural 

resources at a Class III level. A total of 17 cultural sites (9 re-recorded and 8 new) 

were documented in the survey area. Twelve isolated finds were also recorded. Of 

the 17 cultural sites, nine are prehistoric, five are historic, and three are multi-
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-150 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

component. The inventory was reviewed by BLM in 2005 and submitted to SHPO, 

who concurred with the recommendations on site eligibility. Test excavations 

were carried out at some sites. No sites were recommended eligible to the NRHP 

based on testing and evaluation. Additional information about the cultural sites 

that were documented in the survey area is included in the supplementary 

information document for this EIS, which is available on request. 

3.12.2 Environmental Consequences

3.12.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

Data recovery plans are required for sites that are recommended eligible to the 

National Register and cannot be avoided, following testing and consultation with 

the SHPO. In the case of a maintenance lease for an existing mine, full 

consultation with SHPO must be completed prior to approval of the MLA mining 

plan amendment for the mine. At that time, those sites determined to be 

unevaluated or eligible for the NRHP through consultation receive further 

protection or treatment. Impacts to eligible or unevaluated cultural resources 

cannot be permitted. Eligible sites that cannot be avoided or that have not 

already been subjected to data recovery action are carried forward in the mining 

plan as requiring protective stipulations until a testing, mitigation, or data 

recovery plan is developed to address the impacts to the sites. Unevaluated sites 

that cannot be avoided must be evaluated prior to disturbance. Ineligible 

properties may be destroyed without further work. 

As indicated above, BLM reviewed the cultural inventory covering the BLM study 

area for Eagle Butte West LBA Tract and submitted it to SHPO, who concurred 

with the recommendation that no sites within the BLM study area for the Eagle 

Butte West LBA tract are eligible to the NRHP. 

Cultural resources adjacent to the mine areas may be impacted as a result of 

increased access to the areas. There may be increased vandalism and 

unauthorized collecting associated with recreational activity and other pursuits 

outside of but adjacent to mine permit areas. 

3.12.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, coal removal would not occur on from 2,395 to 

2,415 additional acres disturbed that would be disturbed under the Proposed 

Action or BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1, respectively. 

Currently approved mining operations would continue on the existing Eagle Butte 

Mine leases. Impacts to cultural resources related to mining operations at the 

Eagle Butte Mine would not be extended onto portions of the LBA tract that will 

not be affected under the current mining and reclamation plan. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-151 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.12.3 Native American Consultation

Native American heritage sites can be classified as prehistoric or historic. Some 

may be presently in use as offering, fasting, or vision quest sites. Other sites of 

cultural interest and importance may include rock art, stone circles, various rock 

features, fortifications or battle sites, burials, and locations that are sacred or part 

of the oral history and heritage but have no man-made features. 

No Native American heritage, special interest, or sacred sites have been formally 

identified and recorded to date within the general analysis area. However, the 

geographic position of the general analysis area between mountains considered 

sacred by various Native American cultures (the Big Horn Mountains to the west, 

the Black Hills to the east, and Devils Tower to the north) creates the possibility 

that existing locations may have special religious or sacred significance to Native 

American groups. If such sites or localities are identified at a later date, 

appropriate action must be taken to address concerns related to those sites. 

Tribes that have been identified as potentially having concerns about actions in 

the PRB include the Crow, Northern Cheyenne, Shoshone, Arapaho, Oglala Sioux, 

Rosebud Sioux, Crow Creek Sioux, Lower Brule Sioux, Standing Rock Sioux, 

Cheyenne River Sioux, Apache Tribe of Oklahoma, Comanche Tribe of Oklahoma, 

and Kiowa Tribe of Oklahoma. These tribal governments and representatives have 

been sent copies of the EIS. They have also been provided with more specific 

information about the known cultural sites on the tract in this analysis. Their 

help has been requested in identifying potentially significant religious or cultural 

sites in the general analysis area. 

Native American tribes were consulted at a general level in 1995-1996 as part of 

an update to the BLM Buffalo Resource Area RMP. Some of the Sioux tribes were 

consulted by BLM on coal leasing and mining activity in the PRB at briefings held 

in Rapid City, South Dakota in March 2002. 

3.12.4 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring

Class I and III surveys are conducted to identify cultural properties on all lands 

affected by federal undertakings. Prior to any mining disturbance, SHPO is 

consulted to evaluate the eligibility of the cultural properties for inclusion in the 

NRHP. Cultural properties that are determined to be eligible for the NRHP are 

avoided or, if avoidance is not possible, a data recovery plan is implemented prior 

to disturbance. 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-152 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Mining activities are monitored during topsoil stripping operations. If a lease is 

issued for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, BLM would attach a stipulation to the 

lease requiring the lessee to notify appropriate federal personnel if cultural 

materials are uncovered during mining operations (Appendix D). 

3.12.5 Residual Impacts

Cultural sites that are determined to be eligible for the NRHP would be avoided if 

possible. Eligible sites that cannot be avoided would be destroyed by surface coal 

mining after data from those sites are recovered. Sites that are not eligible for the 

NRHP would be lost. 

3.13 Visual Resources 

3.13.1 Affected Environment

Visual sensitivity levels are determined by people’s concern for what they see and 

their frequency of travel through an area. Landscapes within the general analysis 

area include rolling sagebrush and short-grass prairie, which are common 

throughout the PRB. There are also areas of altered landscape, such as oil fields 

and surface coal mines. The existing active surface coal mines located on the 

eastern side of the PRB form three geographic groups that are separated by areas 

with no mining (refer to Figure 1-1). Two of the groups of surface mines are 

located along the east side of State Highway 59, from south of Gillette to south of 

Wright; the third mine group, which includes the Eagle Butte Mine, is located on 

the east side of U.S. Highway 14-16, from Gillette north for about 13 miles. Other 

man-made intrusions include ranching activities (fences, homesteads, and 

livestock), oil and gas development (pumpjacks, pipeline ROWs, CBNG well 

shelters, and CBNG compressor stations), transportation facilities (roads and 

railroads), environmental monitoring installations, road signage, and electrical 

power transmission lines. The natural scenic quality in and near the immediate 

lease area is fairly low because of the industrial nature of the adjacent existing 

mining operations and oil and gas development. 

VRM guidelines for BLM lands are to manage public lands for current VRM 

classifications and guidelines. The VRM system is the basic tool used by BLM to 

inventory and manage visual resources on public lands. The VRM classes 

constitute a spectrum ranging from Class I through Class V that provides for 

increasing levels of change within the characteristic landscape. 

The inventoried lands were classified into VRM classes as follows: 

 Class I – Natural ecologic changes and very limited management activity is 

allowed. Any contrast (activity) within this class must not attract attention. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-153 

 Class II – Changes in any of the basic elements (form, line, color, texture) 

caused by an activity should not be evident in the landscape. 

 Class III – Contrasts to the basic elements caused by an activity are evident 

but should remain subordinate to the existing landscape. 

 Class IV – Activity attracts attention and is a dominant feature of the landscape 

in terms of scale. 

 Class V – This classification is applied to areas where the natural character of 

the landscape has been disturbed up to a point where rehabilitation is needed 

to bring it up to the level of one of the other four classifications. 

For management purposes, BLM evaluated the visual resources on lands under its 

jurisdiction in the 2001 BLM Buffalo RMP update (BLM 2001a). In the general 

analysis area, the predominant VRM classifications are Class IV for lands not yet 

disturbed by mining and Class V for lands that have already been disturbed by 

mining. For lands classified as VRM Class IV, activities, such as mining, attract 

attention and are dominant features of the landscape in terms of scale. Class V 

applies to areas where the natural character of the landscape has been disturbed 

up to a point where rehabilitation is needed to bring it up to the level of one of the 

other four classifications. 

3.13.2 Environmental Consequences

3.13.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

U.S. Highway 14-16 crosses the eastern portion of the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract; however, FCW proposes to move the highway, as discussed in Section 3.15, 

below. The existing mining operations at the Eagle Butte Mine are visible from 

Highway 14-16 and it is likely that mining activities on the LBA tract would be 

visible from this major travel route whether it is moved or remains in its current 

location. 

If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased and mined under the Proposed Action 

or BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1, the area that would be 

disturbed would be considered as VRM Class V prior to reclamation. After 

reclamation of the LBA tract and adjoining mines, the areas classified as Class V 

would improve to resemble the surrounding undisturbed terrain. No visual 

resources that are unique to this area have been identified on or near the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract. 

Reclaimed terrain would be almost indistinguishable from the surrounding 

undisturbed terrain. Slopes might appear smoother (less intricately dissected) 

and gentler (less steep) than undisturbed terrain and sagebrush would not be as 

abundant for several years; however, within a few years after reclamation, the 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-154 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

mined land would not be distinguishable from the surrounding undisturbed 

terrain except by someone very familiar with landforms and vegetation. 

3.13.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, coal removal would not occur on from 2,395 to 

2,415 additional acres that would be disturbed in the tract as applied for or in 

BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1, respectively, and the 

current VRM Class IV and V designations would not change for those lands. 

Currently approved mining operations would continue on the existing Eagle Butte 

Mine leases. Impacts to visual resources related to mining operations at the Eagle 

Butte Mine would not be extended onto portions of the LBA tract that will not be 

affected under the current mining and reclamation plan. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.13.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring

Landscape character would be restored during reclamation to approximate 

original contour and would be reseeded with an approved seed mixture, including 

native species. 

See Section 3.2 and Section 3.9 for additional discussion of the regulatory 

requirements, mitigation, and monitoring for topography and vegetation. 

3.13.4 Residual Impacts

No residual impacts to visual resources are expected. 

3.14 Noise 

3.14.1 Affected Environment

Existing noise sources in the general analysis area include coal mining activities, 

traffic on the nearby highways and county roads, rail traffic, aircraft traffic to and 

from the nearby airport, wind, and CBNG compressor stations. Noise originating 

from CBNG development equipment (e.g., drilling rigs and construction vehicles) is 

apparent locally over the short term (i.e., 30 to 60 days) where well drilling and 

associated construction activities are occurring. The amount of noise overlap 

between well sites is variable and depends on the timing of drilling activities on 

adjacent sites and the distance between the site locations. 

Studies of background noise levels indicate that ambient sound levels generally 

are low at many of the surface PRB mines, owing to the isolated nature of the 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-155 

area. The unit of measure used to represent sound pressure levels (decibels) 

using the A-weighted scale is a dBA. It is a measure designed to simulate human 

hearing by placing less emphasis on lower frequency noise because the human ear 

does not perceive sounds at low frequency in the same manner as sounds at 

higher frequencies. Figure 3-20 presents noise levels associated with some 

commonly heard sounds. 

No site-specific noise level data are available for the proposed lease area. Because 

the Eagle Butte Mine is adjacent to the proposed LBA tract, the current median 

noise level is estimated to be 40-60 dBA for day and night, with the noise level 

increasing with proximity to active mining operations at the adjacent mine. 

Mining activities are characterized by noise levels of 85-95 dBA at 50 ft from 

actual mining operations and activities (BLM 1992). 

OSM prepared a noise impact report for the Caballo Rojo Mine (OSM 1980) that 

determined that the noise level from crushers and a conveyor would not exceed 45 

dBA at a distance of 1,500 ft. The air overpressure created by blasting is 

estimated to be 123 dBA at the location of the blast. At a distance of 

approximately 2,500 ft (0.47 mile), the intensity of this blast would be reduced to 

55 dBA. A noise level below 55 dBA does not constitute an adverse impact. 

There is one residence located within the LBA tract as applied for and within the 

tract under the BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1. There is also 

a residence located within the northern portion of the additional area evaluated by 

BLM under Alternative 1. Seven residences are located in the Echo Subdivision, 

within the northern portion of the additional area evaluated by BLM under 

Alternative 1 but outside of the BLM’s preferred tract configuration. Numerous 

other dwellings and businesses are located within a two-mile radius of the BLM 

study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. The Rawhide Elementary School is 

located within the northern portion of the additional area evaluated by BLM under 

Alternative 1 and the Gillette-Campbell County Airport is located immediately 

adjacent to the southern portion of the additional area evaluated by BLM under 

Alternative 1. Figure 3-8 depicts the locations of occupied residences, the school 

building, and the airport facility with respect to the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 

As shown in Figure 3-8, BLM’s preferred tract configuration for the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract under Alternative 1 does not include the Rawhide Elementary 

School, the Echo Subdivision, or the area immediately adjacent to the GilletteCampbell County Airport. 

3.14.2 Environmental Consequences

3.14.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

Noise levels on the LBA tract would be increased considerably by mining activities 

such as blasting, loading, hauling, and possibly in-pit crushing. Since the LBA 

tract would be mined as an extension of existing operations under the Proposed 
Adapted From ABC's of Our Noise Codes published by

Citizens Against Noise, Honolulu, Hawaii

HOW IT FEELS EQUIVALENT DECIBELS EQUIVALENT HOW IT SOUNDS

SOUNDS SOUNDS

130

120

110

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

Near permanent damage

level from short

exposures

50 hp siren

(100 ft)

Pain to ears

Jet engine

Turbo-fan jet at

Uncomfortably

Discomfort

Scraper-loader

Very loud

Jet fly over

Conversation

Noisy newspaper

Intolerable for

Air compressor

Extra auditory

Power lawnmower

Quiet

Steady flow of

Sleep interference

10-HP outboard motor

Vacuum cleaner

Window air

Occasional private

Garbage trucks

Unmuffled motor bike

135 dB(A)

Unmuffled cycle

Diesel truck

Garbage disposal

Food blender

Muffled jet ski

Passenger car

Busy downtown area

Normal conversation

In a quiet house

phone use

stops

threshold

loud

physiological

effects

(75 ft)

takeoff power

(100ft)

(1000 ft)

press

(20 ft)

freeway trafic

Automatic

dishwasher

Window air

conditioner outside

at 2 ft.

conditioner

in room

auto at 100 ft.

evening

Quiet home during

Library

Bird calls

Soft whisper 5 ft.

Leaves rustling

at midnight

65 mph (25 ft)

(50 ft.)

(25 ft.)

and city buses

(25 ft.)

Rock and roll

Fire cracker

Chainsaw

Jackhammer

(2-3 ft.)

band

(15 ft.)

Car horn

Approx. 64 times

as loud as 75dB(A)

as loud as 75dB(A)

Approx. 32 times

125 dB(A)

as loud as 75dB(A)

Approx. 16 times

115 dB(A)

as loud as 75dB(A)

Approx. 8 times

105 dB(A)

as loud as 75dB(A)

Approx. 4 times

95 dB(A)

as loud as 75dB(A)

Approx. 2 times

85 dB(A)

75dB(A)

as loud as 75dB(A)

Approx. 1/4

55 dB(A)

45 dB(A)

Approx. 1/8

as loud as 75dB(A)

35 dB(A)

Approx. 1/16

as loud as 75dB(A)

Danger to hearing Very quiet

Figure 3-20. Relationship Between A-Scale Decibel Readings and Sounds of Daily Life.

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

3-156 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-157 

Action or Alternative 1, no rail car loading would take place on the LBA tract. The 

Noise Control Act of 1972 indicates that a 24-hour equivalent level of less than 70 

dBA prevents hearing loss and that a level below 55 dBA, in general, does not 

constitute an adverse impact. 

The nearest public facilities and occupied dwellings to the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract are the Rawhide Elementary School, Gillette-Campbell County Airport, and 

nine residences located within the BLM study area for the tract. The two 

residences that are located outside of the Echo Subdivision are owned by FCW 

and would be removed prior to mining if the LBA tract is leased. 

The distance between the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (as applied for or under 

BLM’s preferred tract configuration) and the occupied dwellings and the airport is 

similar to, but not less than, the distance between the existing Eagle Butte Mine 

federal coal leases and the dwellings and airport. The Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

(as applied for or under BLM’s preferred tract configuration) is closer to Rawhide 

Elementary School than the existing Eagle Butte Mine federal coal leases. Noise 

impacts at the dwellings and airport would be similar to the noise impacts that 

have occurred as a result of mining operations to recover the coal in the existing 

Eagle Butte Mine leases. Noise impacts at the school would be expected to be 

greater than the impacts that have occurred as a result of mining operations in 

the existing Eagle Butte Mine leases. If the tract is leased as applied for or under 

BLM’s preferred tract configuration, the occupied dwellings, the Rawhide 

Elementary School, and the airport would experience adverse noise impacts if 

mining activities (particularly blasting) occur within 2,500 ft of them. 

Wildlife in the immediate vicinity of mining may be adversely affected by the noise 

of the mining operations. Anecdotal observations at surface coal mines in the area 

suggest that some wildlife may adapt to increased noise associated with coal 

mining activity. After mining and reclamation are completed, noise would return 

to premining levels. 

3.14.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, coal removal and the associated noise impacts 

would not occur on from 2,395 to 2,415 additional acres that would be disturbed 

in the tract as applied for or in BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 

1, respectively. Currently approved mining operations and associated noise 

impacts would continue on the existing Eagle Butte Mine leases. Noise impacts 

related to mining operations at the Eagle Butte Mine would not extend onto 

portions of the LBA tract that will not be affected under the current mining and 

reclamation plan. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-158 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

3.14.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring

Mine operators are required to comply with MSHA regulations concerning noise, 

which include protecting employees from hearing loss associated with noise levels 

at the mines. MSHA periodically conducts mine inspections to ensure compliance 

with the requirements of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977. 

3.14.4 Residual Impacts

No residual impacts to noise are expected. 

3.15 Transportation 

3.15.1 Affected Environment

Transportation resources near the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract include U.S. 

Highway 14-16, State Highway 59, an improved two-lane county road (Hannum 

Road), several improved and unimproved local roads and accesses, numerous twotrack trails, the Eagle Butte Mine BNSF railroad spur, oil and gas pipelines, 

utility/power lines, telephone lines, and associated ROWs. The Gillette-Campbell 

County Airport is located directly south of the LBA tract. Figure 3-21 depicts the 

current transportation facilities, excluding the oil and gas pipelines, within and 

near the proposed lease area. Figure 3-22 depicts the oil and gas pipelines within 

and near the proposed lease area. 

U.S. Highway 14-16, State Highway 59, and Hannum Road are the major northsouth public transportation corridors, while the principal east-west public 

transportation corridors are State Highway 59 and Hannum Road. Access to the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is on unnamed local access roads and two-track trails 

off of U.S. Highway 14-16, which crosses the eastern edge of the proposed lease 

area. These highways and improved roads all provide public and private access 

within the general analysis area. The unimproved local access roads and trails in 

the area are primarily for private use. 

The nearest railroad facilities are the BNSF Railroad spurs accessing the surface 

mines along the eastern edge of the PRB. The Buckskin Mine railroad loop is the 

northern terminus of a series of spur lines that serve the surface coal mines and 

extends approximately 13 miles north of Gillette. The individual spur lines 

connect each of the mines, including the Eagle Butte Mine, to the railroad for the 

purpose of transporting the coal out of the eastern PRB once it is mined. 

The Gillette-Campbell County Airport complex consists of two runways (7,500 and 

5,803 ft in length) and averages 44 aircraft operations per day. Approximately 53 

percent of the airport’s traffic is related to transient general aviation (general 

aviation operating away from their home base). 
T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

16

1

12

2

11

3

10

4

9

5

8

6

7

11

14

23

26

35

10

15

22

27

34

9

21

28

33

8

17

20

29

32

7

18

19

30

31

12

13

24

25

36

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

U.S. Highway 14-16

U.S. Highway 14-16

State Highway 59

BNSF Railroad

GILLETTE -

CAMPBELL

COUNTY

AIRPORT

spur

State Highway 59

Hannum Road

Hannum Road

LEGEND

0 2500 5000 10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Eagle Butte Mine Permit Boundary

Existing Eagle Butte Mine Federal Coal Leases

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as Applied for

Electric Corridor

Telephone Corridor

Additional Area Evaluated Under Alternative 1

Area Added Under BLM's Preferred

Tract Delineation for Alternative 1

Figure 3-21. Transportation Facilities Within and Adjacent to the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract.

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-159
T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

16

1

12

2

11

3

10

4

9

5

8

6

7

11

14

23

26

35

10

15

22

27

34

9

21

28

33

8

17

20

29

32

7

18

19

30

31

12

13

24

25

36

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

U.S. Highway 14-16

U.S. Highway 14-16

State Highway 59

LEGEND

0 2500 5000 10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Eagle Butte Mine Permit Boundary

Existing Eagle Butte Mine Federal Coal Leases

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as Applied for

Pipeline Corridor

Additional Area Evaluated Under Alternative 1

Area Added Under BLM's Preferred

Tract Delineation for Alternative 1

Figure 3-22. Oil and Gas Pipelines Within and Adjacent to the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract.

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

3-160 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-161 

3.15.2 Environmental Consequences

3.15.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

Essentially all of the coal mined on the LBA tract would be transported by rail 

system. Since the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would be an extension of the 

existing Eagle Butte Mine operations, the existing rail infrastructure would be 

used during mining of the proposed lease area. BNSF has upgraded and will 

continue to upgrade their rail capacities to handle the increasing coal volume 

projected for the PRB, with or without the leasing of the proposed Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract. 

Active pipelines and utility/power transmission lines currently cross the LBA 

tract. Any relocation of these pipelines and utility lines would be handled 

according to specific agreements between the coal lessee and the pipeline and 

utility owners, if the need arises. There would be additional surface disturbance 

associated with construction when pipeline is relocated. 

As discussed in Chapters 1 and 2, not all of the coal included in the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract is mineable. Some of the coal included in the tract under both the 

Proposed Action and the BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1 is 

overlain by U.S. Highway 14-16. SMCRA prohibits mining within 100 ft of the 

outside ROW line of any public road unless the appropriate public road authority 

allows the road to be relocated or closed after public notice, an opportunity for a 

public hearing, and a finding that the interests of the affected public and 

landowners will be protected [30 CFR 761.11(d)]. As a result, the coal underlying 

the highway ROW and adjacent buffer zone has been determined to be unsuitable 

for mining according to coal leasing Unsuitability Criterion Number 3 [43 CFR 

3461(c)]. The coal underlying U.S. Highway 14-16 is included in the tract being 

considered for leasing because the coal under the highway could be mined if the 

authorized public road authority determines that the road could be moved [see 43 

CFR 3461.5(c)(2)(iii) and discussion in Section 2.1]. If the road is not moved, 

including the coal underlying the highway in the lease would allow maximum 

recovery of all the mineable coal adjacent to the highway ROW and buffer zone 

(100 ft on either side of the highway ROW). 

FCW and WYDOT are working on a plan to relocate U.S. Highway 14-16, which 

would allow recovery of the coal underlying the highway, the ROW and the buffer 

zone. FCW estimates that moving the highway would allow an estimated 25 

million tons of coal underlying the highway ROW and buffer zone within the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract as applied for to be recovered (see Tables 2-2 and 2-3). 

FCW estimates that up to 26 million additional tons of coal would be recoverable 

within the BLM study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (the tract as 

applied for and the additional area evaluated by BLM under Alternative 1) if U.S. 

Highway 14-16 were moved. Several of the existing Eagle Butte Mine leases 

located east of U.S. Highway 14-16 also include federal coal underlying the 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-162 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

highway, and those additional coal reserves would be recoverable if the highway is 

moved. 

U.S. Highway 14-16 is a major public transportation route that is utilized by a 

large number of businesses (i.e., mining, CBNG development, agricultural) for 

transporting their products to and from the marketplace, as well as by many 

citizens commuting to and from the city of Gillette for jobs, business, shopping, 

and pleasure. Relocating the highway would affect the distances that these 

businesses and citizens would have to drive, which would potentially result in 

increased fuel costs. Relocating the highway could also affect the time it takes 

emergency vehicles to respond to fires, accidents, and medical emergencies. 

In a public open house held by WYDOT at the Tower West Lodge in Gillette on 

February 7, 2006, FCW presented three potential relocation routes for U.S. 

Highway 14-16. The purpose of the open house was to provide information and 

gather public feedback for the proposed highway relocation. Figure 3-23 presents 

the three proposed alternative routes (Alternatives A, B, and C) for the U.S. 

Highway 14-16 relocation. 

As depicted in Figure 3-23, the Alternative A route would result in an additional 

one-way travel distance of approximately 1.5 miles, the Alternative B route would 

result in an additional one-way travel distance of approximately 0.3 mile, and the 

Alternative C route would add approximately 5.6 miles of additional one-way travel 

distance. Alternative A would require 6.8 miles of new highway construction, 

Alternative B would require 2.7 miles of new highway construction, and 

Alternative C would require 3.7 miles of new highway construction. There would 

be additional surface disturbances associated with road construction of the 

Alternative A and C routes, although the Alternative B route would be across a 

backfilled pit that is partially reclaimed within Eagle Butte Mine’s current permit 

area. 

There are unmined coal resources underlying much of the Alternative A route, 

which would potentially mean that another relocation would be needed in the 

future, if that alternative is chosen. The coal has already been removed 

underlying the Alternative B route, and no coal is present under the Alternative C 

route. 

People who attended the open house in Gillette on February 7, 2006 and who 

subsequently submitted comments to WYDOT generally expressed a preference for 

Alternative B, which represents the shortest additional travel distance of the three 

proposed alternative routes. The Campbell County Board of Commissioners also 

endorsed the Alternative B route (Gillette News Record 2006a). 

WYDOT is evaluating FCW’s proposal to relocate U.S. Highway 14-16. A 

subsurface geotechnical study has been conducted by FCW to evaluate the 

Alternative B route across Eagle Butte Mine’s backfill area. Based on the public’s 
T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

U.S. Highway

U.S. Highway 14 -16

State Highway 59

BNSF Railroad

ALTERNATIVE B

0.3 ADDITIONAL

MILES

ALTERNATIVE A

1.5 ADDITIONAL

MILES

ALTERNATIVE C

5.6 ADDITIONAL

MILES

16

1

12

1

12

2

11

3

10

4

9

5

8

6

7

12

13

24

25

36

11

14

23

26

35

10

15

22

27

34

9

21

28

33

8

17

20

29

32

7

18

19

30

31

12

13

24

25

36

State Highway 59

RAWHIDE

SCHOOL

GILLETTE -

CAMPBELL

COUNTY

AIRPORT

14 -16

LEGEND

0 2500 5000 10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Eagle Butte Mine Permit Boundary

BLM's Preferred Alternative Configuration

of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract

Proposed Alternative Highway Construction Route

Figure 3-23. U.S. Highway 14 - 16 Proposed Alternative Relocation Routes.

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-163
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-164 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

preference for Alternative B and the results of the geotechnical study, WYDOT has 

indicated that moving the highway onto the backfill (Alternative B) is feasible. 

WYDOT must next make a decision as to whether the highway move will be 

permanent or temporary (Holwell 2006, Gillette New Record 2007). 

Actions that will temporarily or permanently relocate a public highway or will 

require redesign of a highway require the designated regulatory authority to 

conduct its own public process and NEPA evaluation. According to WYDOT, FCW 

is required to obtain the necessary construction permits and provide a NEPA 

document (WYDOT 2005). Generally, WYDOT leads the design effort and conducts 

public meetings to obtain input on alignment, safety items, construction methods, 

schedule, and other factors prior to selecting a route. The final design is then 

completed and construction scheduled. FCW is interactive in the process and 

typically covers the costs related to all steps of work. This would likely be a 

design-build project by a firm or team of firms that is approved by WYDOT. The 

project steps are directed by WYDOT according to a previously defined procedure 

to ensure that the constructed roadway achieves all objectives for the involved 

parties. 

It would not be necessary to relocate State Highway 59 in order to recover the coal 

included in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Highway 59 has been relocated in 

advance of mining operations at the Eagle Butte Mine twice previously. 

If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for or under BLM’s preferred tract 

configuration for Alternative 1 is leased, mining operations at the Eagle Butte 

Mine would not occur closer to the Gillette-Campbell County Airport than they 

currently are; however, mining activities would continue at existing levels for up to 

nine additional years. The southern portion of the additional area evaluated by 

BLM under Alternative 1 is located closer to the airport’s runways than the 

current Eagle Butte mining operations are, but that portion of the BLM study area 

is not included in BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1. The 

airport is a vital component of transportation to many of the area’s businesses and 

citizens and any disruptions to the operations of the airport by mining activities 

would have an impact upon those who depend on air travel. 

The Gillette-Campbell County Airport expressed concerns in writing and orally 

about potential conflicts between mining activities and the airport and its air 

traffic during the scoping period and scoping meeting for the Eagle Butte West 

Coal Lease Application EIS. Following the scoping period, FCW provided 

information to the airport in response to their concerns. According to Jay Lundell, 

the Executive Director of the Gillette-Campbell County Airport, the responses 

provided by FCW addressed the airports concerns and the system that was 

previously put in place to manage mining operations adjacent to the airport has 

worked (Lundell 2007). The written comments received by BLM, from the GilletteCampbell County Airport during the scoping period, FCW’s written responses to 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-165 

the airport addressing their concerns, and the response from the airport to FCW 

are included as Appendix H in this EIS. 

Extending the life of the Eagle Butte Mine by up to nine years, which would occur 

under the Proposed Action or BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1, 

would help to maintain current use levels at the airport, which helps assure 

availability of regular airline service to citizens and businesses. 

3.15.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, coal removal would not occur on from 2,395 to 

2,415 additional acres that would be disturbed in the tract as applied for or in 

BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1, respectively, and the 

transportation resources located in those areas would not be affected by mining. 

Currently approved mining operations and any associated impacts to 

transportation resources would continue on the existing Eagle Butte Mine leases. 

Impacts related to mining operations at the Eagle Butte Mine would not be 

extended onto portions of the LBA tract that will not be affected under the current 

mining and reclamation plan. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.15.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring

The regulatory requirements regarding transportation facilities require that 

existing pipelines and utility lines be relocated, if necessary, in accordance with 

specific agreements between the coal lessee and the pipeline and utility owners. 

The Eagle Butte Mine obtained a permit from the FAA while mining operations 

were conducted within the approach surface of the Gillette-Campbell County 

Airport’s cross-wind runway. That permit included specific requirements for 

lighting of mine equipment and establishment of protocols and notification 

procedures when mining activities were conducted within designated areas. The 

mine would pursue the necessary permits from the FAA prior to mining the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract, if it is leased. Those permits would include specific 

requirements for conducting mining operations on the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract. The mine has indicated they would work with the airport to design a postmine topography that would not impact protected airspace and would meet with 

the airport’s approval. Additional information regarding FAA requirements and 

post-mine topography design is included in Appendix H. 

Blasting would be conducted in accordance with Chapter 6 of the WDEQ Rules 

and Regulations. These regulations establish vibration standards that were 

developed to protect structures. A pre-blast survey of the airport complex was 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-166 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

conducted in 2001, and a follow-up survey would be conducted if required by the 

airport. 

Eagle Butte’s current mining and reclamation plan includes requirements to 

control fugitive dust in accordance with WDEQ/AQD requirements for BACT. 

Management practices that are used to control fugitive dust include timely 

reclamation, seeding and, in some cases, ripping soils to control erosion. The 

Eagle Butte Mine has purchased larger water trucks to increase dust control 

efficiency. 

3.15.4 Residual Impacts

If WYDOT’s evaluation concludes that U.S. Highway 14-16 can be relocated, and if 

the highway is relocated permanently, the residual impacts would include 

increased transportation and/or labor costs to businesses and citizens traveling to 

and from Gillette. The amount of the increased cost would depend upon the 

chosen relocation route. No other residual impacts to transportation facilities are 

anticipated. 

3.16 Hazardous and Solid Waste 

3.16.1 Affected Environment

Potential sources of hazardous or solid waste on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

would include spilled, leaked or dumped hazardous substances, petroleum 

products, and/or solid waste associated with coal and oil and gas exploration, oil 

and gas development, utility line installation and maintenance, or agricultural 

activities. No such hazardous or solid wastes are known to be present on the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Wastes produced by current mining activities at the 

Eagle Butte Mine are handled according to the procedures described in Section 

2.1.2. 

3.16.2 Environmental Consequences

3.16.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

If the applicant mine acquires the LBA tract, the wastes that would be generated 

in the course of mining the tract would be similar to those currently being 

generated by the existing mining operation. The procedures that are used for 

handling hazardous and solid wastes at the existing mine are described in 

Chapter 2, Section 2.1.2. Wastes generated by mining the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract would be handled in accordance with the existing regulations using the 

procedures currently in use and in accordance with WDEQ-approved waste 

disposal plans at the Eagle Butte Mine. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-167 

3.16.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, coal removal would not occur on from 2,395 to 

2,415 additional acres that would be disturbed in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

as applied for or in BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1, 

respectively, and no waste materials would be generated as a result of coal 

removal on the tract. Currently approved mining operations would continue on 

the existing Eagle Butte Mine leases. Impacts related to mining operations at the 

Eagle Butte Mine would not be extended onto portions of the LBA tract that will 

not be affected under the current mining and reclamation plan. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.16.3 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring

The regulatory requirements regarding production, use, and/or disposal of 

hazardous or extremely hazardous materials are discussed in Section 2.1.2. All 

mining activities involving hazardous materials are, and would continue to be, 

conducted so as to minimize potential environmental impacts. 

3.16.4 Residual Impacts

No residual hazardous and solid waste impacts are expected. 

3.17 Socioeconomics 

The social and economic study area for the proposed project includes Campbell 

County and the City of Gillette. The community of Gillette would most likely 

attract the majority of any new residents due to its current population levels and 

the availability of services and shopping amenities. 

3.17.1 Local Economy

3.17.1.1 Affected Environment

Wyoming’s coal mines produced 444.9 million tons in 2006, according to the 

Wyoming State Inspector of Mines. This was an increase of about10 percent over 

the 404.5 million tons produced in 2005. PRB coal production (Campbell and 

Converse Counties, 13 active mines) was over 430.9 million tons in 2006, which 

represented almost 97 percent of the state coal production (Wyoming Department 

of Employment 2005a and 2006a). 

In the first quarter of 2005, 29 percent of the total employment and 45 percent of 

the total payroll in Campbell County were attributed to the mining sector, which 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-168 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

also includes oil and gas employment (Wyoming Department of Employment 

2005b). In 2005, Campbell County employment grew faster than the statewide 

average (8.1 percent versus 3.3 percent change). Job growth occurred in 

construction, trade, manufacturing, transportation and utilities, and local 

government, but the most dramatic increase was in the mining sector (Wyoming 

Department of Employment 2006b). 

Lease bonus bids are paid to the federal government for the right to enter into 

lease agreements for federal coal. Bonus bids are paid in five annual installments; 

the state receives half of each installment. In 2004 and 2005, BLM held 

competitive sealed-bid lease sales for six coal tracts (NARO South, West Antelope, 

West Hay Creek, Little Thunder, West Roundup, and NARO North). No coal lease 

sales were held for federal coal tracts in the PRB in 2006. 

The successful bonus bids for the six lease sales held in 2004 and 2005 ranged 

from 30 cents per ton to 97 cents per ton and totaled $1.69 billion (BLM 2006c). 

Annual bonus bid payments from the six lease sales total $338.2 million. 

Combined with remaining bonus bid payments from lease sales held in previous 

years of $90.1 million, the annual bonus bid payment total for 2004 was $428.3 

million, derived directly from federal coal in Campbell and Converse Counties. 

The Wyoming Consensus Revenue Estimating Group is projecting that coal lease 

bonus revenues to the state will be $169.8 million for fiscal years 2007, 2008, and 

2009. The bonus money received by the state is allocated to fund capital 

construction for cities and towns, the state’s highway fund, community colleges, 

and school capital construction (Wyoming CREG 2007). 

Wyoming, Campbell County, and the cities and towns in the county receive 

revenue from a variety of taxes and royalties on the production of federal coal in 

addition to the bonus bids. These include ad valorem taxes, severance taxes, 

royalty payments, sales and use taxes, and required contributions to the AML 

program and the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund. 

Federal royalties are collected at the time the coal is sold and equal 12.5 percent 

of the sale price. Federal royalties and bonus bids are divided equally with the 

State of Wyoming. Coal mines pay 31.5 cents per ton of surface coal mined to 

fund AML reclamation programs. Annual appropriations returned to the states 

vary depending on Congressional authorizations and AML program priorities. 

Additional sources of revenue include federal income tax and annual rentals that 

are paid to the government. 

Sales and use taxes are distributed to cities and towns within the county and to 

the county’s general fund. According to the Excise Tax Division of the Wyoming 

Department of Revenue (2004), the sales and use taxes collected from coal mines 

and coal mining-related services in Campbell County in FY 2004 was $8.2 million. 

In 1994, the University of Wyoming estimated that the total fiscal benefit to the 

State of Wyoming for coal produced in the PRB was $1.10 per ton (Borden et al. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-169 

1994). This study did not include AML fees or bonus bid payments in the 

calculation for fiscal benefits to the State of Wyoming. Calculating the estimated 

total fiscal benefit to the State of Wyoming in 2005 by including half of the bonus 

bid payments, half of the federal mineral royalties based on current prices, half of 

the AML fees, and all of the ad valorem taxes, severance taxes, and sales and use 

taxes for coal produced in Campbell County in 2005 results in an estimated $661 

million, or $1.62 per ton. Figure 3-24 depicts the estimated total revenues to 

state and federal governments from 2005 coal production in Campbell County. 

Recent GSP calculations for Wyoming (2004) indicate that the minerals industry 

accounted for about 21 percent of the GSP, which made it the largest sector of the 

Wyoming economy. Mining alone accounted for 8.3 percent of the Wyoming GSP 

(Wyoming Department of Administration and Information 2007). 

3.17.1.2 Environmental Consequences

3.17.1.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

The federal and state revenues that would be generated by leasing and mining the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would depend on which alternative is selected and the 

sale price of the coal. Coal prices increased in 2005, generally as a result of coal 

transportation and stockpile issues, but declined in 2006. According to the 

WSGS, the average spot price of 8,400 Btu coal in the second half of 2005 was 

$11.06 per ton (WSGS 2006). The spot price for 8,400 Btu coal declined to $9.17 

per ton by the end of June, 2006 (WSGS 2007). The Wyoming Consensus 

Revenue Estimating Group forecast that the average gross sales prices for 

Wyoming coal production will range from $8.51 to $9.20 per ton from 2006 

through 2010 (Wyoming CREG 2007). PRB coal prices are generally lower than 

prices for coal produced in other areas of Wyoming; however, most of the coal 

produced in Wyoming is from the PRB. For the purposes of this EIS, a 

conservative average price of $5.80 per ton is estimated for the coal included in 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, which has an average Btu value of a little under 

8,400. 

Using the coal tonnages shown in Table 3-1, projected federal and state revenues 

for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract are presented in Table 3-11, assuming an 

average coal price of $5.80 per ton recovered and a potential range of bonus 

payments on the leased (mineable) coal of 30 to 97 cents per ton. As discussed in 

Section 3.0, the estimates of recoverable coal, associated disturbance, and mine 

life shown in Table 3-1 assume that Highway 14-16 is not moved. If the highway 

is moved, FCW estimates that an additional 25 million tons of coal could be 

recovered. 

If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased and mined under the Proposed Action, 

the potential additional federal revenues would range from approximately $188 to 

$259 million. For the BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1, the 
Total Wyoming Revenue = $660.5 Million

Total Federal Revenue = $504.5 Million

Bonus Bid Payments

$216.2 million

(42.8%)

Ad Valorem Taxes

$103.6 million

(15.7%)

Sales and Use Taxes

$9.2 million

(1.4%)

Federal Mineral Royalties

$146.8 million

(22.2%)

Severence Tax

$121.8 million

(18.4%)

AML Fund

$63.1 million

(9.5%)

Bonus Bid Payments

$216.2 million

(32.7%)

AML Fund

$63.1 million

(12.5%)

Black Lung Fund

$94.0 million

(15.6%)

Federal Royalties

$146.8 million

(29.1%)

Figure 3-24. Estimated Wyoming and Federal Revenues from 2005 Coal Production in Campbell County.

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

3-170 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-171 

Table 3-11. Projected Socioeconomic Impacts from Leasing the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract Under the Proposed Action or Alternative 1 – 

Assuming That Highway 14-16 Is Not Moved And The Coal 

Underlying The Highway Is Not Recovered.

Item 

No Action 

Alternative 

(Existing Eagle 

Butte Mine) Added by Proposed 

Action 

Added by BLM’s 

Preferred Tract 

Configuration Under 

Alternative 1 

State Revenues $ 384.5 mm $ 261.1 to $ 331.8 mm $ 264.2 to $ 336.0 mm 

Federal Revenues $ 261.6 mm $ 187.9 to $ 258.5 mm $ 190.7 to $ 262.5 mm 

Increased Mine Life 0 yrs 8.1 yrs 8.2 yrs 

Additional 

Employees 0 0 0 

potential additional federal revenues would range from about $191 million to $263 

million. 

If the LBA tract is leased and mined under the Proposed Action, the potential 

additional state revenues would range from approximately $261 to $332 million. 

For the BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1, potential 

additional state revenues would range from about $264 to $336 million. 

The base of economic activity provided by wages and local purchases would 

continue for about eight additional years under either alternative. 

3.17.1.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the coal included in the LBA tract under the 

Proposed Action or the BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1 (about 

203.0 to 206.1 million tons of recoverable coal, respectively, if Highway 14-16 is 

not moved) would not be recovered and the economic benefits associated with 

mining that coal would not be realized by the local, state, or federal governments. 

Currently approved mining operations and associated economic benefits would 

continue on the existing Eagle Butte Mine leases for approximately 13.6 more 

years. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.17.2 Population

3.17.2.1 Affected Environment

Campbell County had a population of 33,698 in 2000 and an estimated 

population of 37,812 in 2004. This represents a 12.2 percent growth rate between 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-172 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

2000 and 2004, making Campbell County the second fastest growing county in 

the state. Campbell County’s population ranks it as the fourth largest of 

Wyoming’s 23 counties and Gillette is the fourth largest city in the state, following 

only Cheyenne, Casper, and Laramie (USDOC 2000, CCEDC 2006, and Wyoming 

Department of Administration and Information 2005). 

Gillette’s population totaled 17,054 in 1987 and, according to census data, by 

2000 Gillette’s population was 19,646. Between 1990 and 2000, Gillette grew by 

2,011 persons, averaging 1.1 percent per year. From December 2001 through 

December 2006, the population of Gillette increased from 22,867 to 27,533 

(USDOC 1990 and 2000, Wyoming Department of Administration and Information 

2005, and City of Gillette 2007). 

3.17.2.2 Environmental Consequences

3.17.2.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

Leasing and subsequently mining the LBA tract would extend the life of the Eagle 

Butte Mine, and current employment at the mine, by about eight years at the 

current rate of production, under the Proposed Action and BLM’s preferred tract 

configuration for Alternative 1. As indicated by Table 3-11, FWC is not projecting 

an increase in average yearly employment at the mine under either alternative. As 

discussed in Section 3.0, the estimates of recoverable coal, associated 

disturbance, and mine life shown in Table 3-1 assume that Highway 14-16 is not 

moved. 

It is likely that if any additional employees would be needed at the Eagle Butte 

Mine they would be available from the existing workforce in Campbell County and 

no influx of new residents would occur as a result of filling those new positions. 

3.17.2.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the coal included in the LBA tract would not be 

mined and population levels would not be affected by coal recovery from the LBA 

tract. Mining operations would not be extended by about eight years under the 

Proposed Action or BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1. FWC 

currently estimates that approved mining operations and associated employment 

levels would continue on the existing Eagle Butte Mine leases for approximately 

13.6 more years. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-173 

3.17.3 Employment

3.17.3.1 Affected Environment

Coal mining has changed a great deal since the 1970s, largely as a result of the 

introduction of new mining technologies. The local coal mining labor force grew 

during the 1970s. Between 1980 and 1998, overall production rose while 

employee numbers generally decreased or remained constant. The employment 

declines followed large industry capital investments in facilities and production 

equipment, the majority of which were aimed at increasing productivity. Direct 

employment in Campbell County at coal mines increased from 3,011 to 4,168 

between 1998 and 2005 (Wyoming Department of Employment 1998 and 2005a). 

The mining sector, which includes oil and gas workers, accounts for almost 28 

percent of all employment in Campbell County, nearly four times the statewide 

percentage. 

In 2005, around 6,007 people were directly employed by surface coal mines or 

coal contractors in Campbell County, representing about 25 percent of the 

employed labor force (Wyoming Department of Employment 2005a). Campbell 

County also has slightly higher percentages of construction and wholesale trade 

employment, which is keeping with the development demands of continuing 

growth and the county’s position as a commercial center for northeast Wyoming. 

3.17.3.2 Environmental Consequences

3.17.3.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

Leasing and subsequently mining the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would extend 

the life of the Eagle Butte Mine by about eight years under the Proposed Action or 

BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1. As discussed above, FCW is 

not projecting an increase in average yearly employment at the mine under either 

alternative. In July 2005, the unemployment rate in Campbell County was 2.7 

percent (641 persons) (Wyoming Department of Employment 2005d). It is likely 

that if any additional employees would be needed they would be available from the 

existing workforce in Campbell County, depending on the timing of the hiring at 

the mine as compared to the timing of hiring for other ongoing and proposed 

projects in the county, which are discussed in Section 4.1. The economic stability 

of the community of Gillette would benefit by having the current Eagle Butte Mine 

workforce living in the community and employed at the mine for about eight 

additional years. 

3.17.3.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the coal included in the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract under the Proposed Action or Alternative 1 would not be mined and mining 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-174 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

operations and associated employment would not be extended about eight 

additional years. Currently approved mining operations and associated 

employment would continue on the existing Eagle Butte Mine leases for 

approximately 13.6 more years to recover the coal in the existing leases. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.17.4 Housing

3.17.4.1 Affected Environment

According to a 2001 report on housing needs in Campbell County, roughly 61 

percent of PRB surface coal mining employees live in Gillette and surrounding 

areas, 14 percent live in Wright, and 25 percent live outside of Campbell County 

(BLM 2003a). 

There were 11,538 housing units in Campbell County reported in the 1990 

census. The 2000 census counted 13,288 housing units in Campbell County, of 

which 12,207 were occupied at the time. There were 8,989 (73.6 percent) owner 

occupied units and 3,218 (26.4 percent) occupied rental units (U.S. Census 

Bureau 2000). 

The number of housing units in Gillette increased from 7,078 in 1990 to 7,931 in 

2000, an increase of 12 percent. According to the City of Gillette, housing stock in 

Gillette increased to 10,194 units by the end of December 2006 (City of Gillette 

2007). The number of units added in unincorporated, rural areas of Campbell 

County is not known because the county does not require building permits or 

certificates of occupancy for residential development in unincorporated areas 

(Braunlin 2004). 

The types of housing units counted in 2000 included 6,698 single-family detached 

units, 794 single-family attached units, 2,276 multi-family units, 3,432 mobile 

homes, and 88 RVs, vans, or similar types of units. Subsequent construction 

through 2004 added 561 single-family detached, 61 single-family attached, 498 

manufactured homes, and 352 multi-family units in Gillette and Wright, plus an 

unknown number of single-family and manufactured units in rural areas. The 

resulting estimated 2004 totals were 7,259 single-family detached units (49.2 

percent), 855 single-family attached units (5.8 percent), 2,628 multi-family units 

(17.8 percent), 3,930 mobile/manufactured units (26.6 percent), and 88 RV/vans 

(0.6 percent) (CSI 2005). 

The overall vacancy rate in Campbell County in 1990 was 13.6 percent, although 

the homeowner vacancy rate was just 3.6 percent while rental vacancies were at 

19.4 percent (U.S. Census Bureau 1990). By 2000, the overall vacancy rate in the 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-175 

county had dropped to 8.1 percent with the rate for rental units at 9.0 percent 

and the rate for owner units at 1.2 percent (U.S. Census Bureau 2000). Due to 

the population growth that has occurred in association with CBNG development, 

the housing vacancy rate within the City of Gillette has continued to decrease. A 

survey conducted in October 2004 estimated the vacancy rate of rental units to be 

7.0 percent, based on a sample of approximately 40 percent of all rental units, 

mostly in larger complexes (CSI 2005). According to the City of Gillette, there was 

a 0.15 percent vacancy rate for rental property in 2006, while the average annual 

vacancy rate for manufactured home/mobile home rentals within the city limits 

was 9.05 percent (City of Gillette 2007). Many apartments had waiting lists. 

The average selling price of a house in Campbell County was $133,482 in 2002. 

Prices tend to be lowest in Wright and highest in unincorporated areas, with the 

City of Gillette in between. Average selling prices in the first three quarters of 

2004 ranged from $78,189 for a manufactured home in Gillette to $230,601 for a 

site-built home in rural Campbell County (CSI 2005). 

An October 2004 survey found average apartment rents ranging from $363 per 

month for an efficiency apartment to $572 per month for a three-bedroom unit 

(CSI 2005). In the fourth quarter of 2003, average rent for a house in Campbell 

County was $707 and the average rent for a mobile home was $590 (Wyoming 

Department of Administration and Information 2005). 

In addition to permanent housing, temporary or transient housing is a 

consideration for any project that might have a construction component. 

Temporary housing can include hotels or motels, campgrounds, and possibly 

mobile home parks. 

There are 17 motels in Gillette with 1,346 guest rooms, one additional 27-room 

motel in Wright, and a two-room bed and breakfast in Gillette. Hotel occupancy 

rates have recently been very high and several new hotels are proposed for 

construction (Gillette News-Record 2006b). Gillette has two year-round 

commercial campgrounds with 150 hookups for RVs plus tent areas (Gillette 

Convention and Visitor’s Bureau 2004). Campbell County has a multi-event 

facility, the CAM-PLEX, located in Gillette. It has 1,821 RV sites, which vary from 

688 full service sites with rest rooms and shower facilities to electric only sites. 

The CAM-PLEX facilities are generally available only for scheduled special events, 

not for public camping (CAM-PLEX 2005). 

Gillette also has approximately 1,595 mobile home park spaces. Mobile home 

parks are generally considered permanent housing resources, but they sometimes 

provide temporary spaces for RVs as well if there are vacant spaces available. The 

Gillette City Council approved a change which allows RVs to be placed in mobile 

home parks for up to three years (Gillette News-Record 2006c). As of early 

October 2004, the average vacancy rate in Gillette’s mobile home parks was 35 

percent, or 558 spaces (CSI 2005). 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-176 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

3.17.4.2 Environmental Consequences

3.17.4.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

As discussed above, FCW does not project an increase in average yearly 

employment at the mine under the Proposed Action or BLM’s preferred tract 

configuration for Alternative 1. Current employment levels would continue for 

from about eight additional years under either alternative, but no additional 

demands on the existing infrastructure or services in the community would be 

expected. Although housing is tight in Gillette, it is likely that housing would be 

available from the existing and proposed units in Campbell County if any 

additional employees are needed at the Eagle Butte Mine. 

3.17.4.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the Eagle Butte West coal lease application would 

be rejected and the coal included in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract under the 

Proposed Action or BLM’s preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1 would not 

be mined. Currently approved mining operations and associated employment 

levels would continue on the existing Eagle Butte Mine leases for approximately 

13.6 more years on the existing Eagle Butte Mine leases, but would not be 

extended beyond that time to recover the coal in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.17.5 Local Government Facilities and Services

3.17.5.1 Affected Environment

The availability of revenues generated by mineral production has helped local 

government facilities and services keep pace with growth and are adequate for the 

current population. 

Estimated enrollment in Campbell County School District No. 1 as of December, 

2006 was 7,608 students, making it the third largest school district in Wyoming. 

Recent increases in enrollment have resulted in more crowded schools in the 

district. The district facilities include: one high school (with two campuses) and 

two junior high schools in Gillette, a junior-senior high school in Wright and 15 

elementary schools (including one in Wright and three in rural areas). The district 

also operates an alternative high school and aquatic center in Gillette (Gillette 

News-Record 2006d and CCSD 2007). The Rawhide Elementary School, which is 

located within the BLM study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, is 

undergoing a renovation which will add classrooms and make room for more 

students (Gillette News-Record 2007b). 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-177 

The Campbell County Sheriff provides police protection throughout the county, 

except within the City of Gillette. In addition to general law enforcement, the 

Sheriff’s staff provides court security, detention facilities, and animal control. For 

the 2004 fiscal year, the department budgeted for 60 law enforcement employees. 

Recent improvements have increased the Campbell County detention facility to 

128 beds, which includes separate modules for women and juveniles (BLM 

2005b). 

Fire protection throughout Campbell County is provided by the Campbell County 

Fire Department, which is governed by a city-county joint powers board (Vonsik 

2005). The department maintains four stations in Gillette and six dispersed 

throughout the county. The department has 17 full-time staff and 150 trained 

volunteers. In addition, there are 30 to 40 volunteers in outlying areas who are 

trained and equipped primarily to fight wildland fires. Campbell County coal 

mines generally provide equipment and trained staff to fight fires on mine 

property. The County Fire Department provides backup assistance with personnel 

and equipment (Vonsik 2005). 

The primary medical care facility in Campbell County is Campbell County 

Memorial Hospital, a 90-bed acute care hospital. The hospital has a medical staff 

of over 50 affiliated physicians in 20 specialties and a total staff of 800 (CCMH 

2005). The hospital also operates the Wright Clinic, a satellite clinic with a fulltime, family practice physician. Ambulance service for Campbell County is 

provided by the hospital, which has a 24-hour emergency service capability. The 

Campbell County Fire Department provides first responder service to emergency 

calls, but transport is the responsibility of the hospital affiliated ambulance 

service (Vonsik 2005). 

Water and wastewater treatment systems are provided by the City of Gillette. 

Gillette serves the city and some urbanized areas nearby from groundwater wells. 

The water system has the capacity to serve approximately 25,000 people. Water 

use has recently approached capacity during the summer months when parks and 

private lawns are being irrigated (Morovits 2005). The Gillette City Council has 

approved a resolution supporting a voluntary summer water conservation program 

suggested by the city’s water division (Gillette News-Record 2007c). An additional 

well field is being planned for completion in about five years. In the interim, the 

city has other wells it can pump if necessary, but high natural fluoride levels 

require careful monitoring if they are used (Morovits 2005). Improvements to 

Gillette’s sewer treatment system were recently completed, which updated the 

system and increased the design capacity to accommodate 50,000 people (Gillette 

News-Record 2007d). The system was designed to serve about 35,000 people 

before the recent upgrade. 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-178 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

3.17.5.2 Environmental Consequences

3.17.5.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

As discussed above, FCW is not projecting an increase in average yearly 

employment at the mine under the Proposed Action or BLM’s preferred tract 

configuration for Alternative 1. Current employment levels would continue for 

about eight additional years under either alternative, but no additional demands 

on the existing infrastructure or services in the community would be expected. If 

any additional employees are needed at the Eagle Butte Mine, it is likely that the 

demand for public facilities and services would be satisfied by the existing 

facilities and services currently in place in Campbell County. 

3.17.5.2.2 No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, the coal included in the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract under the Proposed Action or BLM’s preferred tract configuration under 

Alternative 1 would not be mined. Local government facilities and services would 

not be affected by an extension of mining operations of about eight additional 

years at the Eagle Butte Mine. Currently approved mining operations and 

associated employment levels would continue on the existing Eagle Butte Mine 

leases for approximately 13.6 more years. 

As discussed in Section 2.2, a decision to reject the Eagle Butte West lease 

application at this time would not preclude an application to lease the tract in the 

future. 

3.17.6 Environmental Justice

3.17.6.1 Affected Environment

Environmental Justice issues are concerned with actions that unequally impact a 

given segment of society as a result of physical location, perception, design, noise, 

or other factors. On February 11, 1994, Executive Order 12898, “Federal Action 

to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations”, was published in the Federal Register (59 FR 7629). The Executive 

Order requires federal agencies to identify and address disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, 

and activities on minority populations and low-income populations (defined as 

those living below the poverty level). The Executive Order makes it clear that its 

provisions apply fully to Native American populations and Native American tribes, 

specifically to effects on tribal lands, treaty rights, trust responsibilities, and the 

health and environment of Native American communities. 

Communities within Campbell County, entities with interests in the area, and 

individuals with ties to the area all may have concerns about the presence of 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-179 

surface coal mines in the area. Environmental Justice concerns are usually 

directly associated with impacts on the natural and physical environment, but 

these impacts are likely to be interrelated with social and economic impacts as 

well. Native American access to cultural and religious sites may fall under the 

umbrella of Environmental Justice concerns if the sites are on tribal lands or 

access to a specific location has been granted by treaty right. 

Compliance with Executive Order 12898 concerning Environmental Justice was 

accomplished through opportunities for the public to receive information on this 

EIS in conjunction with consultation and coordination described in Section 1.6 of 

this document. This EIS and contributing socioeconomic analysis provide a 

consideration of the impacts with regard to disproportionately adverse impacts on 

minority and/or low-income groups, including Native Americans. 

3.17.6.2 Environmental Consequences

3.17.6.2.1 Proposed Action and Alternative 1

Economic and demographic data indicate that neither minority populations nor 

people living at or below the poverty level make up “meaningfully greater 

increment” of the total population in Gillette or Campbell County than they do in 

the state as a whole. Also, the Native American population is smaller than in the 

state as a whole and there are no known Native American sacred sites on or near 

the proposed LBA site. Consequently, implementation of the proposed project 

would not adversely affect the environmental justice considerations in the area. 

3.17.6.2.2 No Action Alternative

Economic and demographic data do not indicate that minority populations or 

people living at or below the poverty level make up “meaningfully greater 

increment” of the total population in Gillette or Campbell County than they do in 

the state as a whole. Also, the Native American population is smaller than in the 

state as a whole and there are no known Native American sacred sites on or near 

the existing Eagle Butte Mine. Consequently, the No Action Alternative would not 

adversely affect the environmental justice considerations in the area. 

3.17.7 Regulatory Compliance, Mitigation and Monitoring

Surface coal mines are required to pay royalty and taxes as required by federal, 

state, and local regulations. The BLM compares the amount of coal reported as 

produced with the estimated amount of coal in the ground to verify that the 

federal coal is efficiently mined and royalties are paid on all of the coal that is 

recovered. 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-180 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

3.17.8 Residual Effects

No socioeconomic residual impacts are expected. 

3.18 The Relationship Between Local Short-term Uses of Man’s 

Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-term 

Productivity 

From 2006 on, the Eagle Butte Mine would be able to produce coal at an average 

production level of 25 mmtpy for almost 14 more years under the No Action 

Alternative, compared with an average of 25 mmtpy for about 22 years for the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for or under BLM’s preferred tract 

configuration for Alternative 1, assuming that Highway 14-16 is not moved (Table 

2-3). 

As the coal is mined, almost all components of the present ecological system, 

which have developed over a long period of time, would be modified. In partial 

consequence, the reclaimed land would be topographically lower, and although it 

would resemble original contours, it would lack some of the original diversity of 

geometric form. 

The forage and associated grazing and wildlife habitat that the LBA tract provides 

would be temporarily lost during mining and reclamation. During mining of the 

LBA tract there would be a loss of native vegetation on 2,395 acres (Proposed 

Action) up to a maximum of 2,415 acres (BLM’s preferred tract configuration for 

Alternative 1) with an accompanying disturbance of wildlife habitat and grazing 

land. This disturbance would occur incrementally over a period of years. The 

mine site would be returned to equivalent or better forage production capacity for 

domestic livestock before the performance bond is released. Long-term 

productivity would depend largely on postmining range management practices, 

which to a large extent would be controlled by private landowners. 

Mining would disturb pronghorn and sage-grouse nesting habitat. There would be 

loss and displacement of wildlife during mining, but it is anticipated that 

reclaimed habitat would support a diversity of wildlife species similar to premining 

conditions. The diversity of species found in undisturbed rangeland would not be 

completely restored on the leased lands for an estimated 50 years after the 

initiation of disturbance. Re-establishment of mature sagebrush habitat, which is 

crucial for pronghorn and sage-grouse, would be expected to take even longer. 

CBNG is currently being recovered from within and/or near the LBA tract and 

BLM’s analysis suggests that a large portion of the CBNG resources on the tract 

has been recovered or would be recovered prior to mining. CBNG that is not 

recovered prior to mining would be vented to the atmosphere during the mining 

process. CBNG is composed primarily of methane, which is a greenhouse gas that 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-181 

contributes to global warming. According to the Energy Information 

Administration: 

• U.S. anthropogenic methane emissions totaled 26.6 million metric tons in 

2005. 

• U.S. 2005 methane emissions from coal mining were estimated at 2.85 

million metric tons, which represents approximately 10.7 percent of the 

U.S. total anthropogenic methane emissions in 2005. 

• Methane emissions from surface coal mining in the U.S. were estimated to 

be responsible for about 0.54 million metric tons of methane emissions in 

2005, which represents about 2.03 percent of the estimated U.S. 

anthropogenic methane emissions in 2001, and about 19 percent of the 

estimated methane emissions attributed to coal mining of all types 

(USDOE 2005a). 

• Approximately 51.3 percent of the coal mined using surface mining 

techniques in the U.S. in 2005 came from the Wyoming PRB 

(USDOE 2005b), which means that Wyoming PRB surface coal mines were 

responsible for approximately 1.04 percent of the estimated U.S. 

anthropogenic methane emissions in 2005. 

Total U.S. methane emissions attributable to coal mining would not be likely to 

decrease if the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is not leased at this time because a 

decision to lease or not to lease the tract would not directly affect total U.S. coal 

production. However, the methane on an LBA tract could be more completely 

recovered if leasing is delayed. 

Coal is a major source of electricity generation in the U.S. Approximately 51.1 

percent of electric power in the U.S. is provided by coal (USDOE 2005b). Coalfired power plant emissions include greenhouse gasses that contribute to global 

warming. According to the Energy Information Administration (USDOE 2005a 

and 2005b): 

• CO2 emissions represent about 84 percent of the total U.S. greenhouse gas 

emissions. 

• Estimated CO2 emissions in the U.S. totaled 6,008.6 million metric tons in 

2005, which was 0.3 percent more than 2004. 

• Estimated CO2 emissions from the electric power sector totaled 2,375.0 

million metric tons, or about 40 percent of total U.S. energy-related CO2

emissions in 2005. 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-182 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

• Estimated CO2 emissions from coal electric power generation in 2005 

totaled 1,994.2 million metric tons or about 33 percent of total U.S. energyrelated CO2 emissions in 2005. 

• The Wyoming PRB produced about 37.6 percent of the coal used for power 

generation in 2005, which means that Wyoming PRB surface coal mines 

were responsible for approximately 12.5 percent of the estimated U.S. CO2

emissions in 2005. 

The applicant mine plans to produce the coal included in the LBA tract at 

currently permitted levels using existing production and transportation facilities. 

As a result, leasing the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract to an existing mine under the 

Proposed Action or Alternative 1 would not be expected to result in increased or 

new emissions of CO2 from coal-fired power plants. 

Coal also releases mercury into the air when it is burned. Mercury in the air 

settles into water or onto land, where it can be washed into the water. Certain 

microorganisms can change it into methyl mercury, which is a highly toxic 

mercury compound that builds up in fish and shellfish when they feed. There are 

adverse health effects to both humans and other animals that consume these fish 

and shellfish. Research has shown that most people’s fish consumption does not 

cause a health concern, but high levels of methyl mercury in the bloodstream of 

unborn babies and young children may harm the developing nervous systems of 

those children (EPA 2006e). 

According to the EPA, coal-fired power plants are the largest remaining source of 

human-generated mercury emissions in the U.S., accounting for more than 40 

percent of all domestic human-caused mercury emission; however, these 

emissions contribute little to the global mercury pool. EPA estimates that mercury 

emissions from U.S. coal-fired power plants account for about one percent of the 

global total (EPA 2007e). As indicated above, the Wyoming PRB produced about 

37.6 percent of the coal used for power generation in 2005, which would represent 

less than 0.4 percent of the global mercury emissions. 

As indicated previously, the Eagle Butte Mine plans to produce the coal included 

in the LBA tract at currently permitted levels using existing production and 

transportation facilities. As a result, leasing the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

under the Proposed Action or Alternative 1 would not be expected to result in 

increased or new emissions of mercury from coal-fired power plants. 

If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased, mined, and reclaimed, there would be 

a deterioration of the groundwater quality in the lease area; however, the water 

quality would still be adequate for livestock and wildlife. This deterioration would 

probably occur over a long period of time. As a result of mining alone, depth to 

groundwater would increase during mining in an area extending roughly 11 miles 

west of the Eagle Butte Mine pits in the coal aquifer. The depth to groundwater in 
 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 3-183 

the overburden aquifer would also increase during mining around the Eagle Butte 

Mine pits. The water levels in the coal and overburden aquifers should return to 

premining levels at some time after mining has ceased, as discussed in Section 

3.5.4, because recharge areas would not be disturbed in order to recover the coal 

in the LBA tract. 

Mining operations and associated activities would degrade the air quality and 

visual resources of the area on a short-term basis. Following coal removal, 

removal of surface facilities, and completion of reclamation, there would be no 

long-term impact on air quality. The long-term impact on visual resources would 

be minor. 

Short-term impacts to recreation values may occur from reduction in big game 

populations due to habitat disturbance and reduction in access to some public 

lands. These changes would primarily impact hunting in the lease area. However, 

because reclamation would result in a wildlife habitat similar to that which 

presently exists and access to public lands would be restored, there should be no 

long-term adverse impacts on recreation. 

The long-term economy of the region would be enhanced as a result of the 

Proposed Action and Alternative 1. The Proposed Action and Alternative 1 would 

extend the life of the Eagle Butte Mine up to eight years (Table 2-3). 

3.19 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources 

The major commitment of resources would be the mining and consumption of 

from 203.0 million tons (Proposed Action) to 206.1 million tons (the BLM’s 

preferred tract configuration for Alternative 1) of coal to be used for electrical 

power generation. CBNG that is not recovered prior to mining would also be 

irreversibly and irretrievably lost (see additional discussion of the impacts of 

venting CBNG to the atmosphere in Section 3.18). It is estimated that one to two 

percent of the energy produced would be required to mine the coal, and this 

energy would also be irretrievably lost. 

The characteristics of topsoil on from approximately 2,395 acres (Proposed Action) 

to approximately 2,415 acres (the BLM’s preferred tract configuration for 

Alternative 1) would be irreversibly changed. Soil formation processes, although 

continuing, would be irreversibly altered during mining-related activities. Newly 

formed soil material would be unlike that in the natural landscape. 

Direct and indirect wildlife deaths caused by mining operations or associated 

activity would be an irreversible loss. 

Loss of life may conceivably occur due to the mining operations and vehicular and 

train traffic. On the basis of surface coal mine accident rates in Wyoming as 

determined by the Mine Safety and Health Administration (1997) for the 10-year 
3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

3-184 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

period 1987-1996, fatal accidents (excluding contractors) occur at the rate of 

0.003 per 200,000 man-hours worked. Disabling (lost-time) injuries occur at the 

rate of 1.46 per 200,000 man-hours worked. Any injury or loss of life would be an 

irretrievable commitment of human resources. 

Disturbance of all known historic and prehistoric sites on the mine area would be 

mitigated to the maximum extent possible. However, accidental destruction of 

presently unknown archeological or paleontological values would be irreversible 

and irretrievable. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-1 

4.0 CUMULATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

Cumulative impacts result from the incremental impacts of an action added to 

other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless of who 

is responsible for such actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually 

minor, but collectively significant, actions occurring over time. 

This section summarizes the cumulative impacts that are occurring as a result 

of existing development in the PRB1 and considers how those impacts would 

change if other projected development in the area occurs and if the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract is leased and mined. 

BLM completed three regional EISs evaluating the potential cumulative impacts 

of surface coal development in the 1970s and early 1980s (BLM 1974, 1979, and 

1981). A draft document for a fourth regional EIS was prepared and released in 

1984 (BLM 1984). Since those regional EISs were prepared, BLM has prepared a 

number of NEPA analyses evaluating coal leasing actions and oil and gas 

development in the PRB. Each of these NEPA analyses includes an analysis of 

cumulative impacts in the Wyoming PRB. 

The BLM is completing a regional technical study, called the PRB Coal Review, to 

help evaluate the cumulative impacts of coal and other mineral development in 

the PRB. The PRB Coal Review consists of three tasks: 

• Task 1 identifies current resource conditions in the PRB and, for 

applicable resources, updates the BLM's 1996 status check for coal 

development in the PRB. The baseline year for the Task 1 evaluation of 

the current conditions is 2003. 

• Task 2 defines the past and present development activities in the PRB and 

their associated development levels as of 2003 and develops a forecast of 

reasonably foreseeable development in the PRB through 2020. The 

reasonably foreseeable activities fall into three broad categories: coal 

development (coal mine and coal-related), oil and gas development 

(conventional oil and gas, CBNG, and major transportation pipelines), and 

other development, which includes development that is not energy-related 

as well as other energy-related development. 

• Task 3 predicts the cumulative impacts that could be expected to occur to 

air, water, socioeconomic, and other resources if the development occurs 

as projected in the forecast developed under Task 2. 

A series of reports has been prepared to present the results of the PRB Coal 

Review task studies. The Task 1, 2, and 3 reports represent components of a 

technical study of cumulative development in the PRB; they do not evaluate 

specific proposed projects, but they provide information that BLM is using to 

 

1 Refer to page xv for a list of abbreviations and acronyms used in this document. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-2 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

evaluate the cumulative impacts that would be expected to occur if specific 

projects or applications, such as the Eagle Butte West coal lease application, are 

approved. The Task 1 reports, which include air quality conditions, water 

resources conditions, social/economic conditions, and other resource 

conditions, and the Task 2 reports have been completed. The Task 3 reports for 

air quality conditions, social/economic conditions, and other resource 

conditions have been completed. The Task 3 evaluation of water resource 

conditions is in progress. The information in these reports is summarized later 

in this chapter, and the completed reports are available for viewing at the BLM 

offices in Casper and Cheyenne and on the Wyoming BLM website at 

http://www.blm.gov/wy/st/en/programs/energy/Coal_Resources/PRB_Coal/pr

bdocs.html. 

The PRB includes portions of northeastern Wyoming and southeastern Montana. 

The Wyoming portion of the PRB is the primary focus of the PRB Coal Review 

reports. The Montana portion of the PRB is included in the Task 2 report and in 

the Task 1 and 3 air resources studies. For the majority of resources in the 

Task 1 report and for the Task 2 report, the Wyoming portion of the PRB Coal 

Review study area encompasses all of Campbell County, all of Sheridan and 

Johnson Counties outside of the Bighorn National Forest, and the northern 

portion of Converse County (Figure 4-1). For some components of the Task 2 

report and for the Task 1 and 3 air resource studies, the Montana PRB Coal 

Review study area includes portions of Big Horn, Custer, Powder River, Rosebud, 

and Treasure Counties. For several resources, the Task 1 and Task 3 study 

areas include only potentially affected portions of the Wyoming PRB Coal Review 

study area; for other resources, the study area extends outside of Wyoming and 

Montana because the impacts would extend beyond the PRB. For example, the 

groundwater drawdown is evaluated in the area surrounding and extending west 

of the mines, because that is the area where surface coal mining operations 

would impact groundwater resources; but air quality impacts are evaluated over 

a multi-state area because they would be expected to extend beyond the PRB. 

Section 4.1 summarizes the information presented in the PRB Coal Review Task 

1 and Task 2 reports. Section 4.2 summarizes the predicted cumulative impacts 

to air, water, socioeconomic, and other resources presented in the PRB Coal 

Review Task 3 reports. 

4.1 Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Development 

Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable development in the Wyoming PRB are 

considered in the Task 1 and Task 2 reports for the PRB Coal Review. The Task 

1 reports describe the current situation, which reflects the past and present 

levels of development. The Task 2 report defines the past and present 

development activities in the PRB as of the end of 2003 and projects reasonably 

foreseeable development in the Wyoming PRB through 2020. 
CAMPBELL

COUNTY

SHERIDAN

COUNTY

JOHNSON

COUNTY

CONVERSE

COUNTY

SHERIDAN

BUFFALO

GILLETTE

WRIGHT

1

2

3

Buckskin, Dry Fork, Eagle Butte,

Rawhide, and Wyodak Mines 1 Subregion 1 -

2

3

Belle Ayr, Caballo, Coal Creek, and

Cordero-Rojo Mines Subregion 2 -

Antelope, North Rochelle/Black

Thunder, Jacobs Ranch, and North

Antelope/Rochelle Mines

Subregion 3 -

SCALE: 1"= 20 MILES

COAL MINE SUBREGIONS

LEGEND

Coal Mine Lease Boundaries

Railroads

Former Surface Coal Mine Sites

PSO Ash

Creek Mine

Big

Horn

Mine

Dave Johnston

Mine

Task 1 and 2 Study Boundary

Figure 4-1. Wyoming Study Area for PRB Coal Review Studies Evaluating Current and Projected Levels of

Development.

4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-3
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-4 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

4.1.1 Coal Development

4.1.1.1 Coal Mine Development

The Powder River Federal Coal Region was decertified as a federal coal 

production region by the PRRCT in 1990. Decertification of the region allows 

leasing to take place on an application basis, as discussed in the regulations at 

43 CFR 3425.1-5. Between 1990 and 2005, the BLM’s Wyoming State Office 

held 23 competitive coal lease sales and issued 17 new federal coal leases 

containing almost 5.2 billion tons of coal using the LBA process. The lease sales 

are listed in Table 1-1, and the leased tracts are shown in Figure 1-1. This 

leasing process has undergone the scrutiny of two appeals to the IBLA and one 

audit by the GAO. As can be seen in Figure 4-2, leasing activity has generally 

paralleled production since decertification. This is consistent with the PRRCT’s 

objective at the time of decertification, which was to use the LBA process to lease 

tracts of federal coal to maintain production at existing mines. 

The Wyoming BLM has pending applications for 12 additional maintenance 

tracts for existing mines containing about 4.44 billion tons of coal (Table 1-2). 

BLM has also completed three exchanges involving federal coal resources in the 

Wyoming PRB since decertification: 

 • Belco Exchange – an exchange of lease rights for a portion of the former 

Hay Creek federal coal tract for lease rights to coal near Buffalo, Wyoming, 

which became unmineable when Interstate 90 was constructed. This 

exchange was authorized by Public Law 95-554 and completed in 2000. 

• Pittsburg and Midway Coal Mining Company (P&M) Exchange – an 

exchange of federal coal in Sheridan County, Wyoming, for land and 

mineral rights in Lincoln, Carbon, and Sheridan Counties, Wyoming, 

completed in 2004. 

• Powder River Coal Company AVF Exchange - an exchange of lease rights 

underlying an AVF at the Caballo Mine, which cannot be mined, for lease 

rights of equal value adjacent to existing federal leases at Powder River 

Coal Company’s North Antelope Rochelle Mine, completed in 2006. 

Table 4-1 provides information about the status, ownership and production 

levels for the existing surface coal mines in the Wyoming PRB for 2003, which is 

the baseline year for the PRB Coal Review Task 1 and Task 2 studies. In the 

baseline year, there were 12 active surface coal mines and one inactive mine. 

The North Rochelle Mine was not operated as a separate mine in 2005 and 2006 

following its purchase by the operator of the Black Thunder Mine. The North 

Rochelle Mine leases were divided between Black Thunder and North Antelope 

Rochelle Mines in 2006. These mines are all located in Campbell and Converse 

Counties, just west of the outcrop of the Wyodak coal, where the coal is at the 

shallowest depth (Figure 1-1). As indicated in Table 4-1, there have been
Cumulative Tons Leased 

Cumulative Tons Mined 

Powder River Basin

Campbell and Converse Counties, Wyoming

6,000,000,000

5,000,000,000

4,000,000,000

3,000,000,000

2,000,000,000

1,000,000,000

0

Tons

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Year

2001 2002 2003 

Figure 4-2. Tons of Federal Coal Leased Versus Tons of Coal Mined Since 1990.

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-5
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-6 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Table 4-1. Status and Ownership of Wyoming PRB Coal Mines for 2003 the PRB Coal Review Baseline Year. 2003 Mine 1994 Mine Owner 2006 Mine Owner

Actual Coal

Production

(mm Tons)1 

Permitted 

Production 

Level 

(mm Tons)2 Status and Additional Comments

SUBREGION 1 (North Gillette) 

Buckskin SMC (Zeigler) Kiewit Mining Properties 17.5 27.5 Active Dry Fork Phillips/WFA & Fort Union Ltd WFA 4.4 24.4 Active (Includes former Fort Union Mine) 

Eagle Butte Cyprus-Amax Foundation Coal West 24.5 35.0 Active Rawhide Carter (Exxon) Peabody Holding Co. 3.6 24.0 Active Wyodak Wyodak Resources Wyodak Resources 4.8 12.0 Active (Includes former Clovis Point Mine) 

Total 54.8 122.9

SUBREGION 2 (South Gillette) 

Belle Ayr Cyprus-Amax Foundation Coal West 17.9 35.0 Active Caballo Carter (Exxon) & Western Energy Peabody Holding Co. 22.7 40.0 Active (Includes Rocky Butte and West Rocky Butte leases) Cordero Rojo Kennecott & Drummond Rio Tinto Energy America3 36.1 65.0 Active (Consolidation of former Cordero and Caballo Rojo Mines) 

Coal Creek ARCO Arch Coal Inc. 0 25.0 Inactive in 2003, operations resumed in 2006 Total 76.7 165.0

SUBREGION 3 (Wright)

Antelope Kennecott Rio Tinto Energy America3 29.5 32.0 Active Black Thunder ARCO Arch Coal Inc. 62.6 90.0 Active Jacobs Ranch Kerr-McGee Rio Tinto Energy America3 36.0 55.0 Active 

N. Antelope/ Rochelle Peabody Peabody Holding Co. 80.1 85.0-105.0 Active (Consolidation of former North Antelope and Rochelle Mines) N. Rochelle SMC (Zeigler) Arch Coal Inc. 23.9 35.0 Inactive since 2005, leases split between Black Thunder and North Antelope Rochelle Mines Total 232.1 297.0-317.0

TOTAL FOR 3 MINE GROUPS 363.6 584.9-604.9

1 Wyoming State Inspector of Mines (Wyoming Department of Employment 2003). 2 WDEQ permitting levels. 3 Kennecott Energy Company changed its name to Rio Tinto Energy America in 2006. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-7 

numerous changes in mine ownership since decertification, which have resulted 

in mine consolidations and mine closings within the PRB. 

Recently active surface coal mines in Sheridan County, (the Big Horn Coal Mine) 

and southern Converse County (the Dave Johnston Mine) have ended mining 

operations, relinquished their federal coal leases, and are reclaiming areas of 

disturbance. 

There are existing permits for other surface coal mining-related operations in the 

PRB. These include the Ash Creek and Welch Mine permits in Sheridan County 

and the IZITA Mine permit in Campbell County. Operations at these sites are 

completed and disturbed areas have been reclaimed, but monitoring of the 

reclaimed areas is ongoing. The KFx Mine, located north of Gillette on privately 

owned coal, is mining coal for processing at the KFx coal enhancement plant, 

which is discussed in Section 4.1.1.2.4. 

The active mines in the Wyoming PRB are geographically grouped into three 

subregions (Figure 4-1). For purposes of this cumulative impact discussion, 

these subregions are called the North Gillette, South Gillette, and Wright 

subregions. Table 4-1 lists the mines included in each subregion. A fourth 

subregion includes former and proposed mines in Sheridan County, Wyoming, 

and existing mines just north of Sheridan County, in Montana. There are 

currently no active mines in the Wyoming portion of the fourth subregion. 

The surface coal mines listed in Table 4-1 currently produce over 96 percent of 

the coal produced in Wyoming each year. Since 1989, coal production in the 

PRB has increased by an average of six percent per year. The increasing 

production is primarily due to increasing sales of low-sulfur, low-cost PRB coal 

to electric utilities who must comply with the Phase I requirements of Title III of 

the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. Electric utilities account for 97 percent of 

Wyoming’s coal sales. In 2003 (the baseline year for the PRB Coal Review), more 

than 33 percent of the coal mined in the United States came from the Wyoming 

PRB. 

BLM estimates that the surface coal mines listed in Table 4-1 currently have 

about 122,280 acres of federal coal leased in Campbell and Converse Counties. 

This represents approximately 3.97 percent of Campbell County, where the 

majority of the leases are located. 

Task 2 of the PRB Coal Review projected coal development into the future for the 

years 2010, 2015, and 2020. Due to the variables associated with future coal 

production, two projected coal production scenarios (representing an upper and 

a lower production level) were developed to bracket the most likely foreseeable 

regional coal production level. The basis for the projected production levels 

included: 

1) an analysis of historic PRB production levels in comparison to the gross 

domestic product and national coal demand; 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-8 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

2) an analysis of current PRB coal market forecasts that model the impact of 

gross domestic product growth, potential regulatory changes affecting 

coal-fired power plants, and mining and transportation costs on PRB coal 

demand; 

3) the availability, projected production cost, and quality of future minespecific coal reserves within the PRB region; and 

4) the availability of adequate infrastructure for coal transportation. 

The projected upper and lower production levels subsequently were allocated to 

the Wyoming PRB subregions, discussed above, and to individual mines based 

on past market shares. Individual mine production levels were reviewed relative 

to potential future production constraints (e.g., loadout capacities), permitted 

production levels, mining costs, and coal quality. Then the projected future 

production was aggregated on a subregion basis. The actual 2003 production 

level and the two projected coal production scenarios for 2010, 2015, and 2020 

are shown in Figure 4-3 and Tables 4-2 and 4-3. 

Tables 4-2 and 4-3 also show the cumulative coal mining disturbance as of the 

baseline year and the cumulative coal mine disturbance projected for the future 

years for the upper and lower production scenarios. In these tables, the baseline 

year and cumulative projected disturbance areas are broken down into three 

categories: 

• areas that are or are projected to be permanently reclaimed; 

• areas that are or are projected to be undergoing active mining or which 

have been mined but are not yet reclaimed; and 

• areas that are or are projected to be occupied by mine facilities, haul 

roads, stockpiles, and other long-term structures, and which are therefore 

unavailable for reclamation until mining operations are completed. 

The two tables also include estimates of baseline year and projected future coal 

mining employment, water consumption, and water production. 

As discussed in Section 1.2, based upon the current projected annual coal 

production over the life of the mine, FCW currently estimates that the existing 

recoverable reserves at the Eagle Butte Mine will be depleted within 

approximately 13.6 years at an average production rate of approximately 25 

mmtpy. If they acquire a lease for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, FCW 

anticipates that the average rate of annual production would not increase, and 

that the mine would extend its productive life by eight or nine years, depending 

on whether U.S. Highway 14-16 is moved or not. The existing and projected coal 

development levels and associated disturbance shown in Tables 4-2 and 4-3 

include production at the Eagle Butte Mine during the baseline year (2003) and 

projected production at the mine for 2010, 2015, and 2020. As discussed
Lower Production Scenerio

0

100,000,000

Upper Production Scenario

Tons/Year

600,000,000

500,000,000

400,000,000

300,000,000

200,000,000

Year

2003 2005 2010 2015 202

Figure 4-3. Projected Total Coal Production from Campbell and Converse Counties Under the Lower and

Upper Production Scenarios.

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-9
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-10 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Table 4-2. Current and Projected Wyoming PRB Coal Mine Development, Lower Production Scenario.

Subregion 

Annual 

Production 

(million tons) 

Cumulative 

Disturbed 

Area 

(acres) 

Cumulative 

Permanently 

Reclaimed 

Area 

(acres) 

Cumulative 

Active Mining 

Area and 

Unreclaimed 

Mined Area 

(acres) 

Cumulative 

Area 

Disturbed and 

Unavailable 

For 

Reclamation1

(acres) 

Total Mine 

Employment 

Annual 

Water 

Consumption 

(mmgpy) 

Annual 

Water 

Production 

(acre-feet) 

Baseline year (2003) 

North Gillette Subregion 55 12,047 3,054 3,360 5,633 746 387 586 South Gillette Subregion 77 21,249 6,783 6,107 8,359 1,174 544 1,373 Wright Subregion 231 35,498 11,401 13,992 10,105 3,090 1,709 2,295 Total for 2003 363 68,794 21,238 23,459 24,097 5,010 2,640 4,254 

Reasonably Foreseeable Development for 2010 

North Gillette Subregion 62 15,231 5,004 3,968 6,260 787 441 505 South Gillette Subregion 95 28,021 12,183 6,830 9,008 1,323 656 2,072 Wright Subregion 254 55,410 27,751 16,588 11,070 3,153 1,874 4,354 Total for 2010 411 98,662 44,938 27,386 26,338 5,263 2,971 6,931 

Reasonably Foreseeable Development for 2015 

North Gillette Subregion 74 17,457 6,654 4,202 6,601 830 543 505 South Gillette Subregion 112 32,356 15,683 7,314 9,359 1,369 764 2,072 Wright Subregion 281 67,423 38,851 16,983 11,589 3,186 2,077 4,354 Total for 2015 467 117,236 61,188 28,499 27,549 5,405 3,384 6,931 

Reasonably Foreseeable Development for 2020 

North Gillette Subregion 78 19,729 8,429 4,350 6,950 840 569 505 South Gillette Subregion 126 36,994 19,683 7,589 9,723 1,476 845 2,072 Wright Subregion 291 80,720 51,351 17,243 12,124 3,215 2,157 4,354 Total for 2020 495 137,443 79,463 29,182 28,797 5,531 3,571 6,931 

1 Area unavailable for reclamation includes disturbed areas occupied by permanent or long-term facilities such as buildings, roads, topsoil stockpiles, etc. 

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 2 Report (BLM 2005d)
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-11 

Table 4-3. Current and Projected Wyoming PRB Coal Mine Development, Upper Production Scenario.Subregion 

Annual 

Production 

(million tons) 

Cumulative 

Disturbed 

Area 

(acres) 

Cumulative 

Permanently 

Reclaimed 

Area 

(acres) 

Cumulative 

Active Mining 

Area and 

Unreclaimed 

Mined Area 

(acres) 

Cumulative 

Area 

Disturbed and 

Unavailable 

For 

Reclamation1 

(acres) 

Total 

Mine 

Employment 

Annual Water 

Consumption 

(mmgpy) 

Annual 

Water 

Production 

(acre-feet) 

Baseline Year (2003) 

North Gillette Subregion 55 12,047 3,054 3,360 5,633 746 387 586 South Gillette Subregion 77 21,249 6,783 6,107 8,359 1,174 544 1,373 Wright Subregion 232 35,498 11,401 13,992 10,105 3,090 1,709 2,295 Total for 2003 363 68,794 21,238 23,459 24,097 5,010 2,640 4,254 

Reasonably Foreseeable Development for 2010 

North Gillette Subregion 78 15,911 5,404 4,217 6,290 811 570 505 South Gillette Subregion 117 29,279 13,416 7,536 8,328 1,375 807 2,072 Wright Subregion 284 57,258 27,951 18,236 11,070 3,153 2,101 4,354 Total for 2010 479 102,448 46,771 29,989 25,688 5,339 3,478 6,931 

Reasonably Foreseeable Development for 2015 

North Gillette Subregion 104 18,490 7,329 4,500 6,660 905 785 505 South Gillette Subregion 138 35,624 18,616 8,248 8,760 1,431 952 2,072 Wright Subregion 301 70,431 39,451 19,391 11,589 3,186 1,834 4,354 Total for 2015 543 124,545 65,396 32,139 27,009 5,522 3,571 6,931 

Reasonably Foreseeable Development for 2020 

North Gillette Subregion 121 21,311 9,529 4,766 7,013 1,019 935 505 South Gillette Subregion 148 42,981 25,016 8,758 9,206 1,444 1,018 2,072 Wright Subregion 307 84,797 51,651 21,021 12,124 3,215 2,279 4,354 Total for 2020 576 149,089 86,196 34,545 28,345 5,678 4,232 6,931 1 Area Unavailable for reclamation includes disturbed areas occupied by permanent or long-term facilities such as buildings, roads, topsoil stockpiles, etc. Source: PRB Coal Review Task 2 Report (BLM 2005d)
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-12 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

above, the projected development levels shown in Tables 4-2 and 4-3 are based 

on projected demand and coal market forecasts, which are not affected by a 

decision to lease or not to lease the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 

4.1.1.2 Coal-Related Development

Coal-related development as defined for this analysis includes railroads, coalfired power plants, major (230-kV) transmission lines, and coal technology 

projects. Table 4-4 summarizes the estimated disturbance associated with coalrelated development activities for the baseline year and the projected 

disturbance through 2020. The subsequent paragraphs summarize the existing 

coal-related development in the Wyoming PRB and the reasonably foreseeable 

development considered in the PRB Coal Review. 

Table 4-4. Current and Projected Wyoming PRB Coal-Related Development 

Scenario. 

2003 2010 2015 2020

Coal-Related Disturbance (Acres) 4,891 4,966 5,911 5,911 

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 2 Report (BLM 2005d) 

4.1.1.2.1 Coal Transportation

As discussed above, electric utilities account for about 97 percent of Wyoming’s 

coal sales. Most of the coal sold to electric utilities is transported to power 

plants by rail. The coal mines in the Wright and South Gillette subregions are 

served by a joint BNSF & UP rail line. The existing capacity of the line is 

estimated at approximately 350 mmtpy. The existing capacity of the BNSF line, 

which services the North Gillette subregion, including the Eagle Butte Mine, is 

estimated at 250 mmtpy. 

The two projects related to coal transportation that are projected to be developed 

prior to 2020 are expansion of the BNSF & UP rail facilities south of Gillette and 

the construction of the DM&E rail line in Wyoming and South Dakota. 

UP and BNSF are upgrading sections of their existing joint rail line, including 

construction of 14 miles of a third main line track completed in Spring 2005, 19 

miles of a third main line track scheduled to be fully operational in September 

2006, and an additional 40 miles of third and fourth main line track to be 

constructed by 2009. In 2005, the capacity of the BNSF & UP joint line was 325 

million tons per year. The scheduled improvements will enable the joint line to 

handle more than 400 million tons of coal per year (UP and BNSF press release 

2006). These expansion projects are considered highly likely to occur. 

The proposed DM&E rail line would include new rail construction in South 

Dakota and Wyoming (approximately 15 and 265 miles, respectively) and 600 

miles of rail line rehabilitation in South Dakota and Minnesota. Approximately 

78 miles of the new rail construction would occur in the PRB study area, where 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-13 

the project would provide new rail spur services to the mines in the South 

Gillette and Wright subregions. The STB released a final supplemental EIS for 

this project on December 30, 2005 and granted final approval to construct the 

rail line on February 15, 2006. The supplemental EIS addresses issues that were 

successfully appealed after an EIS was initially completed in 2001. Funding for 

the project is still pending. For the purposes of the PRB Coal Review, it was 

projected that the DM&E line would be constructed when the total rail haulage 

requirement from the eastern Wyoming PRB reaches 450 to 500 million tons per 

year and would potentially be operational by 2015. The construction of this rail 

line is considered moderately likely to occur. 

4.1.1.2.2 Electric Power Generation

Currently, there are four coal-fired power plants in the Wyoming PRB study area 

for Tasks 1 and 2. Black Hills Power Corporation owns and operates the Neal 

Simpson Units 1 and 2 (21.7-MW and 80-MW, respectively), WYGEN 1 (80-MW), 

and Wyodak (330-MW) power plants, all of which are located approximately five 

miles east of Gillette, Wyoming. Pacific Power and Light’s Dave Johnston Power 

Plant is located near Glenrock, Wyoming, outside of but adjacent to the study 

area. 

There are also three separate interconnected gas-fired power plants (Hartzog, 

Arvada, and Barber Creek) located near Gillette, Wyoming. Each contains three 

separate 5-MW-rated turbines that provide electric power to Basin Electric and 

its customers. In winter, the maximum capacity can reach 22.6-MW from each 

site. All units are in operating condition, although they do not operate at 

maximum capacity. 

Several additional power plants are projected to be built prior to 2020 (Figure 1-

1). Any proposed coal-fired power plant that plans to initiate operation by 2010 

currently would have to be undergoing air permit review in order to obtain the 

required construction permits and complete construction by 2010. The 

following three identified projects currently are considered likely for development 

by 2010. 

• Black Hills Power Corporation’s WYGEN 2 coal-fired unit, located east of 

Gillette, currently is under construction and scheduled to be completed by 

the beginning of 2008. As originally permitted, this unit had a planned 

production capacity of 500-MW, which would consume approximately 2.8 

million tons of coal per year. A permit modification has since dropped the 

initial phase to 90-MW. The facility would cover 60 acres within the 

existing 200-acre Black Hills Power and Light power plant area. Operation 

of this facility by 2010 is considered highly likely. 

• North American Power Group has been working to permit and build a 

coal-fired power plant (Two-Elk Unit 1) since 1997 at a 40-acre site 

located approximately 15 miles southeast of Wright, Wyoming. Currently, 

the proposal is for a 320-MW coal-fired power plant. The original air 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-14 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

permit was issued in August 2002. The unit would be dry-cooled, 

requiring very little water. North American Power Group has received 

approval to receive several hundred million dollars in tax-exempt bonds 

from the state to help finance the project and is seeking additional 

funding. Operation of this facility by 2010 is considered moderately likely. 

 • Basin Electric Power Cooperative obtained a permit to construct and 

operate the Dry Fork Station Power Plant from the Wyoming Industrial 

Siting Council in June 2006. As proposed, the Dry Fork Station would be 

a coal-based, mine-mouth 385-MW power plant located near the Dry Fork 

Mine, north of Gillette. Basin Electric estimates that the plant will be 

operational by 2011 (WDEQ/ISC 2006). Construction and operation of 

this facility as scheduled is considered moderately likely. 

The PRB Coal Review assumes that, under the upper development scenario, a 

maximum of one additional 700-MW coal-fired power plant would be 

constructed by 2020 in the Gillette area or near one or more of the operating 

coal mines. North American Power Group submitted an application in 

September, 2007, for a 750-MW coal-fired power plant, Two Elk 2, to be located 

at the same site as the proposed Two Elk plant, discussed above. Black Hills 

Power Corporation has also announced plans to permit the Wygen III power 

plant, which is planned to be similar in design to the Wygen II plant. The study 

assumes that all existing power plants in the PRB region would remain 

operational through 2020. 

4.1.1.2.3 Transmission Lines

Major transmission lines in the Wyoming PRB study area that support the 

regional distribution system are associated with the Dave Johnston power plant 

located near Glenrock, Wyoming, and the power plants operated by Black Hills 

Power Corporation, which are located east of Gillette. These 230-kV 

transmission lines have been in place for several years, and their associated 

permanent disturbance is minimal. Distribution power lines associated with 

conventional oil and gas and CBNG development also occur within the study 

area. For the PRB Coal Review, these lines were included by factoring them in 

proportionally on a per well basis. 

The PRB Coal Review estimates that by 2020, one major transmission line would 

be constructed running south to Colorado markets and one would be 

constructed eastward to mid-west markets. Markets would dictate the size and 

location of such facilities, and these are not known as of this time. Because 

transmission lines are a necessary supporting infrastructure for power 

generating facilities to provide connection to the grid, the PRB Coal Review 

assumes they would be required as part of the overall system development for 

the proposed power plants discussed in the previous section. However, there was 

insufficient information to analyze or assign a likelihood of development by 2020 

when the PRB Coal Review analysis was conducted because no specific 

proposals for these transmission lines had been identified at that time. No 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-15 

specific proposals have since been announced, but the governors of California, 

Nevada, Utah and Wyoming entered into a Memorandum of Understanding to 

encourage development of a high voltage power transmission line, the Frontier 

Line, connecting those states in April 2005. Since that time, no specific plans 

have been announced as to the location or timing of the Frontier Line. 

4.1.1.2.4 Coal Conversion Technology

With rising energy prices, there has been considerable interest in either 

enhancing the quality of PRB coal and/or converting the coal to other fuels. 

Test facilities were previously constructed by KFx at the Fort Union Mine (now 

part of the Dry Fork Mine), by AMAX (predecessor to Foundation Coal West, Inc.) 

at the Belle Ayr Mine, and by ENCOAL at the Buckskin Mine, but no commercial 

production occurred and these facilities either have been dismantled or are no 

longer in use. Although several coal conversion projects have been proposed, as 

discussed below, only one (the KFx Coal Beneficiation Project) was considered to 

have a high enough likelihood of proceeding to include in the PRB Coal Review 

based on current status and available information. 

The KFx coal beneficiation plant, located near the Dry Fork Mine north of 

Gillette, has been constructed but is not running at full capacity. KFx reported 

making a production run and shipping coal to two customers for test burns in 

late December, 2005, and reported that a trainload of enhanced coal had been 

loaded and sent to a customer in Ohio in August 2006. It is expected that the 

plant would eventually produce approximately 750,000 tons of enhanced coal 

per year. This operation has a high likelihood of proceeding with production 

given the technology being used and the forecast market conditions in the PRB. 

If the process and market prove competitive, the company has suggested that up 

to five additional units could be built in the PRB, but the likelihood for 

development of additional units is not known. As a result, the potential 

development of additional units was not analyzed in the PRB Coal Review. 

The following coal conversion projects have been proposed, but were not 

included in the PRB Coal Review analysis because the likelihood of their 

occurrence was not known when the coal review analysis was conducted: 

• Medicine Bow Fuel and Power, a subsidiary of DKRW Energy LLC, has 

announced that it plans to build a coal-to-liquids plant in northern 

Carbon County, Wyoming. GE Energy and Rentech Clean Energy 

Solutions are also involved in the project, which would obtain coal from 

Arch Coal’s Hanna Mine facility. Both the plant location and mine are 

located outside of the PRB. As proposed, the plant would produce about 

11,000 barrels per day; the primary product would be ultra-low-sulfur 

diesel fuel. The project is entering the design stage and no construction 

schedule has been announced. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-16 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

• KFx has proposed joint ventures with Arch Coal, Inc. and Kiewit Mining 

Group to develop beneficiation plants at the Coal Creek and Buckskin 

Mines, respectively. The companies are evaluating these projects. 

• Coal gasification development projects are being actively pursued in both 

Montana and Wyoming. While there appears to be substantial interest in 

these opportunities, it is unknown whether large-scale operations would 

be developed within the 2010 to 2020 timeframe, given permitting, 

engineering, and construction time requirements. A proponent with 

adequate financing to pursue a project that would utilize PRB coal had not 

been identified when the PRB Coal Review was prepared and has not been 

identified since. 

A summary of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable coal mines, coal-related 

facilities, coal production, coal mine employment, and coal and coal-related 

disturbance in the Wyoming PRB is presented in Table 4-5. 

Table 4-5. Past, Present, and Projected Wyoming PRB Coal Mine and CoalRelated Development Scenario. 

Year 

Coal 

Production 

(mmtpy)

Number of 

Active 

Coal 

Mines1

Number of 

Active 

Power 

Plants

Number of 

Active Coal 

Conversion 

Facilities2

Direct Coal 

Mine 

Employment

Total Coal 

Disturbance 

(acres)3 

Past and Present

1990 163 18 3 1 2,862 na 

1995 247 19 4 1 3,177 na 

2000 323 12 4 2 3,335 na 

2003 363 12 4 0 5,010 73,685 

Projected Development - Lower Production Scenario 

2010 411 131 7 12 5,263 103,628 

2015 467 131 7 12 5,405 123,147 

2020 495 131 7 12 5,531 143,354 

Projected Development - Upper Production Scenario 

2010 479 131 7 12 5,339 107,414 

2015 543 131 7 12 5,522 130,456 

2020 576 131 8 12 5,678 155,000 

1 Mines have consolidated and may in the future. Also, new mines may be permitted to better 

access the coal reserves projected for mining by 2020. 

2 Several coal conversion facilities currently are being evaluated; however, there is only one for 

which the likelihood of future development currently can be assessed. 

3 Disturbance area includes coal mine and coal-related disturbance areas. 

Source: Annual Report of the Wyoming State Mine Inspector (Wyoming Department of 

Employment 1990, 1995, 2000, and 2003) and PRB Coal Review Task 2 Report (BLM 

2005d) 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-17 

4.1.2 Oil and Gas Development

4.1.2.1 Conventional Oil and Gas

Conventional oil and gas development includes all non-CBNG development 

activity. Approximately 1,500 conventional oil and gas wells, including 

producing, non-producing and injection wells, were drilled between 1990 and 

2003 (IHS 2004). Of those, 60 percent were development wells (drilled in 

established producing areas) and 40 percent were classified as wildcat wells or 

drilled to evaluate untested prospective zones in producing areas. 

Approximately 25 percent of the wildcat wells were successful and resulted in 

the discovery of 61 new fields that provided 719,000 barrels of oil and 1.45 bcf of 

non-CBNG in the baseline year for the PRB Coal Review (2003) (WOGCC 2004); 

the remaining 75 percent of the wildcat wells were plugged and abandoned. 

As of the end of 2003, there were approximately 3,500 producing conventional 

oil and gas wells in the Wyoming PRB study area plus 1,386 seasonally active 

wells (IHS 2004). The WOGCC reported that these wells produced approximately 

13 million barrels of oil and 40 bcf of conventional gas in 2003 (WOGCC 2004). 

The USGS (2002) estimated that the mean undiscovered non-coal bed 

hydrocarbon resource in the PRB (including Montana) is 1.8 billion BOE. 

Most of Wyoming’s current oil production is from old oil fields with declining 

production and the level of exploration drilling to discover new fields has been 

low (WSGS 2002). This situation is reflected in the PRB where, over the 10-year 

period from 1992 through 2002, oil production from conventional oil and gas 

wells in Campbell and Converse Counties decreased approximately 60.4 percent 

(from 32.8 million barrels in 1992 to 13.0 million barrels in 2002). A recent 

increase in oil prices is reversing projections of a continuing decline in oil and 

gas production; production is now expected to increase in the PRB, with a peak 

around 2010 of approximately 15.7 million barrels (WSO-RMG 2005b). Oil 

production in the short term may also be bolstered by some planned CO2 flood 

projects in the PRB (WSGS 2003b). This projected temporary upward trend in 

conventional oil and gas development is reflected in the PRB Coal Review 

projections (Table 4-6). The active wells identified in Table 4-6 include wells that 

produce year-round, seasonally producing wells, and service wells (mainly 

injection wells). It is estimated that there are approximately 2,000 idle 

conventional oil and gas wells in the PRB study area (WOGCC 2005c); however, 

the number of idle wells gradually would be reduced in the future through 

plugging programs, and the idle well locations (once the wells are abandoned) 

would be reclaimed and no longer represent a disturbance. 

4.1.2.2 CBNG Development

Natural gas production has been increasing in Wyoming. In the PRB, this is due 

to the development of shallow CBNG resources. Commercial development of 

these resources began in limited areas west of and adjacent to the northernmost 

surface coal mines in the late 1980s. Since that time, CBNG development has 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-18 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Table 4-6. Current and Projected Wyoming PRB Conventional Oil and Gas 

Development Scenario.

Existing Projected for Task 3 Study Area 

Category

2003 

Task 1 

Study Area 

2003 

Task 3 

Study Area 2010 2015 2020 

Annual Gas 

Production (bcf)1 39.9 36.3 33.8 30.9 28.0 

Annual Oil 

Production (mmbo) 12.9 11.4 13.8 12.5 11.2 

Active and 

Seasonably Active 

Wells 

5,067 3,890 5,603 5,115 4,625 

1 Future gas production per well was estimated based on 2003 production levels per subwatershed. A greater number 

of future well sites were assumed to occur in locations with historically lower production rates, so the projected 

future conventional gas production varies within the cumulative effects study area relative to the number of 

projected producing wells. 

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 2 Report (BLM 2005d) 

spread south to encompass most of the area west of the surface coal mines and 

is continuing to spread farther west into other parts of the PRB Coal Review 

Task 1 and Task 2 study area. 

On private and state oil and gas leases, the WOGCC and the Wyoming SEO 

authorize CBNG drilling. On federal oil and gas leases, BLM must analyze the 

individual and cumulative environmental impacts of all drilling (federal, state, 

and private), as required by NEPA, before CBNG drilling can be authorized. BLM 

does not authorize drilling on state or private leases but must consider the 

impacts from those wells in their NEPA analyses. In many areas of the PRB, the 

coal estate is federally owned, but the oil and gas estate is privately owned. A 

June 7, 1999 Supreme Court decision (98-830) assigned the rights to develop 

CBNG on a piece of land to the owner of the oil and gas estate. 

At the end of 2003 (the baseline year for the PRB Coal Review), there were 

14,758 producing CBNG wells in the study area (IHS 2004), and total production 

for 2003 was 346 bcf, or 88 percent of the total gas production from the basin 

(WOGCC 2004). From 1987 to 2003, the total cumulative gas production from 

PRB coals was over 1.2 trillion cubic feet. The total water production for the 

same time period was approximately 2.3 billion barrels (96,600 million gallons). 

Annual methane production increased rapidly between 1999 and 2003. In 

2003, the average CBNG production was 900 mmcf per day (Holcomb 2003). 

According to the WOGCC website (http://wogcc.state.wy.us), CBNG production 

in the PRB has fluctuated from just under 900 mmcf per day to over 1,100 mmcf 

per day since December 2003. Water production in 2003 amounted to more 

than 500 mm barrels (21,000 million gallons), or about 1.4 mm barrels per day. 

According to the WOGCC website, water production in the PRB associated with 

CBNG production has varied between just over 1.4 mm barrels per day and 

about 2.2 mm barrels per day since December 2003. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-19 

Since the early 1990s, the Wyoming BLM has completed numerous EAs and two 

EISs analyzing CBNG projects. The most recent of these is the four-volume 

Final EIS and Proposed Plan Amendment for the PRB Oil and Gas Project, which 

was completed in January 2003 (BLM 2003b). The level of CBNG development 

since 2003 appears to be lower than was forecast in that document. New CBNG 

well numbers fell from a high of slightly more than 4,600 in 2001 to 

approximately 2,000 in 2004. The PRB Coal Review Task 2 Report discusses the 

uncertain trends for future CBNG activity in recent years. The methodology used 

to project future activity is detailed in Appendix E of that report. Table 4-7 

shows the current and projected levels of CBNG development levels used to 

evaluate projected cumulative environmental impacts in the PRB Coal Review. 

Table 4-7. Current and Projected CBNG Development Scenario for the 

Wyoming PRB.

Existing Projected to Task 3 Study Area 

Category

2003 

Task 1 

Study Area 

2003 

Task 3 

Study Area 2010 2015 2020 

Annual Production (bcf) 338 284 480 500 443 

Active Wells 14,758 12,152 20,899 21,831 19,366 

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 2 Report (BLM 2005d) 

4.1.2.3 Oil and Gas Related Development

Oil and gas related development activities considered in the PRB Coal Review 

include major transportation pipelines and refineries. Table 4-8, summarizes 

the net disturbance, reclamation, and water production associated with oil and 

gas activity (conventional oil and gas, CBNG, and major transportation pipelines) 

for 2003 (baseline year) and projects disturbance, reclamation, and water 

production for future years. 

4.1.2.3.1 Pipelines

The availability of pipeline capacity for the transport of oil and gas to outside 

markets is a key factor in the development of CBNG and conventional oil and 

gas resources in the Wyoming PRB. As of the baseline year for the PRB Coal 

Review (2003), there were 13 major transportation pipeline systems in the PRB 

that transport gas resources to markets outside of the basin (Flores et al. 2001). 

The capacity of these pipeline systems was 1.9 bcf per day. The combined 

natural gas production (CBNG and conventional gas) in the Wyoming PRB Coal 

Review Task 1 and Task 2 study area was approximately 1.03 bcf per day. 

Major transportation pipelines also provide for transport of CO2 to conventional 

oil fields for EOR. Increased recovery of crude oil also may depend somewhat on 

the availability of CO2 for EOR projects, as well as the availability of pipelines to 

transport oil to refineries for processing. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-20 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Table 4-8. Wyoming PRB Conventional Oil and Gas, CBNG, and Related 

Development Disturbance and Water Production.

Existing1 Projected for Task 3 Study Area1

Category 

2003 

Task 1 

Study Area 

2003 

Task 3 

Study Area 2010 2015 2020 

Cumulative 

Disturbed Area 

(Acres)2 

187,761 148,602 237,883 304,543 361,331 

Cumulative 

Permanently 

Reclaimed Area 

(Acres) 

115,045 90,548 160,175 225,426 288,536 

Cumulative 

Unreclaimed Area 

(Acres) 

72,715 58,053 77,707 79,108 72,794 

Annual Water 

Production 

(mmgpy) 

26,405 21,204 39,108 41,484 37,350 

1 Minor discrepancies in total acreages are the result of number rounding. 2 Inclusive of conventional oil and gas and CBNG activities and major transportation pipelines. 

Disturbance associated with ancillary facilities (including gathering lines and distribution power lines) 

has been factored in a per well basis. 

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 2 Report (BLM 2005d) 

Gathering lines and power lines associated with conventional oil and gas and 

CBNG development also occur within the study area; disturbance from these 

ancillary facilities were factored into the PRB Coal Review analysis on a per well 

basis. 

A 315-mile-long pipeline project, the Bison Pipeline Project, was proposed in 

2004 to move natural gas northward, directly out of the PRB and into the 

Northern Border Pipeline system (FERC 2004). Approximately 53 miles of the 

proposed route is within the Wyoming PRB Coal Review study area. No filing 

has been made with FERC, and the project is not included as an active project in 

Wyoming on the FERC website. As a result, the Bison Pipeline project was 

assumed to have a low likelihood rating for the purposes of the PRB Coal 

Review. 

Several other proposed pipeline projects in the PRB are listed on the Wyoming 

Pipeline Authority projects website (http://www.wyopipeline.com/projects.asp, 

accessed 7/6/2007). Information on pipeline projects proposed in Wyoming can 

be also found in the “For Citizens” section of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission website (http://www.ferc.gov/for citizens.asp). 

The amount of available pipeline capacity could limit the amount of future 

CBNG development. Based on Holcomb (2003), estimates of the growth of 

Wyoming PRB CBNG production range from a 2003 level of 900 mmcf per day to 

3 to 4 bcf per day around 2007, and it is anticipated that they would remain at 

or above those levels until 2015. If CBNG production levels reach 3 to 4 bcf per 

day, it is reasonable to assume that four to five pipeline projects (up to 1.0 bcf 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-21 

per day total capacity each) could be built in the near future. However, based on 

the assumptions in Appendix E of the PRB Coal Review Task 2 Report, the 2003 

basin-wide CBNG production rate of 927 mmcf per day (IHS 2004) is projected to 

reach approximately 1.7 bcf per day in 2020. New pipeline construction projects 

were not considered in the PRB Coal Review analysis because the likelihood for 

additional new pipeline construction was unknown when the PRB Coal Review 

was prepared. 

The CO2 pipeline from Bairoil, Wyoming, to Salt Creek, Wyoming, may be 

extended into the study area to the Sussex Field to support additional EOR 

activity. Although it took many years for a CO2 source to reach the Wyoming 

PRB, it is very likely that several pipelines could be built in the study area in the 

near future to provide additional gas for EOR projects. However, no pipeline 

projects were identified that would transport CO2 beyond Salt Creek, and the 

likelihood for construction of additional CO2 pipelines was unknown when the 

PRB Coal Review analysis was prepared, so they were not considered. 

4.1.2.3.2 Refineries

There are no existing petroleum refineries in the Wyoming PRB study area, and 

no plans for the construction and operation of any petroleum refineries in the 

Wyoming portion of the PRB have been identified. 

4.1.3 Other Development Activity

4.1.3.1 Other Mining

Uranium, sand, gravel, bentonite, and clinker (or scoria) have been and are 

being mined in the Wyoming PRB study area. 

There are three defined uranium districts in the PRB: Pumpkin Buttes, 

Southern Powder River, and Kaycee (BLM 2003b). Numerous mined out or 

uneconomic uranium mining sites are present in these districts. Uranium is 

currently produced in the Southern Powder River District using the in-situ leach 

method. Until recently, there were two operating in-situ uranium recovery sites 

in the PRB, but they have been combined into one operation (WSGS 2005c). 

There has been a recent increase in interest in uranium for power plants here 

and abroad. Claims have been actively staked, but they have primarily been land 

position plays with no specifically defined projects. Based on commodity 

forecasts and uranium activity as of June 2004, the likelihood and potential 

timing of new uranium mining operations in the PRB was not known, and 

additional development was not projected in the PRB Coal Review analysis. 

Bentonite is weathered volcanic ash that is used in a variety of products, 

including drilling mud and kitty litter, because of its absorbent properties. 

There are three major bentonite producing districts in and around the PRB: the 

Colony District in the Northern Black Hills, the Clay Spur District in the 

Southern Black Hills, and the Kaycee District west of Kaycee, Wyoming. Within 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-22 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

the PRB Coal Review study area, bentonite is mined at Kaycee (WMA 2006). The 

PRB Coal Review assumed that bentonite mining would continue throughout the 

study period and that production would continue at existing active mines, with 

no new mines developed through 2020. 

Aggregate, which is sand, gravel, and stone, is used for construction purposes. 

In the PRB, the more important aggregate mining localities are in Johnson and 

Sheridan Counties (WSGS 2004b). The largest identified aggregate operation is 

located in northern Converse County. It has an associated total disturbance 

area of approximately 67 acres, of which four acres have been reclaimed. 

Scoria or clinker (which is formed when coal beds burn and the adjacent rocks 

become baked) is used as aggregate where alluvial terrace gravel or in-place 

granite/igneous rock is not available. Scoria generally is mined in the Converse 

and Campbell Counties portion of the Wyoming PRB study area. 

Increased sand, gravel, and scoria production and associated surface 

disturbance are anticipated in the Wyoming PRB study area in the future 

because aggregate would be required for road maintenance and new 

construction activities as other primary resources, such as coal and oil and gas, 

continue to be developed. New operations and increased production from 

existing operations can be expected. These operations would vary in size based 

on the immediate need from the primary industries, but there is no specific 

information about these projected operations. As a result, new sand, gravel, or 

scoria operations were not analyzed in detail in the PRB Coal Review. 

4.1.3.2 Industrial Manufacturing

There are a number of existing industrial manufacturing establishments located 

in the Wyoming PRB Coal Review study area. Most are relatively small with 

fewer than 25 employees; they predominately serve regional and local markets, 

and most are directly or indirectly related to energy resource development and 

production. Over the years, some of these firms have expanded such that they 

now support activities and serve markets outside of the region, but those 

operations remain dependent upon the local and regional markets to sustain 

their existing operations. 

The PRB Coal Review anticipates that increased coal production would result in 

an increased demand for fuels and explosives. This increased demand could 

result in the need for the development of new off-site chemical feedstock plants 

in the study area. Project-specific information is not available, however, and the 

potential development of new chemical feedstock plants was not considered in 

the PRB Coal Review. 

Local economic development organizations, including CCEDC and CANDO, are 

continually engaged in efforts to recruit or assist new business formation in the 

PRB study area. For example, CANDO has pursued development of long-term 

potential projects, however, the outcomes of those projects are uncertain and 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-23 

little information and detail are available. As a result, they were not considered 

in the PRB Coal Review. 

4.1.3.3 Reservoirs

Currently, there are five key water storage reservoirs in the Wyoming PRB Coal 

Review study area (Healy, Lake DeSmet, Muddy Guard No. 2, Gillette, and Betty 

No. 1) (HKM Engineering et al. 2002a and 2002b). The total disturbance 

associated with these five key water storage areas is 3,263 acres. 

Based on the applicable water plans prepared for the Wyoming Water 

Development Commission for its Basin Planning Program (HKM Engineering et 

al. 2002a and 2002b), there are long range projections for development of 

additional reservoirs in the Wyoming PRB study area. However, none of these 

reservoirs have reached the planning stage; therefore, there was not enough 

information to analyze them in the PRB Coal Review. 

4.1.3.4 Other Non-Energy Development

In addition to the specific projects and developments described above, a network 

of public and private physical infrastructure, private enterprises, and public 

activities has been developed in the PRB over time. Examples of infrastructure 

include the highway and road networks, airports, government offices, hospitals, 

public schools, municipal water systems, and extensive residential and 

commercial real estate development. Private enterprises include local retail and 

service establishments, newspaper publishing, and transportation and 

distribution firms. 

The construction, maintenance, and continuing operations associated with this 

network of development represent an extensive series of public and private 

investments, as well as changes in land use, surface disturbances, water 

consumption, and the factors that characterize local air quality. Those 

investments and changes have occurred over a period of time and in response to 

many different influences. 

Some of the identified current and anticipated plans or proposals for future 

investment in public, private, and commercial infrastructure in the PRB are 

summarized below. 

• The WYDOT State Transportation Improvement Program for 2004 includes 

anticipated 2005 through 2009 construction costs for highway and airport 

maintenance, reconstruction, and improvement projects in the PRB Coal 

Review Study area of approximately $215.4 million. No construction of 

new highways is scheduled and no new airports are proposed between 

now and 2009. 

• A $10.7 million expansion and renovation of the Campbell County 

courthouse was completed in late 2005. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-24 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

• Expansion of the CAM-PLEX conference and multi-event center facility in 

Gillette was approved in a special election in May 2005. 

• The 2005 approved master plans for Wyoming public school facilities 

spending included a total of $72.3 million in new capital construction for 

the seven school districts that are completely or partially in the Wyoming 

PRB study area (WSFC 2005). 

• Construction and maintenance projects for the City of Gillette include a 

recently completed project to renovate and expand the waste water 

treatment plant. 

• Commercial development includes recently completed construction of a 

Home Depot store and expansion of the Wal-Mart store in Gillette. 

A capital facilities tax ballot question in Campbell County in the 2004 election 

asking voters to approve the imposition of a $0.01 sales and use tax [(to be used 

for updated and expanded diesel mechanic and welding programs at the Gillette 

Campus of the Northern Wyoming Community College (now Gillette College) and 

for two community development projects in Wright)] and an increase in the 

lodging tax were defeated in 2004. A renewed attempt to get the lodging tax on 

the ballot for the 2006 primary election failed to gain the approval of the 

Campbell County Board of Commissioners. In their 2007 session, the Wyoming 

Legislature committed to pay half of the cost of a technical education center at 

Gillette College that will house diesel technology, welding and industrial 

electrician programs. The Campbell County Board of Commissioners has 

approved a tax increase to pay the other half of the cost of the project. 

Given the timing, scale, year-to-year variability, relatively short construction 

timetables associated with such investments, the existence of a relatively large 

and diversified construction industry in the region and nearby areas, and the 

limited potential for these projects to alter long-term conditions in the PRB, they 

are not included in the PRB Coal Review analysis. However, one or more of 

these and similar projects could warrant consideration in a cumulative analysis 

for a site-specific project due to proximity or coincidental project schedules and 

timetables. 

4.2 Cumulative Environmental Consequences

Section 4.1 of this chapter discusses current and projected levels of development 

in the Wyoming PRB, and includes summaries of the results of PRB Coal Review 

Task 2 studies. This section summarizes the current conditions resulting from 

baseline year (2003) development and the cumulative environmental 

consequences of the projected development for 2010, 2015, and 2020 based on 

the results of the analyses conducted for PRB Coal Review Task 1 and 3 reports, 

respectively. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-25 

As discussed in Section 4.1, the Wyoming portion of the PRB is the primary 

focus of the PRB Coal Review analyses. For the majority of resources in the 

Task 1 analysis, the Wyoming PRB Coal Review study area encompasses all of 

Campbell County, all of Sheridan and Johnson Counties outside of the Bighorn 

National Forest, and the northern portion of Converse County (Figure 4-1). The 

study areas for the Task 3 analyses are different. For the majority of the 

resources considered in the PRB Coal Review, the Task 3 study area is based on 

watershed boundaries in the PRB and includes the portions of the Upper Powder 

River, Little Powder River, Upper Belle Fourche River, Upper Cheyenne River, 

Antelope Creek, and Dry Fork Cheyenne River subwatersheds that lie within 

Sheridan, Johnson, Campbell and northern Converse Counties (Figure 4-4). 

This study area includes over 4 million acres. Table 4-9 summarizes the total 

disturbance and reclamation acreages for the baseline year of 2003 and the total 

projected disturbance and reclamation acreages for 2010, 2015, and 2020 

within the Task 3 study area described above. 

A total of approximately 220,688 acres of this land area had been disturbed by 

development activities as of 2003, which represents about 5.6 percent of the 

Task 3 study area. This is projected to increase to as much as 514,732 acres in 

2020 under the upper coal production scenario. This area would represent 

approximately 13.1 percent of the Task 3 study area. This disturbance includes 

projected coal mining, coal-related development, and oil and gas and relate 

development disturbance in the Task 3 study area. Areas reclaimed during each 

future time period shown in Table 4-9 reflect how much of the disturbed acreage 

is projected to be permanently reclaimed by that point in time. The acres of 

unreclaimed disturbance would be reclaimed incrementally or following a 

project’s completion, depending on the type of development activity and permit 

requirements. The acres currently not available for reclamation are occupied by 

long-term facilities that are needed to conduct mining operations or coal-related 

activities. These areas would be reclaimed near the end of each mine or facility’s 

life. 

Adjustments were made to the study area described above and shown in Figure 

4-4 for several resources as described below: 

• The potential air quality impacts were evaluated over a multi-state area 

(including most of Wyoming, southeastern Montana, southwestern North 

Dakota, western South Dakota, and northwestern Nebraska) because they 

would be expected to extend beyond the Wyoming and Montana PRB 

study area that was used to identify emissions sources for the air quality 

analysis. 

• The groundwater drawdown was evaluated in the area surrounding and 

extending west of the surface coal mines, shown in Figure 4-4, because 

that is the area where groundwater drawdown related to surface coal 

mining operations and CBNG production operations would overlap. 
CAMPBELL

COUNTY

SHERIDAN

COUNTY

JOHNSON

COUNTY

CONVERSE

COUNTY

SHERIDAN

BUFFALO

GILLETTE

WRIGHT

1

2

3

Buckskin, Dry Fork, Eagle Butte,

Rawhide, and Wyodak Mines 1 Subregion 1 -

2

3

Belle Ayr, Caballo, Coal Creek, and

Cordero-Rojo Mines Subregion 2 -

Antelope, North Rochelle/Black

Thunder, Jacobs Ranch, and North

Antelope/Rochelle Mines

Subregion 3 -

SCALE: 1"= 20 MILES

LEGEND

Coal Mine Lease Boundaries

Railroads

Former Surface Coal Mine Sites

PSO ASH

CREEK MINE

BIG HORN

MINE

DAVE

JOHNSTON

MINE

Subwatershed Boundaries in the

Environmental Consequence Study Area

Groundwater Model Domain

COAL MINE SUBREGIONS

Dry Fork

Cheyenne River

Tongue River

Big

Creek

Goose

Little Goose

Creek

Prairie

Dog

Creek

Sage Creek

Dry Creek Dry Fork Cheyenne

River

Antelope Creek

Porcupine Creek

Little Thunder

Creek

Black Thunder Creek

Bacon Creek

Belle

Fourche River

Four

Horse Creek

Caballo

Creek

Cottonwood Creek

Little Powder

River

Wild

Cat

Creek

Salt

Creek

South

Fork Powder

River

BuffaloMiddle

Creek

Fork Powder River

Bear Trap Creek

Red Fork Powder

River

North

Fork

Powder

River

South

Fork Crazy Woman

Creek

Trabing

Dry

Creek

Crazy

Woman

Creek

Rock Creek

Piney Creek

Clear Creek

Powder River

Spotted Horse Creek

Middle Prong

Horse

Wild

Creek

Antelope

Creek

Timber

Creek

Little

Powder River

North ForkCrazy

Woman

Creek

Powder

River

Wild Horse Creek

Bitter

Creek

Fourmile Creek

Pumpkin Creek

Dry Fork Powder

River

Upper

Belle

Fourche

River

Upper

Powder

River

Little

Powder

River

North Fork Bear

Creek

Upper

River

Figure 4-4. Wyoming Task 3 Study Area for PRB Coal Review Studies Evaluating Projected Environmental

Consequences.

4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences

4-26 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-27 

Table 4-9. Current and Projected Wyoming PRB Total Development Scenario 

– Task 3 Study Area. 

Year 

Total Acres 

Disturbed1

Acres 

Reclaimed1

Acres 

Unreclaimed1

Acres 

Unavailable 

for 

Reclamation2 

Acres 

Affected by 

Coal Mining 

Current 

2003 220,688 111,786 108,901 27,073 68,794 

Projected Development - Lower Coal Production Scenario 

2010 339,912 205,113 134,799 29,389 98,662 

2015 426,084 286,614 139,472 31,546 117,236 

2020 503,085 367,999 135,085 32,794 137,443 

Projected Development - Upper Coal Production Scenario 

2010 343,698 206,946 136,752 28,739 102,448 

2015 433,392 290,822 142,570 31,006 124,545 

2020 514,732 374,732 139,998 32,342 149,089 1 Minor discrepancies in total acreages are the result of number rounding. 2 Includes coal mine and coal-related disturbance. 

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 2 Report (BLM 2005d)

• The socioeconomic impact analysis focused on Campbell County, but also 

considered Converse, Crook, Johnson, Sheridan, and Weston Counties as 

directly affected and Niobrara and Natrona Counties as indirectly affected. 

4.2.1 Topography and Physiography

The PRB is located within the Upper Missouri Basin Broken Lands 

physiographic subprovince that includes northeastern Wyoming and eastern 

Montana to the Canadian border. The topography generally is of low to 

moderate relief with occasional buttes and mesas. The general topographic 

gradient slopes down gently from southwest to northeast with elevations ranging 

from 5,000 to 6,000 ft above sea level on the southern and western portions of 

the basin to less than 4,000 ft above sea level on the north and northeast along 

the Montana state line. The major drainages in the basin are the Tongue, 

Powder, Belle Fourche, and Cheyenne rivers. Most of the drainages in the area 

are intermittent and have flows during high precipitation events or during 

periods of snowmelt. The drainages are part of the upper Missouri River Valley 

drainage basin. 

The disturbance associated with the majority of the past, present, and projected 

activities have resulted in or would result in the alteration of the surface 

topography. Surface coal mining, which is projected to continue in the area of 

the existing coal mines shown in Figure 4-4, permanently alters the topography 

by removing the overburden and coal and then replacing the overburden. 

Recontouring during reclamation to match approximate original contour, as 

required by regulation, reduces the long-term impact to topography. After 

mined-out areas are reclaimed, the restored land surfaces are typically gentler, 

with more uniform slopes and restored basic drainage networks. Oil and gas 

exploration and development has occurred and is projected to continue 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-28 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

throughout most of the Task 3 study area. It also results in the alteration of 

topography to accommodate facilities (e.g., well pads, power plants, etc.) and 

roads, but the disturbance tends to occur in smaller, more discrete areas than 

coal mining and the development is spread out over a wider area. 

The disturbance and reclamation acreages associated with all existing and 

projected development in the Task 3 study area for the years 2003, 2010, 2015, 

and 2020 are given in Table 4-9. 

4.2.2 Geology, Mineral Resources, and Paleontology

The cumulative effects study area for geology, mineral resources, and 

paleontology is the PRB Coal Review Task 3 study area (Figure 4-4). 

The PRB is one of a number of structural basins in Wyoming and the Rocky 

Mountain area that were formed during the Laramide Orogeny. The basin is 

asymmetric with a structural axis that generally trends northwest to southeast 

along the western side of the basin (Flores et al. 1999). Earthquakes, landsides, 

and subsidence do not present a hazard in the PRB based on the lack of active 

faults in the study area (USGS 2004); the low risk of ground shaking in the 

region if a maximum credible earthquake were to occur (Frankel et al. 1997); 

and the absence of evidence of subsidence, landslides, or other geologic hazards 

in association with CBNG production. 

4.2.2.1 Coal

Most of the coal resources of the basin are found in the Fort Union and Wasatch 

Formations. The coals present in the Wasatch Formation are thinner and less 

continuous than the coals in the Fort Union and, therefore, they are not as 

economically important as the coals in the Fort Union for either coal mining or 

CBNG development. Projected levels of coal production and disturbance under 

the lower and upper coal production scenarios are shown in Tables 4-2 and 4-3. 

In the coal mine areas, the overburden and coal would be removed and the 

overburden replaced, resulting in a permanent change in the geology of the area 

and a permanent reduction of coal resources. 

4.2.2.2 Oil and Gas

Drilling for conventional oil and gas in the Wyoming PRB has declined 

considerably in the last 15 years. However, there remains potential for finding 

and developing these resources in the deeper formations of the basin. 

Conversely, CBNG production increased rapidly from 1999 through 2002 and 

leveled off in 2003. Projected production rates for conventional oil and gas and 

CBNG in 2010, 2015, and 2020 are shown in Tables 4-6 and 4-7. 

Oil and gas and related development accounts for most of the projected mineral 

disturbance outside of the coal mining areas. It generally would result in 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-29 

shallow, discrete areas of surface disturbance, as discussed above. The 

acreages over which these impacts currently occur (as of 2003) and are projected 

to occur in the years 2010, 2015, and 2020 are shown in Table 4-9. 

4.2.2.3 Other Mineral Resources 

As discussed in Section 4.1.3.1, other mineral resources that are being mined in 

the Wyoming PRB include uranium, bentonite, clinker, and aggregate. 

Production of uranium and bentonite is not likely to be affected by development 

of coal or CBNG in the PRB. Aggregate and clinker production levels are more 

likely to be affected by other mineral development levels because these resources 

would be used in construction projects related to other mineral development. 

4.2.2.4 Paleontology 

Scientifically significant paleontological resources, including vertebrate, 

invertebrate, plant, and trace fossils, are known to occur in many of the geologic 

formations within the Wyoming PRB. These fossils are documented in the 

scientific literature, in museum records, and are known by paleontologists and 

land managers familiar with the area. 

The Wasatch Formation is the most geographically widespread unit exposed on 

the surface over most of the Task 3 study area. It is underlain by the Fort Union 

Formation. The fossiliferous Morrison and Lance Formations outcrop in the 

western portion of the basin but occur at depth in the vicinity of the coal mines 

and CBNG activity in the eastern portion of the basin. Within the Task 3 study 

area, the highly fossiliferous White River Formation occurs only on Pumpkin 

Buttes in southwestern Campbell County. 

Based on 2003 information, no significant or unique paleontological localities 

have been recorded on federal lands in the PRB. However, the lack of localities 

in the PRB does not mean that no scientifically significant fossils are present, as 

much of the area within and surrounding the PRB has not been adequately 

explored for paleontological resources. As a result, development activities in the 

Task 3 study area have the potential to adversely affect scientifically significant 

fossils, if they are present in or adjacent to disturbance areas. The potential for 

impacts to scientifically significant fossils would be greatest in areas where Class 

4 or 5 formations are present (see Section 3.3.3.1). The Wasatch Formation is 

classified as a Class 5 formation. The Fort Union Formation is classified as a 

Class 3 formation, which means that fossil content varies in significance, 

abundance, and predictable occurrence. The greatest potential impact to 

surface and subsurface fossils would result from disturbance of surface 

sediments and shallow bedrock during construction and/or operations, 

depending on the type of project. Potential subsurface disturbance of 

paleontological resources (e.g., during drilling operations) would not be visible or 

verifiable. The areas over which these impacts occurred as of 2003 and are 

projected to occur as a result of all projected development in the years 2010, 

2015, and 2020 are shown in Table 4-9. As only portions of the Task 3 study 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-30 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

area have been evaluated for the occurrence of paleontological resources, and 

discrete locations for development activities cannot be determined at this time, 

no accurate estimate can be made as to the number of paleontological sites that 

may be affected by cumulative development activities. 

Development activities which involve federally owned surface and/or minerals 

are subject to federal guidelines and regulations protecting paleontological 

resources. Protection measures, permit conditions of approval, and/or 

mitigation measures would be determined on a project-specific basis at the time 

of permitting to minimize potential impacts to paleontological resources as a 

result of these activities. 

4.2.3 Air Quality

The Task 1A Report for the PRB Coal Review (BLM 2005a) documents the 

modeled air quality impacts of operations during a baseline year, 2002, using 

actual emissions and operations for that year. Emissions from permitted minor 

sources were estimated, due to unavailability of actual emissions data. The 

baseline year analysis evaluated impacts both within the PRB itself and at 

selected sensitive areas surrounding the region. The analysis specifically looked 

at impacts of coal mines, power plants, CBNG development, and other 

development activities. Results were provided for both Wyoming and Montana at 

the individual receptor areas. The Task 2 Report for the PRB Coal Review (BLM 

2005d) identifies reasonably foreseeable development activities for the years 

2010, 2015, and 2020. The Task 3A Report for the PRB Coal Review (BLM 

2006b) evaluates the impacts on air quality and air quality-related values for the 

year 2010 using the development levels projected for 2010 and the same model 

and meteorological data that were used for the baseline year study in the Task 

1A report. Impacts for 2015 and 2020 were projected qualitatively based on 

evaluation of anticipated changes in emissions and on modeled impacts for the 

2010 lower and upper production scenarios. BLM is now proposing to update 

the model and conduct an impact analysis for the year 2015. As currently 

proposed, a revised baseline year emissions inventory would be developed using 

2004 actual emissions data or emissions estimates and incorporating recent 

analyses of emissions in Wyoming and Montana, which were not available when 

the 2010 modeling study was done. 

Existing and projected emissions sources for the baseline year (2002) and 2010 

analyses were identified within a study area comprised of the following counties 

in the PRB in Wyoming and Montana: 

• Campbell County, all of Sheridan and Johnson Counties except the 

Bighorn National Forest lands to the west of the PRB, and the northern 

portion of Converse County, Wyoming. 

• Rosebud, Custer, Powder River, Big Horn, and Treasure Counties, 

Montana. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-31 

A state-of-the-art, guideline dispersion model was used to evaluate impacts of 

the existing and projected source emissions on several source groups, as follows: 

• Near-field receptors in Wyoming and Montana covering the PRB Coal 

Review Task 1A and 3A study area in each state. Overall, the near-field 

receptor grid points were spaced at one kilometer intervals over the study 

area; 

• Receptors in nearby federally designated pristine or “Class I” areas; and 

• Receptors at other sensitive areas (Class II sensitive areas). 

The EPA guideline CALPUFF model system (Scire et al. 1999a) and the same 

meteorological data set were used for the Task 1A and Task 3A studies. The 

impacts for the baseline year (2002) and for 2010 lower and upper coal 

production scenarios were directly modeled. As discussed above, the modeling 

domain extends over most of Wyoming, southeastern Montana, southwestern 

North Dakota, western South Dakota, and western Nebraska. An interagency 

group participated in developing the modeling protocol and related domain that 

were used for this analysis. 

The modeling approach for the Task 3A report used actual emissions from 

existing sources representative of 2002 operations and adjusted those emissions 

for the expected level of development in 2010. No specific emissions data were 

available for the projected levels of development. The baseline year emissions 

data were gathered from a variety of sources, but mainly relied on data collected 

by the WDEQ/AQD and the MDEQ. Only actual emission sources inside the 

study area described above were included in the modeling. Key major sources 

were included, such as the coal-fired power plants, gas-fired power plants, and 

sources that were included in the Title V (operating permit) program. The Dave 

Johnston power plant, which is located outside of but adjacent to the study area 

in Converse County, was included in the baseline year study and in the 

projected emissions. Some operational adjustments were made to accommodate 

small sources with air permits that were presumed to be operating at less than 

full capacity. Emissions from other sources, including estimated constructionrelated fugitive dust emissions, were computed based on EPA emission factors 

and on input data from WDEQ/AQD. 

Meteorological data were developed for 1996 for the modeling domain, using the 

guideline Version V of the CALMET (Scire et al. 1999b) diagnostic model, 

identical to that used in the PRB Oil and Gas EIS Project (BLM 2003b) and in 

the Task 1A report. These data provide a four-dimensional depiction that 

represents actual meteorological conditions for that year. The data baseline was 

enhanced by using data for specific surface stations and precipitation data. 

Terrain and land use data from the USGS also were used. Modeling data settings 

generally were set to default values. Baseline year ozone concentrations also 

were incorporated into the model using measured concentrations representative 

of the study area, and were not changed for this study. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-32 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

The existing regional air quality conditions generally are very good in the PRB 

Coal Review Task 1A and Task 3A study area. There are limited air pollution 

emissions sources (few industrial facilities, including the surface coal mines, and 

few residential emissions in relatively small communities and isolated ranches) 

and good atmospheric dispersion conditions. The available data show that the 

region is in compliance with the ambient air quality standards for NO2 and SO2. 

There have been no monitored exceedances of the annual PM10 standard in the 

Wyoming PRB, although, as discussed in Chapter 3 (Section 3.4.2.1.1), 

monitoring sites at some of the surface coal mines have shown some 

exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 standard since 2000. However, as also 

discussed in Chapter 3, there have been no monitored exceedances of the 

annual or 24-hour PM10 ambient air standard at the Eagle Butte Mine. Air 

quality modeling indicates the currently projected mine activities at the Eagle 

Butte Mine will be in compliance with the PM10 ambient air standards for the life 

of the mine at the permitted mining rate of 35 mmtpy, and the applicant 

proposes to mine at an average rate of 25 mmtpy during the time the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract would be mined. Visibility data colleted around the region 

indicate that, although there are some days with notable impacts at Class I 

areas, the general trend in the region shows little change in visibility impacts at 

Badlands National Park and at the Bridger Wilderness area over the period from 

1989 to 2003 (Figure 3-9). 

Predicted impacts from baseline year (2002) and projected 2010 emissions were 

modeled for three air quality criteria pollutants (NO2, SO2, and PM10), along with 

changes in air quality-related values at Class I areas and at identified sensitive 

areas. For regulatory purposes, the Class I PSD evaluations are not directly 

comparable to the air quality permitting requirements, because the modeling 

effort does not identify or separately evaluate increment consuming sources that 

would need to be evaluated under the PSD program. The cumulative impact 

analysis focuses on changes in cumulative impacts instead of on a comparison 

to PSD-related evaluations, which would apply to specific sources. 

Table 4-10 presents the modeled impacts on ambient air quality at the near-field 

receptors in Montana and Wyoming. Results indicate the maximum impacts at 

any point in each receptor group, and data are provided for the baseline year 

(2002) analysis and for both development scenarios for 2010. 

Based on the modeling results, the baseline year (2002) maximum impacts on 

ambient air quality were well below the ambient air quality standards, with an 

exception for PM10 emissions on some receptors near PRB sources. The results 

indicate the maximum modeled 24-hour PM10 levels are greater than the 150 

μg/m3 ambient air standard some near-field receptors in both Montana and 

Wyoming. The modeling also showed impacts on visibility in the surrounding 

Class I areas are above the detectable levels at many receptor areas. 

For the Montana near-field receptors, the modeling for the 24-hour PM10 levels 

projects a maximum impact above the NAAQS for both coal development 

scenarios for 2010 for some receptors. The upper development scenario shows 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-33 

Table 4-10. Projected Maximum Potential Near-field Impacts (μg/m3). 

Pollutant 

Averaging 

Time 

Base 

Year 

(2002) 

Impacts

2010 Lower 

Development 

Scenario 

Impacts 

2010 Upper 

Development 

Scenario 

Impacts NAAQS

Wyoming

AAQS 

Montana

AAQS 

PSD 

Class II 

Increments2

Wyoming Near-field 

NO2 Annual 37.3 42.4 49.0 100 100 --1 25 

SO2 Annual 3.9 4.8 5.6 80 60 --1 20 

 24-hour 14.5 33.5 34.8 365 260 --1 91  3-hour 37.9 148.0 154.2 1,300 1300 --1 512 

PM10 Annual 42.7 49.0 56.6 --3 50 --1 17 

 24-hour 335.5 378.8 439.9 150 150 --1 30 

Montana Near-field

NO2 Annual 8.85 11.3 11.8 100 --1 100 25 

 1-hour 365.8 415.9 519.5 -- --1 564 -- 

SO2 Annual 1.3 2.3 2.7 80 --1 80 20 

 24-hour 18.9 19.5 20.4 365 --1 365 91  3-hour 74.7 76.4 79.8 1,300 --1 1,300 512  1-hour 240.7 246.4 257.3 -- --1 1,300 -- 

PM10 Annual 19.6 22.5 27.7 --3 --1 50 17 

 24-hour 175.8 200.0 247.7 150 --1 150 30 

1 No standard or increment. 2 All NEPA analysis comparisons to the PSD increments are intended to evaluate a threshold of concern and do not represent a regulatory PSD Increments 

Consumption Analysis.

3 On September 21, 2006, the EPA announced final revisions to the NAAQS for particulate matter, which took effect December 18, 2006. The revision 

revoked the annual PM10 standard of 50 μg/m3. The revisions retained the 24-hour PM10 standard. The State of Wyoming will enter into rulemaking to 

revise the Wyoming Ambient Air Quality Standards. See additional discussion in Chapter 3, Section 3.4.2.1. 

Bold values indicate projected exceedances of AAQS. 

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 3A Report (BLM 2006b) 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-34 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

an increase in the impact of more than 40 percent above the baseline year for 

this parameter. Impacts at all other receptors show compliance with the NAAQS 

and the Montana AAQS. Large percentage increases in annual SO2 impacts are 

projected, but the impacts themselves are well below the NAAQS. 

For the Wyoming near-field receptors, the modeling projects maximum 24-hour 

PM10 levels greater than the 150 μg/m3 ambient air standard for the 2010 lower 

and upper coal production scenarios at some receptors. For the 2010 upper 

development scenario, the modeled levels are above 150 μg/m3 at seven of the 

near-field receptors in Wyoming; those receptors are confined in an area of 

intensive coal development. As shown in Table 4-10, the maximum modeled 

PM10 impacts from all sources are nearly three times the 24-hour standard for 

the 2010 upper production scenario. As discussed in Section 3.4.1.1.1, modeling 

tends to over predict the 24-hour impacts of surface coal mining and, as a 

result, WDEQ/AQD does not consider short-term PM10 modeling to be an 

accurate representation of short-term impacts. In view of this, a Memorandum 

of Agreement between WDEQ/AQD and EPA Region VIII, dated January 24, 

1994, allows WDEQ/AQD to conduct monitoring in lieu of short-term modeling 

for assessing coal mining-related impacts in the PRB. This agreement also 

requires Wyoming to implement “Best Available Work Practice” mitigation 

measures at any mine where an exceedance of the PM10 NAAQS has occurred. 

The monitored exceedances at surface coal mines in the Wyoming PRB and the 

measures that WDEQ/AQD has implemented or is proposing to implement to 

prevent future exceedances of the PM10 NAAQS are discussed in Chapter 3, 

Sections 3.4.2.1.1 and 3.4.2.3. 

The maximum modeled impacts on the annual PM10 levels are also projected to 

be above the standard (50 μg/m3) at one near-field receptor in Wyoming for the 

2010 upper production scenario. Impacts of NO2 and SO2 emissions are 

predicted to be below the NAAQS and Wyoming AAQS at all Wyoming near-field 

receptors. A large portion of the impacts for all scenarios would be associated 

with coal-related sources, although non-coal sources would contribute a notable 

portion of the impact. 

As indicated in Chapter 3: 

• There have been no monitored exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 ambient 

air standard at the Eagle Butte Mine. 

• Air quality modeling indicates the currently projected mine activities at 

the Eagle Butte Mine will be in compliance with the annual PM10 or NOx

ambient air standards for the life of the mine at the permitted mining 

rate of 35 mmtpy. The applicant currently proposes to mine at an 

average rate of 25 mmtpy during the time the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract would be mined. 

Table 4-11 lists the three Class I areas and two Class II areas where the modeled 

impacts are the greatest. Table 4-11 includes a comparison to ambient air 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-35 

Table 4-11. Maximum Predicted PSD Class I and Sensitive Class II Area Impacts (μg/m3)1.

Location Pollutant 

Averaging 

Period 

Base Year (2002) 

Impacts 

2010 Lower 

Development 

Scenario 

2010 Upper 

Development 

Scenario 

PSD 

Class I/II 

Increments 

Class I Areas 

NO2 Annual 2.0 2.3 2.7 2.5 

Annual 0.6 0.8 0.9 2 

24-hour 6.1 6.5 6.9 5 SO2

3-hour 26.8 27.9 29.3 25 

Annual 5.0 5.8 7.0 4 

Northern Cheyenne 

Indian Reservation 

PM10 24-hour 42.0 47.8 59.4 8 

NO2 Annual 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.5 

Annual 0.0 0.1 0.1 2 

24-hour 1.0 3.0 3.3 5 SO2

3-hour 2.0 5.1 5.6 25 

Annual 0.3 0.4 0.4 4 

Washakie Wilderness 

Area 

PM10 24-hour 14.5 16.5 16.9 8 

NO2 Annual 1.2 1.5 1.7 2.5 

Annual 0.2 0.4 0.5 2 

24-hour 1.2 3.5 3.8 5 SO2

3-hour 3.5 9.9 10.3 25 

Annual 1.3 1.7 1.9 4 

Wind Cave National 

Park 

PM10 24-hour 10.7 14.0 15.7 8 

Sensitive Class II Areas 

NO2 Annual 5.7 6.2 6.7 25 

Annual 0.8 0.9 0.9 20 

24-hour 4.7 5.1 5.3 91 SO2

3-hour 14.7 15.1 15.7 512 

Annual 3.0 3.7 4.0 17 

Crow Indian 

Reservation 

PM10 24-hour 30.5 35.1 36.7 30 

NO2 Annual 0.5 0.7 0.7 25 

Annual 0.1 0.2 0.3 20 

24-hour 1.4 3.3 3.7 91 SO2

3-hour 3.6 6.5 7.9 512 

Annual 0.8 1.1 1.2 17 

Cloud Peak Wilderness 

Area 

PM10 24-hour 13.3 17.1 17.9 30 

1 The PSD demonstrations serve information purposes only and do not constitute a regulatory PSD Increments Consumption Analysis. 

Bold values indicate exceedance of PSD Class I or II standards. Source: PRB Coal Review Task 3A Report (BLM 2006b)
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-36 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

quality standards and PSD increments; however, it must be noted that this 

modeling analysis did not separate PSD increment-consuming sources from 

those that do not consume increment. The PSD-increment comparison is 

provided for informational purposes only and cannot be directly related to a 

regulatory interpretation of PSD increment consumption. For the Class I 

Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation, modeled impacts for the baseline year 

(2002) and the two production scenarios for 2010 are less than the annual SO2

PSD Class I increment, slightly above the PSD Class I increment levels for 

annual PM10, 24-hour SO2, and 3-hour SO2, and well above the Class I 

increments for 24-hour PM10. For annual NO2, the modeled impacts are less 

than the annual increment for the baseline year and lower production scenario 

and slightly above the annual increment for the upper production scenario. In 

the other two Class I areas, only the 24-hour PM10 impacts are higher than the 

comparison to the PSD increment levels. In the sensitive Class II areas, all 

modeled impacts are well below the Class II PSD increments, with the exception 

that the 24-hour PM10 impacts are greater than the Class II 24-hour PM10

increments at the Crow Indian Reservation. 

The projected modeled visibility impacts for the baseline year (2002) and for the 

lower and upper coal production scenarios for 2010 for all analyzed Class I and 

sensitive Class II areas are listed in Table 4-12. For the baseline year, the 

maximum visibility impacts at Class I areas were determined to be at the 

Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation in Montana and at Wind Cave and 

Badlands National Parks in South Dakota. For these locations, modeling 

showed more than 200 days of impacts with a change of 10 percent or more in 

extinction. A 10 percent change in extinction corresponds to 1.0 dv. 

To provide a basis for discussing the modeled visibility impacts resulting from 

the projected increased production under the lower and upper coal production 

scenarios for 2010, the modeled visibility impacts for 2002 were subtracted from 

the model results for 2010. Table 4-12 shows the number of additional days 

that the projected impacts were greater than 1.0 dv (10 percent in extinction) for 

each site for the upper and lower coal production scenarios. Using Badlands 

Park as an example, the modeling analysis projects 238 days with impacts 

greater than 1.0 dv in 2002. Under the 2010 lower coal production scenario, the 

modeling analysis projects an additional 19 days with impacts greater than 1.0 

dv, or a total of 257 days with impacts greater than 1.0 dv. 

For acid deposition, all predicted impacts are below the deposition threshold 

values for both nitrogen and sulfur compounds. There are substantial 

percentage increases in deposition under the lower and upper coal development 

scenarios for 2010; however, impacts remain well below the threshold values. 

The acid neutralizing capacity of sensitive lakes also was analyzed, and results 

are summarized in Table 4-13. The baseline year study indicated that none of 

the lakes had predicted significant impacts; however, the lower and upper 

development scenarios for 2010 show an increased impact at Florence Lake, 

leading to an impact that is above the 10 percent ANC. Impacts also are 

predicted to be above the 1 μeq/L threshold for Upper Frozen Lake. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-37 

Table 4-12. Modeled Change in Visibility Impacts at Class I and Sensitive 

Class II Areas. 

 2002 

2010 Lower 

Development 

Scenario 

2010 Upper 

Development 

Scenario 

Location 

No. of 

Days 

>10% 

Change in 

No. of Days 

> 10% 

Change in 

No. of Days 

> 10% 

Federally and Tribally Designated Class I Areas

Badlands National Park1 238 19 26 

Bob Marshall WA 12 2 4 

Bridger WA 47 4 7 

Fitzpatrick WA 42 3 5 

Fort Peck Indian Reservation 69 8 9 

Gates of the Mountain WA 14 6 7 

Grand Teton National Park 26 2 5 

North Absaroka WA 47 6 6 

North Cheyenne Indian Reservation 305 5 10 

Red Rock Lakes 16 3 5 

Scapegoat WA 14 4 4 

Teton WA 40 4 5 

Theodore Roosevelt National Park 98 15 22 

UL Bend WA 49 4 5 

Washakie WA 53 2 3 

Wind Cave National Park 261 11 15 

Yellowstone National Park 42 7 8 

Sensitive Class II Areas 

Absaroka Beartooth WA 53 3 5 

Agate Fossil Beds National Monument 199 26 30 

Big Horn Canyon National Rec. Area 108 7 8 

Black Elk WA 263 16 22 

Cloud Peak WA 137 8 8 

Crow Indian Reservation 284 10 15 

Devils Tower National Monument 279 15 21 

Fort Belknap Indian Reservation 46 3 4 

Fort Laramie National Historic Site 153 27 30 

Jedediah Smith WA 23 1 2 

Jewel Cave National Monument 267 14 18 

Lee Metcalf WA 25 2 4 

Mount Naomi WA 8 6 8 

Mount Rushmore National Monument 248 19 25 

Popo Agie WA 47 7 8 

Soldier Creek WA 223 23 29 

Wellsville Mountain WA 6 5 7 

Wind River Indian Reservation 66 12 15 1 The U.S. Congress designated the Wilderness Area portion of Badlands National Park as a mandatory Federal PSD 

Class I area. The remainder of Badlands National Park is a PSD Class II area. 

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 3A Report (BLM 2006b) 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

 4-38 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Table 4-13. Predicted Total Cumulative Change in Acid Neutralizing Capacity of Sensitive Lakes. Location Lake 

Background 

ANC 

(μeq/L) 

Area 

(hectares) 

Base Year 

2002 

Change 

(percent) 

2010 Lower 

Development 

Scenario Change 

(percent) 

2010 Upper 

Development 

Scenario Change 

(percent) 

Thresholds 

(percent) 

Black Joe 67.0 890 1.3 1.88 1.97 10 Deep 60.0 205 1.4 2.08 2.18 10 Hobbs 70.0 293 0.9 1.37 1.43 10 

Bridger Wilderness Area 

Upper Frozen 5.0 65 0.71 0.991 1.041 11

Emerald 55.3 293 5.3 6.59 6.89 10 Cloud Peak 

Florence 32.7 417 8.9 11.52 12.03 10 

Fitzpatrick Wilderness Area Ross 53.5 4,455 0.9 1.37 1.43 10 Popo Agie Wilderness Area Lower Saddlebag 55.5 155 1.9 2.58 2.70 10 1 Data for Upper Frozen Lake presented in changes in μeq/L rather than percent change. (For lakes with less than 25 μeq/L background ANC.)Source: PRB Coal Review Task 3A Report (BLM 2006b)
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-39 

The study also modeled impacts of selected hazardous air pollutant emissions 

(benzene, ethyl benzene, formaldehyde, n-hexane, toluene, and xylene) on the 

near-field receptors in Montana and Wyoming. Model results for the 2010 upper 

development scenario show that impacts were predicted to be above the acute 

Reference Exposure Level for formaldehyde (94 μg/m3) at two receptors in 

Wyoming but are below all Reference Exposure and Reference Concentrations for 

Chronic Inhalation levels in Montana and for other compounds in Wyoming. 

Essentially, the modeled impacts for 2010 showed a continuation of the patterns 

exhibited for the baseline year analysis. 

For 2015 and 2020, the PRB Coal Review Task 3A report includes a qualitative 

analysis of potential air quality impacts and the impacts from individual source 

groups, based on the projected changes from 2002 to 2010 for the respective 

production scenarios. The production from conventional oil and gas and CBNG 

activities is projected to peak at 2010, with slight declines predicted over the 

following decade. Therefore, from these sources, expected impacts would 

decrease slightly from 2010 to 2015 and 2020. The coal mining sources would 

be the major contributors to PM10 impacts in the near-field, and these impacts 

would result from the proximity of the receptors to the coal mining operations. If 

coal mines expand or relocate, those impacts likely would follow that 

development; however, the specific impacts would need to be addressed with a 

more refined modeling effort, specifically including accurate source parameters. 

Power plants currently are the major contributors to all SO2 impacts in the nearfield in both states. However, the impacts are well below any ambient standard 

or PSD increment, and continued expansion should not jeopardize the 

attainment of those standards. Impacts on NO2 concentrations are the result of 

emissions from all the source groups. No one source group dominates the NO2

impacts in the near-field. 

A pattern that is similar to the near-field receptors holds true for the Class I and 

sensitive Class II receptor groups. Essentially, the mine operations would 

continue to dominate the PM10 impacts, the power plants would continue to 

dominate the SO2 impacts (although they would continue to be below the 

standards), and the overall source groups would continue to contribute to NO2 

impacts, but impacts should remain below the NO2 standard. 

Based on modeling results, none of the acid deposition thresholds were exceeded 

at Class I areas for either the baseline year or for the lower or upper 

development scenarios for 2010. In general, the projected increases in coal 

development (and power plants) are not expected to raise the deposition levels 

above the threshold, extended into 2020. The only concern relates to the acid 

deposition into sensitive lakes. The model results showed that the increased 

deposition, largely from SO2 emissions from power plants, exceeded the 

thresholds of significance for the ANC at two sensitive (high alpine) lakes. The 

results indicate that with increased growth in power plant operations, the 

reduced ANC of the sensitive lakes would become significant and would need to 

be addressed carefully for each proposed major development project. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-40 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

WDEQ/AQD and WDEQ/LQD mitigation and monitoring requirements for coal 

mine emissions are discussed in Sections 3.4.2.3 and 3.4.3.3. The discussion in 

these sections includes the operational control measures that are currently in 

place and would be required for mining operations on LBAs that are issued in 

the future, as well as measures that may be required to avoid future 

exceedances of the WAAQS and NAAQS and/or future mine-related impacts to 

the public. 

4.2.4 Water Resources

Surface and groundwater are used extensively throughout the PRB for 

agricultural water supply, municipal water supply, and both domestic and 

industrial water supply. Surface water use is limited to major perennial 

drainages and agricultural areas within the basin are found mainly along these 

drainages. Municipal water supply comes from a combination of surface and 

groundwater. Domestic and industrial water supply primarily is from 

groundwater. 

The PRB Coal Review Task 3B (Cumulative Water Effects) report is currently in 

preparation. This report, which will describe projected effects on ground and 

surface water as a result of projected development in the PRB, will be 

incorporated into future EIS analyses when it is complete. The analysis area for 

groundwater modeling (PRB Coal Review Task 3B report) is shown in Figure 4-4. 

The PRB Coal Review used publicly available and accessible data and 

publications in the surface water and groundwater analyses. The two principal 

studies used were the Powder/Tongue River Basin study (HKM Engineering et 

al. 2002a) and the Northeast Wyoming River Basins study (HKM Engineering et 

al. 2002b). The Powder/Tongue River Basin study includes the area drained by 

the Little Bighorn, Tongue, and Powder Rivers. The Belle Fourche and Cheyenne 

Rivers drain the area included in the Northeast Wyoming River Basins study. 

4.2.4.1 Groundwater

There are five main aquifers in the Powder/Tongue River Basin study area and 

in the Wyoming portion of the Northeast Wyoming River Basin study area that 

can be used for water supply: 

• Madison Aquifer System; 

• Dakota Aquifer System; 

• Fox Hills/Lance Aquifer System; 

• Fort Union/Wasatch Aquifer System; and 

• Quaternary Alluvial Aquifer System. 

The Fort Union/Wasatch Aquifer System includes the coal and overburden 

aquifers that are directly affected by surface coal mining. It is a major source of 

local water supply for domestic and stock water use, and it is also the aquifer 

where the major pumpage from CBNG wells occurs. Table 4-14 shows the 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-41 

Table 4-14. Recoverable Groundwater in the Fort Union/Wasatch Aquifer 

System.

Hydrogeologic 

Unit 

Surface Area (acres) Average Formation Thickness (ft) Percentage of Sand/Coal Average Sand/Coal Thickness (ft) Specific Yield (percent) Recoverable Groundwater (acre-feet)1 

Wasatch-Tongue 

River Aquifer 

Sandstones 

5,615,609 2,035 50.0 1,018 13.0 743,169,695 

Wasatch-Tongue 

River Aquifer Coals 4,988,873 2,035 6.2 126 0.4 2,514,392 

Lebo Confining 

Layer Sandstones 6,992,929 1,009 33.0 250 13.0 227,270,193 

Tullock Aquifer 

Sandstones 7,999,682 1,110 52.0 430 13.0 447,182,224 

1 Calculated by multiplying Surface Area × Average Sand/Coal Thickness × Specific Yield. These 

numbers vary slightly from the numbers presented in Table 3-5 of the Final Environmental Impact 

Statement and Proposed Plan Amendment for the PRB Oil and Gas Project (BLM 2003b). 

Source: BLM 2003b 

estimated recoverable groundwater in the components of the Fort 

Union/Wasatch Aquifer System. The volumes of recoverable groundwater from 

the sandstones within the Wasatch/Tongue River Aquifer, the Lebo Confining 

Layer, and the Tullock Aquifer were determined from the volume of sandstone in 

each of these unites multiplied by the 13 percent specific yield value for 

sandstone. Similarly, the volume of recoverable groundwater from the coals 

within the Wasatch/Tongue River was calculated from the volume of coal 

multiplied by the 0.4 percent specific yield value for coal. 

As a result of statutory requirements and concerns, several studies and a 

number of modeling analyses have been conducted to help predict the impacts 

of surface coal mining on groundwater resources in the Wyoming portion of the 

PRB. Some of these studies and modeling analyses are discussed below. 

In 1987, the USGS, in cooperation with the WDEQ and OSM, conducted a study 

of the hydrology of the eastern PRB. The resulting description of the cumulative 

hydrologic effects of all current and anticipated surface coal mining (as of 1987) 

was published in 1988 in the USGS Water-Resources Investigation Report 

entitled “Cumulative Potential Hydrologic Impacts of Surface Coal Mining in the 

Eastern Powder River Structural Basin, Northeastern Wyoming”, also known as 

the “USGS CHIA” (Martin et al. 1988). This report evaluates the potential 

cumulative groundwater impacts of surface coal mining in the area and is 

incorporated by reference into this EIS. The USGS CHIA analysis considered the 

proposed mining at the Eagle Butte Mine. It did not evaluate potential 

groundwater impacts related to additional coal leasing in this area and it did not 

consider the potential for overlapping groundwater impacts from coal mining 

and CBNG development. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-42 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Each mine must assess the probable hydrologic consequences of mining as part 

of the mine permitting process. The WDEQ/LQD must evaluate the cumulative 

hydrologic impacts associated with each proposed mining operation before 

approving the mining and reclamation plan for each mine, and they must find 

that the cumulative hydrologic impacts of all anticipated mining would not 

cause material damage to the hydrologic balance outside of the permit area for 

each mine. As a result of these requirements, each existing approved mining 

permit includes an analysis of the hydrologic impacts of the surface coal mining 

proposed at that mine. If revisions to mining and reclamation permits are 

proposed, then the potential cumulative impacts of the revisions must also be 

evaluated. If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased to the applicant, the 

existing mining and reclamation permit for the Eagle Butte Mine must be revised 

and approved to include the new lease before it can be mined. 

The PRB Oil and Gas Project FEIS (BLM 2003b) includes a modeling analysis of 

the groundwater impacts if an additional 39,000 new CBNG wells are drilled in 

the PRB by the end of 2011. The project area for this EIS, which covers all of 

Campbell, Sheridan, and Johnson Counties, as well as the northern portion of 

Converse County, is similar to the study area for the PRB Coal Review Task 1 

and Task 2 study area. 

Another source of data on the impacts of surface coal mining on groundwater is 

the monitoring that is required by WDEQ/LQD and administered by the mining 

operators. Each mine is required to monitor groundwater levels and quality in 

the coal and in the shallower aquifers in the area surrounding their operations. 

Monitoring wells are also required to record water levels and water quality in 

reclaimed areas. 

The coal mine groundwater monitoring data are published each year by GAGMO, 

a voluntary group formed in 1980. Members of GAGMO include most of the 

companies with operating or proposed mines in the Wyoming PRB, WDEQ, the 

Wyoming SEO, BLM, USGS, and OSM. GAGMO contracts with an independent 

firm each year to publish the annual monitoring results. GAGMO also 

periodically publishes reports summarizing the water monitoring data collected 

since 1980 in the Wyoming PRB (e.g., Hydro-Engineering 1991, 1996, 2001, and 

2007). 

The major groundwater issues related to surface coal mining that have been 

identified are: 

• the effect of the removal of the coal aquifer and any overburden aquifers 

within the mine area and replacement of these aquifers with backfill 

material; 

• the extent of the temporary lowering of static water levels in the aquifers 

around the mine due to dewatering associated with removal of these 

aquifers within the mine boundaries; 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-43 

• the effects of the use of water from the subcoal Fort Union Formation by 

the mines; 

• changes in water quality as a result of mining; and 

• potential overlapping drawdown due to proximity of coal mining and 

CBNG development. 

The impacts of large scale surface coal mining on a cumulative basis for each of 

these issues are discussed in the following paragraphs. 

The effect of replacing the coal and overburden with backfill is the first major 

groundwater concern. The following discussion of recharge, movement, and 

discharge of water in the backfill aquifer is excerpted from the USGS CHIA 

(Martin et al. 1988): 

Postmining recharge, movement, and discharge of groundwater in the 

Wasatch aquifer and Wyodak coal aquifer will probably not be 

substantially different from premining conditions. Recharge rates and 

mechanisms will not change substantially. Hydraulic conductivity of the 

spoil aquifer will be approximately the same as in the Wyodak coal 

aquifer allowing groundwater to move from recharge areas where clinker 

is present east of mine areas through the spoil aquifer to the undisturbed 

Wasatch aquifer and Wyodak coal aquifer to the west. 

Monitoring data verify that recharge has occurred and is continuing in the 

backfill (Hydro-Engineering 1991, 1996, 2001, and 2007). The water monitoring 

summary reports prepared each year by GAGMO list current water levels in the 

monitoring wells completed in the backfill and compare them with the 1980 

water levels, as estimated from the 1980 coal water-level contour maps. In the 

1991 GAGMO 10-year report, some recharge had occurred in 88 percent of the 

51 backfill wells reported at that time (Hydro-Engineering 1991). In the GAGMO 

20-year report, 79 percent of the 82 backfill wells measured contained water 

(Hydro-Engineering 2001). 

Coal companies are required by state and federal law to mitigate any water 

rights that are interrupted, discontinued, or diminished by mining. 

The cumulative size of the backfill area in the PRB and the duration of mining 

activity would be increased by mining the recently issued leases and the 

currently proposed LBA tracts, including the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Since 

the mined-out areas are being backfilled and the monitoring data demonstrate 

that recharge of the backfill is occurring, substantial additional impacts are not 

anticipated as a result of the pending leasing actions. 

Clinker or scoria, the baked and fused rock formed by prehistoric burning of the 

Wyodak-Anderson coal seam, occurs all along the coal outcrop area (Figure 3-

11) and is believed to be the major recharge source for the backfill aquifer, just 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-44 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

as it is for the coal. However, not all clinker is saturated. Some clinker is mined 

for road-surfacing material, but saturated clinker is not generally mined since 

abundant clinker exists above the water table and does not present the mining 

problems that would result from mining saturated clinker. Therefore, the major 

recharge source for the backfill aquifer is not being disturbed by current mining. 

Clinker is not present on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract under the Proposed 

Action or under BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1. 

The second major groundwater issue is the extent of water level drawdown in the 

coal and shallower aquifers in the area surrounding the mines. In general, the 

limited extent of the saturated sand aquifers in the Wasatch Formation 

overburden dictates that drawdowns in the Wasatch Formation are much 

smaller and cover much less area than the coal drawdowns. In this EIS, 

assessment of cumulative impacts to groundwater related to surface coal mining 

is based on impact predictions made by the Eagle Butte Mine and the other 

adjacent mines (Buckskin, Rawhide, Dry Fork, and Wyodak mines). Those 

drawdowns are extrapolated to evaluate the potential impacts of mining of the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Figure 4-5 depicts the extrapolated extent of the 

five-ft cumulative drawdown contour within the Wyodak coal aquifer resulting 

from the five mines in the North Gillette subregion. The extent of the five-ft 

drawdown contour is used by WDEQ/LQD to assess the cumulative extent of 

the impact to the groundwater system caused by mining operations. 

The GAGMO 25-year report provides actual groundwater drawdown information 

after 25 years of mining (Hydro-Engineering 2007). Most of the 530 monitoring 

wells included in the GAGMO 25-year report are completed in the coal beds, in 

the overlying sediments, or in sand channels or interburden between the coal 

beds at 16 active and proposed mine sites. Since 1996, some BLM monitor wells 

have been included in the GAGMO reports. 

The USGS CHIA predicted the approximate area of five feet or more water level 

decline in the Wyodak coal aquifer which would result from “all anticipated coal 

mining”. “All anticipated coal mining” included 16 surface coal mines operating 

at the time the report was prepared and six additional mines proposed at that 

time. All of the currently producing mines, including the Eagle Butte Mine, were 

considered in the USGS CHIA analysis (Martin et al. 1988). The study predicted 

that water supply wells completed in the coal may be affected as far away as 

eight miles from mine pits, although the effects at that distance were predicted 

to be minimal. 

As drawdowns propagate to the west, available drawdown in the coal aquifer 

increases. Available drawdown is defined as the elevation difference between the 

potentiometric surface (elevation to which water will rise in a well bore) and the 

bottom of the aquifer. Proceeding west, the coal depth increases faster than the 

potentiometric surface declines, so available drawdown in the coal increases. 

Since the depth to coal increases, most stock and domestic wells are completed 

in units above the coal. Consequently, with the exception of methane wells, few 

wells are completed in the coal in the areas west of the mines. Those wells 

4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-46 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

completed in the coal have considerable available drawdown, so it is unlikely 

that surface coal mining would cause adverse impacts to wells outside the 

immediate mine area. 

Wells in the Wasatch Formation were predicted to be impacted by drawdown 

only if they were within 2,000 ft of a mine pit (Martin et al. 1988). Drawdowns 

occur farther from the mine pits in the coal than in the shallower aquifers 

because the coal is a confined aquifer that is areally extensive. The area in 

which the shallower aquifers (Wasatch Formation, alluvium, and clinker) 

experience a five-ft drawdown would be much smaller than the area of 

drawdown in the coal because the shallower aquifers are generally 

discontinuous, of limited areal extent, and often unconfined. 

When the USGS CHIA was prepared, there were about 1,200 water supply wells 

within the maximum impact area defined in that study. Of those wells, about 

580 were completed in Wasatch aquifers, about 100 in the Wyodak coal aquifer, 

and about 280 in strata below the coal. There were no completion data available 

for the remainder of the wells (about 240) at the time the USGS CHIA was 

prepared. 

If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased and mined, the groundwater 

drawdown would be extended into the area surrounding the proposed new lease. 

When a lease is issued to an existing mine for a maintenance tract, the mine 

must revise its existing mining permit to include the new tract in its mine and 

reclamation plans. In order to do that, the lessee would be required to conduct 

a groundwater analysis to predict the extent of drawdown in the coal and 

overburden aquifers caused by mining the new lease. WDEQ/LQD would use 

the revised drawdown predictions to update their cumulative hydrologic impact 

analysis (WDEQ CHIA) for this portion of the PRB. The applicant has installed 

monitoring wells that would be used to confirm or refute drawdowns predicted 

by analysis. This analysis would be required as part of the WDEQ mine 

permitting procedure discussed in Section 1.2. 

Potential water-level decline in the subcoal Fort Union Formation is the third 

major groundwater issue. Water level declines in the Tullock Aquifer have been 

documented in the Gillette area. According to Crist (1991), these declines are 

most likely attributable to pumpage for municipal use by Gillette and for use at 

subdivisions and trailer parks in and near the city of Gillette. Most of the waterlevel declines in the subcoal Fort Union wells occur within one mile of the 

pumped wells (Crist 1991, Martin et al. 1988). Many of the mines have water 

supply wells completed in zones below the coal, but the mine facilities in the 

PRB are separated by a distance of one mile or more, so little interference 

between mine supply wells would be expected. 

In response to concerns voiced by regulatory personnel, several mines have 

conducted impact studies of the subcoal Fort Union Formation. The OSM also 

commissioned a cumulative impact study of the subcoal Fort Union Formation 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-47 

to address the effects of mine facility wells on this aquifer (OSM 1984). 

Conclusions from these studies are similar and may be summarized as follows: 

• Because of the discontinuous nature of the sands in this formation and 

because most large-yield wells are completed in several different sands, it 

is difficult to correlate completion intervals between wells. 

• In the Gillette area, water levels in this aquifer have probably declined 

because the city of Gillette and several subdivisions have utilized water 

from the formation (Crist 1991). (Note: Gillette is mixing Fort Union 

Formation water with water from wells completed in the Madison 

Formation. Also, because drawdowns have occurred, some operators are 

able to dispose of CBNG water by injecting it into the subcoal Fort Union 

Formation near the city of Gillette.) 

• Because large saturated thicknesses are available (locally) in this aquifer 

unit, generally 500 ft or more, a drawdown of 100 to 200 ft in the vicinity 

of a pumped well would not dewater the aquifer. 

Most of the existing coal mines have permits from the Wyoming SEO for subcoal 

Fort Union Formation water supply wells. The Eagle Butte Mine uses two water 

supply wells completed in the Tullock aquifer below the Roland and Smith coal 

seams (NSERV1 and NSERV2) to supply water for human consumption and 

mining operations (Figure 3-10). Extending the life of the Eagle Butte Mine by 

issuing a new lease would result in additional water being withdrawn from the 

subcoal Fort Union Formation, but no new sub-coal water supply wells would be 

required. The additional water withdrawal would not be expected to extend the 

area of water level drawdown over a substantially larger area due to the 

discontinuous nature of the sands in the Tullock Member and the fact that 

drawdown and yield reach equilibrium in a well due to recharge effects. Due to 

the distances separating subcoal Fort Union Formation wells used for mine 

water supply, these wells have not experienced interference and are not likely to 

in the future. 

Water requirements and sources for the proposed WYGEN 2 and Basin Electric 

Power Cooperative power plants, which would be located in the vicinity of the 

northern group of mines, are not currently known. The Wyoming SEO is 

discouraging further development of the lower Fort Union Formation aquifers, so 

the most likely groundwater source for these power plants would be the LanceFox Hills Aquifer System. This would reduce the chances that the power plants 

would add to cumulative hydrologic impacts of mining. 

The fourth issue of concern with groundwater is the effect of mining on water 

quality. Specifically, what effect does mining have on the water quality in the 

surrounding area, and what are the potential water quality problems in the 

backfill aquifer following mining? 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-48 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

In a regional study of the cumulative impacts of coal mining, the median 

concentrations of dissolved solids and sulfates were found to be higher in water 

from backfill aquifers than in water from either the Wasatch Formation 

overburden or the Wyodak coal aquifer (Martin et al. 1988). This is expected 

because blasting and movement of the overburden materials exposes more 

surface area to water, increasing dissolution of soluble materials, particularly 

from the overburden materials that were situated above the saturated zone in 

the premining environment. 

One pore volume of water is the volume of water that would be required to 

saturate the backfill following reclamation. The time required for one pore 

volume of water to pass through the backfill aquifer is greater than the time 

required for the postmining groundwater system to reestablish equilibrium. 

According to the USGS CHIA, estimates of the time required to reestablish 

equilibrium range from tens to hundreds of years (Martin et al. 1988). 

The major current use of water from the aquifers being replaced by the backfill 

(the Wasatch Formation overburden and Wyodak coal aquifers) is for livestock 

because these aquifers are typically too high in dissolved solids for domestic use 

and well yields are typically too low for irrigation (Martin et al. 1988). Chemical 

analyses of 336 samples collected between 1981 and 1986 from 45 wells 

completed in backfill aquifers at 10 mines indicated that the quality of water in 

the backfill will, in general, meet the state standard for livestock use of 5,000 

mg/L for TDS when recharge occurs (Martin et al. 1988). The 2000 annual 

GAGMO report (Hydro-Engineering 2000) evaluated samples from 48 backfill 

wells in 1999 and found that the TDS in 75 percent were less than 5,000 mg/L, 

TDS in 23 percent were between 5,000 and 10,000 mg/L, and TDS in one well 

was above 10,000 mg/L. An analysis of about 2,000 samples collected from 95 

backfill monitoring wells between 1986 and 2002 found that the water quality in 

75 percent of the wells were within the acceptable range for the Wyoming 

livestock standard, with 25 percent exceeding that standard (Ogle 2004). Water 

quality data for the backfill aquifer for the five mines in the North Gillette 

subregion (Buckskin, Rawhide, Dry Fork, Eagle Butte, and Wyodak) for the 

period from 1977 to 2004 was compiled by WDEQ/LQD and presented in the 

most recently prepared WDEQ CHIA for that mine group (Ogle et al. 2006). The 

median TDS concentration of groundwater from the backfill aquifer in that group 

of mines was 5,016 mg/L, based on 429 samples. The water type is similar to 

the pre-mining Wasatch and alluvial aquifers. Water quality data compiled and 

presented in the 2005 GAGMO Annual Report (Hydro-Engineering 2006) for the 

backfill aquifer for the northern group of mines for the 2000 through 2004 

period of record indicate that the TDS concentrations range between 

approximately 1,500 mg/L to 8,800 mg/L. Exactly 50 percent of the 169 

samples that were collected from 17 backfill monitoring wells during that fiveyear period had TDS concentrations that were greater than 5,000 mg/L. The 

median TDS concentration of groundwater from the backfill aquifer in that group 

of mines during that time was 4,849 mg/L. The incremental effect on 

groundwater quality due to leasing and mining the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-49 

would be to increase the total volume of backfill and, thus, the time for 

equilibrium to reestablish. 

The fifth area of concern is the potential for cumulative impacts to groundwater 

resources due to the proximity of coal mining and CBNG development. The 

Wyodak coal is being developed by mining and CBNG production in the same 

general area. Dewatering activities associated with CBNG development have 

overlapped with and expanded the area of groundwater drawdown in the coal 

aquifer in the PRB over what would occur due to coal mining development alone, 

and this would be expected to continue. 

Numerical groundwater flow modeling was used to predict the impacts of the 

cumulative stresses imposed by mining and CBNG development on the Fort 

Union Formation coal aquifer in the PRB Oil and Gas Project EIS (BLM 2003b). 

Modeling was necessary because of the large areal extent, variability, and 

cumulative stresses imposed by mining and CBNG development on the Fort 

Union coal aquifers. Information from earlier studies was incorporated into the 

modeling effort for this analysis. 

As expected, the modeling has indicated that the groundwater impacts from 

CBNG development and surface coal mining would be additive in nature and 

that the addition of CBNG development would extend the area experiencing a 

loss in hydraulic head to the west of the mining area. The 20-year GAGMO 

report stated that drawdowns in all areas have greatly increased in the last few 

years due to the water production from the Wyodak coal aquifer by CBNG 

producers (Hydro-Engineering 2001). 

Drawdowns in the coal caused by CBNG development would be expected to 

reduce the need for dewatering in advance of mining, which would be beneficial 

for mining operations. Wells completed in the coal may also experience increased 

methane emissions in areas of significant aquifer depressurization. There would 

be a potential for conflicts to occur over who (coal mining or CBNG operators) is 

responsible for replacing or repairing private wells that are adversely affected by 

the drawdowns; however, the number of potentially affected wells completed in 

the coal is not large. 

As discussed previously, coal companies are required by state and federal law to 

mitigate any water rights that are interrupted, discontinued, or diminished by 

coal mining. In response to concerns about the potential impacts of CBNG 

development on water rights, a group of CBNG operators and local landowners 

developed a standard water well monitoring and mitigation agreement that can 

be used on a case-by-case basis as development proceeds. All CBNG operators 

on federal oil and gas leases are required to offer this water well agreement to 

the surface landowners (BLM 2003b). 

After CBNG development and coal mining projects are completed, it will take 

longer for groundwater levels to recover due to the overlapping drawdown 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-50 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

impacts caused by the dewatering and depressuring of the coal aquifer by both 

operations. 

4.2.4.2 Surface Water

The main rivers in the Powder/Tongue River Basin are the Tongue River and the 

Powder River. The Powder/Tongue River Basin receives substantial surface 

water runoff from the Big Horn Mountains, leading to major agricultural 

development along drainages in the Tongue River and Powder River basins. 

Reservoirs are used throughout the basin for agricultural water supply and for 

municipal water supply in the Powder/Tongue River Basin. Water use in the 

Powder/Tongue River Basin as of 2002 is summarized in Table 4-15.

Table 4-15. Water Use as of 2002 in the Powder/Tongue River Basin. 

Dry Year Normal Year Wet Year 

(acre-feet per year) 

Water Use 

Categories 

Surface 

Water 

Groundwater Surface 

Water 

Groundwater Surface 

Water 

Groundwater 

Agricultural 178,000 200 184,000 200 194,000 300 

Municipal 2,700 500 2,700 500 2,700 500 

Domestic --- 4,400 --- 4,400 --- 4,400 

Industrial1 --- 68,000 --- 68,000 --- 68,000 

Recreation Non-consumptive 

Environmental Non-consumptive 

Evaporation 11,300 -- 11,300 -- 11,300 -- 

Total 192,000 73,100 198,000 73,100 208,000 73,200 

1 Includes conventional oil and gas production water and CBNG production water. Source: HKM Engineering et al. 2002a

The Little Bighorn River, Tongue River, Powder River, Crazy Woman Creek, and 

Piney Creek carry the largest natural flows in the Powder/Tongue River Basin. 

Many of the other major drainages are affected by irrigation practices to the 

extent that their flows are not natural (HKM Engineering et al. 2002a). Water 

availability in the major sub-basins of the Powder/Tongue River Basin is 

summarized in Table 4-16. This table presents the amount of surface water in 

acre-feet that is physically available above and beyond allocated surface water in 

these drainages. As a result of the Yellowstone River Compact, Wyoming must 

share some of the physically available surface water in the Powder/Tongue River 

Basin with Montana. 

Table 4-16. Surface Water Availability in the Powder/Tongue River Basin. 

Surface Water Availability 

(acre-feet per year) 

Sub-basin Wet Years Normal Years Dry Years 

Little Bighorn River 152,000 113,000 81,000 

Tongue River 473,000 326,000 218,000 

Clear Creek 213,000 124,000 80,000 

Crazy Woman Creek 69,000 32,000 16,000 

Powder River 547,000 324,000 16,000 

Little Powder River 48,000 12,000 3,000 

Total 1,502,000 931,000 414,000 

Source: HKM Engineering et al. 2002a 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-51 

The main rivers in the Northeast Wyoming River Basins are the Belle Fourche in 

Campbell and Crook Counties and the Cheyenne River in Converse, Weston, and 

Niobrara Counties. Water in these rivers and their tributaries comes from 

groundwater baseline flow and from precipitation, especially from heavy storms 

during the summer months. 

Water use in the Northeast Wyoming River Basins as of 2002 is summarized in 

Table 4-17. 

Table 4-17. Water Use as of 2002 in the Northeast Wyoming River Basins. 

Dry Year Normal Year Wet Year 

(acre-feet per year) 

Water Use 

Categories 

Surface 

Water 

Groundwater Surface 

Water 

Groundwater Surface 

Water 

Groundwater 

Agricultural 65,000 11,000 69,000 17,000 71,000 17,000 

Municipal --- 9,100 --- 9,100 --- 9,100 

Domestic --- 3,600 --- 3,600 --- 3,600 

Industrial 

(Oil and Gas) 

--- 46,000 --- 46,000 --- 46,000 

Industrial (Other) --- 4,700 --- 4,700 --- 4,700 

Recreation Non-consumptive 

Environmental Non-consumptive 

Evaporation 

(Key Reservoirs) 

14,000 --- 14,000 --- 14,000 --- 

Evaporation 

(Stock Ponds) 

6,300 --- 6,300 --- 6,300 --- 

Total 85,300 74,400 89,300 80,400 91,300 80,400 

1 Includes conventional oil and gas production water and CBNG production water. 

2 Includes electricity generation, coal mining, and oil refining.

Source: HKM Engineering et al. 2002b

Stream flow in the major drainages of the Northeast Wyoming River Basins is 

much less than in the Powder/Tongue River Basin, due to the absence of a 

major mountain range to provide snow melt runoff. Water availability in the 

major sub-basins of the Northeast Wyoming Rivers Basin is summarized in 

Table 4-18. 

Table 4-18. Surface Water Availability in the Northeast Wyoming River 

Basins. 

Surface Water Availability 

(acre-feet per year) 

Sub-basin Wet Years Normal Years Dry Years 

Redwater Creek 34,000 26,000 17,000 

Beaver Creek 30,000 20,000 14,000 

Cheyenne River 103,000 31,000 5,000 

Belle Fourche River 151,000 71,000 13,000 

Total 318,000 148,000 49,000 

Source: HKM Engineering et al. 2002b 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-52 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

The surface water resources in the PRB Coal Review Task 3 study area consist 

primarily of intermittent and ephemeral streams and scattered ponds and 

reservoirs. The major impact of the projected development activities would be 

direct surface disturbance of these surface water features. Table 4-9 

summarizes the cumulative baseline (2003) and projected (in 2010, 2015, and 

2020) acres of surface disturbance and reclamation. The projected activities 

would result in surface disturbance in each of the six Task 3 study area 

subwatersheds (Figure 4-4). Discrete locations for development disturbance and 

reclamation areas cannot be determined based on existing information. 

However, the projected disturbance would primarily involve the construction of 

additional linear facilities, product gathering lines, and road systems associated 

with conventional oil and gas and CBNG activities, plus additional disturbance 

associated with extending coal mining operations onto lands adjacent to the 

existing mines. 

Future coal mining could remove intermittent or ephemeral streams and stock 

ponds in the Little Powder River, Upper Belle Fourche River, Upper Cheyenne 

River, and Antelope Creek subwatersheds. As discussed in Section 3.5.2, the 

Eagle Butte Mine is in the Little Powder River subwatershed. Coal mine permits 

provide for removal of first-through fourth-order drainages. During reclamation, 

third- and fourth-order drainages must be restored; first- and second-order 

drainages often are not replaced (Martin et al. 1988). 

Coal mining-related surface water would be discharged into intermittent and 

ephemeral streams in these same four subwatersheds (Antelope Creek, Little 

Powder River, Upper Belle Fourche River, and Upper Cheyenne River). Based on 

current trends, it is assumed that most, if not all, of the coal mine-produced 

water would be consumed during operation. As discussed in Section 3.5.2.2, 

changes in surface runoff would occur as a result of the destruction and 

reconstruction of drainage channels as mining progresses. Sediment control 

structures would be used to manage discharges of surface water from the mine 

permit areas. State and federal regulations require treatment of surface runoff 

from mined lands to meet effluent standards. 

The PRB Coal Review assumes that future permitting would allow a portion of 

CBNG-produced water to be discharged to intermittent and ephemeral drainages 

as is currently allowed in the six subwatersheds in the PRB Coal Review Task 3 

study area. It is estimated that up to 39,108, 41,899, and 37,390 mmgpy of 

water would be produced in 2010, 2015, and 2020, respectively. Based on past 

monitoring in receiving streams, no change in surface flows would be expected 

beyond approximately two miles from the discharge points (BLM 2003b). For 

example, water discharged from CBNG wells has supplied the Belle Fourche 

River and some tributaries, ponds, and playas with water nearly continuously 

for several years, but this reach of the Belle Fourche River has not become 

perennial, even with the addition of CBNG discharge water. 

Surface disturbing activities can result in sediment input to water bodies, which 

affects water quality parameters such as turbidity and bottom substrate 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-53 

composition. Contaminants also can be introduced into water bodies through 

chemical characteristics of the sediment. Studies have shown that TDS levels in 

streams near reclaimed coal mine areas have increased from one percent to 

seven percent (Martin et al. 1988). Typically, sedimentation effects are shortterm in duration and localized in terms of the affected area. Suspended sediment 

concentrations would stabilize and return to typical background concentrations 

after construction or development activities have been completed. It is 

anticipated that sediment input associated with development disturbance areas 

would be minimized by implementation of appropriate erosion control measures, 

as would be determined during future permitting. 

4.2.5 Alluvial Valley Floors

Currently identified AVFs for all coal mines in the PRB Coal Review study area 

are described in the PRB Coal Review Task 1D Report (BLM 2005c), based on 

individual mine State Decision Documents. Regulatory determinations of AVF 

occurrence and location are completed as part of the permitting process for coal 

mining operations, because their presence can restrict mining activities under 

SMCRA and Wyoming laws. The WDEQ/LQD administers the AVF regulations 

for coal mining activities in Wyoming. Coal mine-related impacts to designated 

AVFs generally are not permitted if the AVF is determined to be significant to 

agriculture. If an AVF is determined not to be significant to agriculture or if the 

permit to affect the AVF was approved prior to the effective date of SMCRA, the 

AVF can be disturbed during mining but must be restored to essential 

hydrologic function during reclamation. The portions of the PRB Coal Review 

Task 3 study area that are outside of the mine permit areas have generally not 

been surveyed for the presence of AVFs; therefore, the locations and extent of 

the AVFs outside of the mine permit areas have not been determined. 

The formal AVF designation and related regulatory programs described above 

are specific to coal mining operations; however, other development-related 

activities in the study area would potentially impact AVF resources. 

4.2.6 Soils

The PRB Coal Review Task 3D Report (BLM 2005f) discusses potential 

cumulative impacts to soils as a result of projected development activities in the 

PRB Coal Review Task 3 study area. The baseline year (2003) area of 

disturbance and reclamation and the projected cumulative areas of disturbance 

and reclamation for 2010, 2015, and 2020 related to surface coal mining are 

shown in Tables 4-2 and 4-3. The baseline year area of disturbance and 

reclamation and the projected cumulative total areas of disturbance and 

reclamation for all projected development for 2010, 2015, and 2020 are shown 

in Table 4-9. 

Development activities such as increased vehicle traffic, vegetation removal, soil 

salvage and redistribution, discharge of CBNG produced groundwater, and 

construction and maintenance of project-specific components (e.g., roads, 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-54 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

ROWs, well pads, industrial sites, and associated ancillary facilities) would 

result in cumulative impacts to soils in the study area. In general, soil 

disturbance and handling from these activities would generate both long-term 

and short-term impacts to soil resources through accelerated wind or water 

erosion, other declining soil quality factors, compaction, and the essentially 

permanent removal of soil resources at industrial sites. 

Of the types of development projects in the study area, coal mining activities 

would create the most concentrated cumulative impacts to soils. This is due to 

the large acreages involved and the tendency of mining operations to occur in 

contiguous blocks. These factors would encourage widespread accelerated wind 

and water erosion; extensive soil handling would reduce soil quality through 

compaction and corresponding loss of permeability to water and air; declining 

microbial populations, fertility, and organic matter; potential mixing of saline 

and/or alkaline soil zones into seedbeds; and the limited availability of suitable 

soil resources for reclamation uses in some areas. 

However, for surface coal mining operations, there are measures that are either 

routinely required or can be specifically required as necessary to reduce impacts 

to soil resources and to identify overburden material that may be unsuitable for 

use in reestablishing vegetation, as discussed in Sections 3.3.1.3, 3.4.2.3, and 

3.8.3. 

As described in Appendix E of the PRB Coal Review Task 2 Report (BLM 2005d), 

a variety of CBNG water disposal methods may be employed in the Task 3 study 

area. The potential impacts to soils would depend on the water treatment 

method, if any, and the nature of the disposal method. As discussed in the PRB 

Coal Review Task 3D Report (BLM 2005f), due to elevated SAR levels in water 

produced from the Wyodak-Anderson coal zone in the Upper Powder River and 

Little Powder River subwatersheds, land applications of CBNG-produced water 

in those areas could increase soil alkalinity. Although elevated SARs are also 

observed in CBNG-produced waters in the Upper Belle Fourche River 

subwatershed, land application of CBNG-produced water is not anticipated 

there. The specific approaches to CBNG water discharges, the resource 

conditions and locations in which they occur, the timing of discharges, and the 

discharge permit stipulations from regulatory and land management agencies 

would determine the extent and degree of potential impacts to soils. 

4.2.7 Vegetation, Wetlands and Riparian Areas

The PRB Coal Review Task 3D Report (BLM 2005f) discusses potential 

cumulative impacts to vegetation, wetlands, and riparian areas as a result of 

projected development activities in the PRB Coal Review Task 3 study area. The 

baseline year (2003) area of disturbance and reclamation and the projected 

cumulative areas of disturbance and reclamation for 2010, 2015, and 2020 

related to surface coal mining are shown in Tables 4-2 and 4-3. The baseline 

year area of disturbance and reclamation and the projected cumulative total 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-55 

areas of disturbance and reclamation for all projected development for 2010, 

2015, and 2020 are shown in Table 4-9. 

4.2.7.1 Vegetation

The PRB is characterized as a mosaic of general vegetation types, which include 

prairie grasslands, shrublands, forested areas, and riparian areas. These broad 

categories often represent several vegetation types that are similar in terms of 

dominant species and ecological importance. Fourteen vegetation types were 

identified within the PRB Coal Review Task 1 study area, of which 10 primarily 

consist of native vegetation and are collectively classified as rangeland. These 

vegetation types include short-grass prairie, mixed-grass prairie, sagebrush 

shrubland, other shrubland, coniferous forest, aspen, forested riparian, shrubby 

riparian, herbaceous riparian, and wet meadow. The remaining vegetation types 

support limited or non-native vegetation and include cropland, urban/disturbed, 

barren, and open water. The vegetation types are described in more detail in the 

Task 1D Report for the PRB Coal Review (BLM 2005c). 

Impacts to vegetation can be classified as short-term and long-term. Potential 

short-term impacts arise from the removal and disturbance of herbaceous 

species during a project’s development and operation (e.g., coal mining, CBNG 

drilling and production, etc.), which would cease upon project completion and 

successful reclamation in a given area. Reclaimed mine land is defined by 

WDEQ/LQD as affected land that has been backfilled, graded, topsoiled, and 

permanently seeded in accordance with the approved practices specified in the 

reclamation plan (Christensen 2002). Species composition on the reclaimed 

lands may be different than on the surrounding undisturbed lands. The 

removal of woody species would be considered a long-term impact since these 

species take approximately 25 years or longer to attain a size comparable to 

woody species present within proposed disturbance areas. Potential long-term 

impacts would also include permanent loss of vegetation and vegetative 

productivity in areas that would not be reclaimed in the near term (e.g., power 

plant sites). 

4.2.7.2 Special Status Plant Species

Special status plant species are those species for which state or federal agencies 

afford an additional level of protection by law, regulation, or policy. Included in 

this category are federally listed and federally proposed species (species that are 

protected under the ESA), BLM Sensitive Species, USDA-FS Sensitive Species, 

and WGFD Species of Special Concern in Wyoming. Further discussions of 

species that are protected under the ESA and BLM Sensitive Species are 

included in Appendices F and G of this EIS. One federally listed species (Ute 

ladies’-tresses orchid) and one USDA-FS sensitive species (Barr’s milkvetch) are 

known to occur in the PRB Coal Review Task 3 study area. Three BLM sensitive 

species [Nelson’s milkvetch and Laramie columbine (Casper Field Office) and 

William’s wafer-parsnip (Buffalo Field Office) may occur in the PRB Coal Review 

Task 3 study area. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-56 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Potential direct impacts to special status plant species in the study area could 

include the incremental loss or alteration of potential or known habitat, 

associated with past and projected activities. Direct impacts also could include 

the direct loss of individual plants within the PRB Coal Review Task 3 study 

area, depending on their location in relation to development activities. Indirect 

impacts could occur due to increased dispersal and establishment of noxious 

weeds, which may result in the displacement of special status plant species in 

the long term. 

4.2.7.3 Noxious and Invasive Weed Species

Once established, invasive and non-native plant species can outcompete and 

eventually replace native species, thereby reducing forage productivity and the 

overall vigor of existing native plant communities. The State of Wyoming has 

designated the following 25 plant species as noxious weeds: 

• Field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) 

• Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) 

• Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) 

• Perennial sowthistle (Sonchus arvensis) 

• Quackgrass (Agropyron repens) 

• Hoary cress (Cardaria draba) 

• Hairy whitetop (Cardaria pubescens) 

• Perennial pepperweed (giant whitetop) (Lepidium latifolium) 

• Ox-eye daisy (Chrysanthemum leucanthemum) 

• Skeletonleaf bursage (Franseria discolor Nutt.) 

• Russian knapweed (Centaurea repens L.) 

• Yellow toadflax (Linaria vulgaris) 

• Dalmatian toadflax (Linaria dalmatica) 

• Scotch thistle (Onopordum acanthium) 

• Musk thistle (Carduus nutans) 

• Common burdock (Arctium minus) 

• Plumeless thistle (Carduus acanthoides) 

• Dyers woad (Isatis tinctoria) 

• Houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale) 

• Spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa Lam.) 

• Diffuse knapweed (Centaurea diffusa Lam.) 

• Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria L.) 

• Saltcedar (Tamarix spp.) 

• Common St. Johnswort (Hypericum perforatum) 

• Common Tansy (Tanacetum vulgare) 

Campbell County does not have a declared county list of weeds. 

Development-related construction and operation activities would potentially 

result in the dispersal of noxious and invasive weed species within and beyond 

the surface disturbance boundaries, which would result in the displacement of 

native species and changes in species composition in the long term. The 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-57 

potential for these impacts would be higher in relation to the development of 

linear facilities (e.g., pipeline ROWs, oil- and gas-related road systems, etc.) than 

for site facilities (e.g., mines, power plants, etc.) due to the potential for dispersal 

of noxious weeds over a larger area. 

Chapter 4, Section 2(d)(xiv) of the WDEQ/LQD rules and regulations requires 

that surface coal mines address weed control on reclaimed areas as follows: 

The operator must control and minimize the introduction of noxious 

weeds in accordance with Federal and State requirements until bond 

release. 

Accordingly, the reclamation plans for the existing Eagle Butte Mine and for all 

other surface coal mines in the Wyoming PRB include steps to control invasion 

by weedy (invasive nonnative) plant species. As discussed in Chapter 3, Section 

3.9.4, Eagle Butte Mine works with the Campbell County Weed and Pest 

Department and conducts an active noxious weed control program on their 

existing coal leases. Similar measures to identify and control noxious weeds are 

used at all of the surface coal mines in the Wyoming PRB as a result of the 

WDEQ/LQD regulatory requirements. 

Mitigation to control invasion by noxious weeds for CBNG developers is 

determined on a site-specific basis and may include spraying herbicides before 

entering areas and washing vehicles before leaving infested areas. BLM reviews 

weed educational material during preconstruction on-site meetings with CBNG 

operators, subcontractors, and landowners. BLM also attaches this educational 

information to approved APDs or PODs (BLM 2003b). BLM also participates in a 

collaborative effort with the South Goshen Cooperative Extension Conservation 

District, the Natural Resources Conservation Service, private surface owners, 

WGFD, and the Weed and Pest District in a prevention program that includes a 

long-term integrated weed management plan, public awareness and prevention 

programs, and a common inventory (BLM 2003b). 

4.2.7.4 Wetland and Riparian Species

Operations associated with development activities in the study area would result 

in the use of groundwater. Annually, during 2010-2020, from 30,000-35,000 

mmgpy of CBNG-produced water would be discharged to impoundments or 

intermittent and ephemeral streams or reinjected. The discharge of produced 

water could result in the creation of wetlands in containment ponds, landscape 

depressions, and riparian areas along segments of drainages that previously 

supported upland vegetation. In addition, existing wetlands and riparian areas 

that would receive additional water would become more extensive and potentially 

support a greater diversity of wetland species in the long term. Alternately, the 

discharge of abnormally high flows or water with SARs of 13 or more could 

impact existing vegetation as discussed in the Task 1D Report for the PRB Coal 

Review (BLM 2005c). For agricultural uses, the current Wyoming water quality 

standard for SAR is 8.0 (WDEQ/WQD 2005). SARs of 5 to 10 have been 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-58 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

observed in discharge waters in the study area (BLM 2003b). Once water 

discharges have peaked and subsequently decrease in the long term, the extent 

of wetlands and riparian areas and species diversity would decrease accordingly. 

After the complete cessation of water discharges, artificially-created wetland and 

riparian areas once again would support upland species and previously existing 

wetland and riparian areas would decrease in areal extent. 

4.2.8 Wildlife and Fisheries

The PRB Coal Review Task 3D Report (BLM 2005f) discusses potential 

cumulative impacts to wildlife as a result of projected development activities in 

the PRB Coal Review Task 3 study area. The baseline year (2003) area of habitat 

disturbance and reclamation and the projected cumulative areas of habitat 

disturbance and reclamation for 2010, 2015, and 2020 related to surface coal 

mining are shown in Tables 4-2 and 4-3. The baseline year area of total habitat 

disturbance and reclamation and the projected cumulative total areas of habitat 

disturbance and reclamation for 2010, 2015, and 2020 are shown in Table 4-9. 

Impacts to wildlife can be classified as short-term and long-term. Potential 

short-term impacts arise from habitat disturbance associated with a project’s 

development and operation (e.g., coal mines, CBNG wells, etc.) and would cease 

upon project completion and successful reclamation in a given area. Potential 

long-term impacts consist of long-term changes to habitats and the wildlife 

populations that depend on those habitats, irrespective of reclamation success, 

and habitat disturbance related to longer term projects (e.g., power plant 

facilities, rail lines, etc.). Direct impacts to wildlife populations as a result of 

development activities in the study area could include direct mortalities, habitat 

loss or alteration, habitat fragmentation, or animal displacement. Indirect 

impacts could include increased noise, additional human presence, and the 

potential for increased vehicle-related mortalities. 

Habitat fragmentation from activities such as roads, well pads, mines, pipelines, 

and electrical power lines also can result in the direct loss of potential wildlife 

habitat. Other habitat fragmentation effects such as increased noise, elevated 

human presence, dispersal of noxious and invasive weed species, and dust 

deposition from unpaved road traffic can extend beyond the surface disturbance 

boundaries. These effects result in overall changes in habitat quality, habitat 

loss, increased animal displacement, reductions in local wildlife populations, 

and changes in species composition. However, the severity of these effects on 

terrestrial wildlife would depend on factors such as sensitivity of the species, 

seasonal use, type and timing of project activities, and physical parameters (e.g., 

topography, cover, forage, and climate). 

4.2.8.1 Game Species

Big game species that are present within the Task 3 study area include 

pronghorn, white-tailed deer, mule deer, and elk. Potential direct impacts to 

these species would include the incremental loss or alteration of potential forage 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-59 

and ground cover associated with development construction and operational 

activities. Development associated with coal mining, drilling for CBNG, ancillary 

facilities, agricultural operations, urban areas, and transportation and utility 

corridors result in vegetation removal. Assuming that adjacent habitats would 

be at or near carrying capacity and considering the variabilities associated with 

drought conditions and human activities in the study area, displacement of 

wildlife species (e.g., big game) as a result of development activities would create 

some unquantifiable reduction in wildlife populations. 

A number of big game habitat ranges occur within the PRB Coal Review Task 3 

study area. In Wyoming, the WGFD and the BLM have established habitat 

categories based on seasonal use. Category types include crucial winter, severe 

winter, winter yearlong, and yearlong. Crucial winter range areas are considered 

essential in determining a game population’s ability to maintain itself at a 

certain level over the long term. As discussed in the PRB Coal Review Task 2 

report, discrete locations for most of the disturbance related to the projected 

development could not be determined based on the available information. 

However, identified future coal reserves were used for the Task 3 report to 

provide some level of quantification of potential future impacts to big game 

ranges. Tables 4-19 through 4-22 summarize the effects on pronghorn, deer, 

and elk game ranges as a result of the predicted lower and upper levels of coal 

production through 2020. 

Table 4-19. Potential Cumulative Disturbance to Pronghorn Ranges from 

Development Activities--Lower and Upper Coal Production 

Scenarios (acres/percent affected). 

Pronghorn Ranges1

Time Period/Scenario Crucial Winter Severe Winter Winter Yearlong Yearlong 

2010/Lower N/A 1,472 / 3% 33,196 / 2% 32,099 / 1% 

2010/Upper N/A 1,472 / 3% 34,760 / 2% 33,172 / 1% 

2015/Lower N/A 1,460 / 3% 32,649 / 2% 34,828 / 1% 

2015/Upper N/A 1,460 / 3% 34,177 / 2% 36,999 / 1% 

2020/Lower N/A 1,422 / 3% 33,637 / 2% 35,714 / 1% 

2020/Upper N/A 1,422 / 3% 33,580 / 2% 37,437 / 2% 

1 Potential coal mine-related impacts to big game ranges were determined based on GIS information as 

follows: the total acres of a big game range (e.g., crucial winter, severe winter, winter yearlong, and 

yearlong) within the PRB Coal Review Task 3 study area was divided by the sum of the potential 

disturbance acreage for the time period (based on GIS mapping of coal reserves for the lower 

production scenario) and existing (2003) disturbance from coal mine development.

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 3D Report (BLM 2005f)

Direct and indirect effects to small game species (i.e., upland game birds, 

waterfowl, small game mammals) within the Task 3 study area as a result of 

development activities would be the same as discussed above for big game 

species. Impacts would result from the incremental surface disturbance of 

potential wildlife habitat, increased noise levels and human presence, dispersal 

of noxious and invasive weed species, and dust effects from unpaved road traffic. 

Operations associated with development activities in the Task 3 study area 

would result in the use of groundwater. Most, if not all, of the coal mineproduced water would be consumed during operation. It is projected that up to 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-60 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Table 4-20. Potential Cumulative Disturbance to White-tailed Deer Ranges 

from Development Activities--Lower and Upper Coal Production 

Scenarios (acres/percent affected).

White-tailed Deer Ranges1

Time Period/Scenario Crucial Winter Severe Winter Winter Yearlong Yearlong 

2010/Lower N/A N/A N/A 1,411 / 0.6% 

2010/Upper N/A N/A N/A 1,411 / 0.6% 

2015/Lower N/A N/A N/A 1,497 / 0.7% 

2015/Upper N/A N/A N/A 1,495 / 0.7% 

2020/Lower N/A N/A N/A 1,704 / 0.7% 

2020/Upper N/A N/A N/A 1,707 / 0.8% 

1 Potential coal mine-related impacts to big game ranges were determined based on GIS information as 

follows: the total acres of a big game range (e.g., crucial winter, severe winter, winter yearlong, and 

yearlong) within the PRB Coal Review Task 3 study area was divided by the sum of the potential 

disturbance acreage for the time period (based on GIS mapping of coal reserves for the lower 

production scenario) and existing (2003) disturbance from coal mine development.

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 3D Report (BLM 2005f)

Table 4-21. Potential Cumulative Disturbance to Mule Deer Ranges from 

Development Activities--Lower and Upper Coal Production 

Scenarios (acres/percent affected). 

Mule Deer Ranges1

Time Period/Scenario Crucial Winter Severe Winter Winter Yearlong Yearlong 

2010/Lower N/A N/A 6,808 / 0.4% 25,390 / 1% 

2010/Upper N/A N/A 6,924 / 0.4% 26,641 / 1% 

2015/Lower N/A N/A 6,956 / 0.4% 26,420 / 1% 

2015/Upper N/A N/A 7,285 / 0.5% 27,205 / 1% 

2020/Lower N/A N/A 6,958 / 0.4% 27,004 / 1% 

2020/Upper N/A N/A 7,413 / 0.5% 27,990 / 1% 

1 Potential coal mine-related impacts to big game ranges were determined based on GIS information as 

follows: the total acres of a big game range (e.g., crucial winter, severe winter, winter yearlong, and 

yearlong) within the PRB Coal Review Task 3 study area was divided by the sum of the potential 

disturbance acreage for the time period (based on GIS mapping of coal reserves for the lower production 

scenario) and existing (2003) disturbance from coal mine development.

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 3D Report (BLM 2005f)

Table 4-22. Potential Cumulative Disturbance to Elk Ranges from 

Development Activities--Low and High Development Scenarios 

(acres/percent affected). 

Elk Ranges1

Time Period/Scenario Crucial Winter Severe Winter Winter Yearlong Yearlong 

2010/Lower 24 / 0.4% N/A 375 / 1% 1,444 / 0.9% 

2010/Upper 24 / 0.4% N/A 375 / 1% 1,444 / 0.9% 

2015/Lower 24 / 0.4% N/A 351 / 1% 1,161 / 0.7% 

2015/Upper 24 / 0.4% N/A 351 / 1% 1,162 / 0.7% 

2020/Lower 24 / 0.4% N/A 351 / 1% 1,121 / 0.7% 

2020/Upper 24 / 0.4% N/A 351 / 1% 1,168 / 0.7% 

1 Potential coal mine-related impacts to big game ranges were determined based on GIS information as 

follows: the total acres of a big game range (e.g., crucial winter, severe winter, winter yearlong, and 

yearlong) within the PRB Coal Review Task 3 study area was divided by the sum of the potential 

disturbance acreage for the time period (based on GIS mapping of coal reserves for the lower 

production scenario) and existing (2003) disturbance from coal mine development.

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 3D (BLM 2005f)
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-61 

approximately 39,108, 41,899, and 37,390 mmgpy of water would be produced 

in 2010, 2015, and 2020, respectively. The portion of that water that is 

produced in association with CBNG production would be discharged to 

impoundments or intermittent and ephemeral streams and would be available 

for area wildlife (e.g., waterfowl). Although much of the water would evaporate 

or infiltrate into the ground, it is anticipated that substantial quantities of water 

would remain on the surface and would result in the expansion of wetlands, 

stock ponds, and reservoirs, potentially increasing waterfowl breeding and 

foraging habitats. The median sodium concentration of CBNG-produced water 

from the Fort Union Formation is 270 mg/L. If sodium concentrations are 

maintained below 17,000 mg/L in the evaporation ponds, the potential adverse 

effects to waterfowl would be minimal. 

4.2.8.2 Nongame Species

Potential direct impacts to nongame species (e.g., small mammals, raptors, 

passerines, amphibians, and reptiles) would include the incremental loss or 

alteration of potential foraging and breeding habitats from construction and 

operation of activities (e.g., vegetation removal for coal mines and CBNG wells, 

ancillary facilities, and transportation and utility corridors). Impacts also could 

result in mortalities of less mobile species (e.g., small mammals, reptiles, 

amphibians, and invertebrates), nest or burrow abandonment, and loss of eggs 

or young as a result of crushing from vehicles and equipment. Indirect impacts 

would include increased noise levels and human presence, dispersal of noxious 

weeds, and dust effects from unpaved road traffic. Assuming that adjacent 

habitats would be at or near carrying capacity and considering the variabilities 

associated with drought conditions and human activities in the study area, 

displacement of wildlife species from the Task 3 study area would result in an 

unquantifiable reduction in wildlife populations. 

A number of migratory bird species have been documented within the PRB. In 

the event that development activities were to occur during the breeding season 

(April 1 through July 31), these activities could result in the abandonment of a 

nest site or territory or the loss of eggs or young, resulting in the loss of 

productivity for the breeding season. Loss of an active nest site, incubating 

adults, eggs, or young would not comply with the intent of the Migratory Bird 

Treaty Act and potentially could affect populations of important migratory bird 

species that may occur in the PRB. 

Breeding raptor species that occur within the Task 3 study area include bald 

eagle, golden eagle, red-tailed hawk, Swainson’s hawk, rough-legged hawk, 

American kestrel, prairie falcon, northern harrier, short-eared owl, and great 

horned owl. Potential direct impacts to raptors would result from the surface 

disturbance of nesting and foraging habitat in the PRB Coal Review Task 3 study 

area. In the event that development activities were to occur during the breeding 

season (February 1 through July 31), these activities could result in the 

abandonment of a nest site or territory or the loss of eggs or young, resulting in 

the loss of productivity for the breeding season. As discussed above, loss of an 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-62 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

active nest site, incubating adults, eggs, or young would not comply with the 

intent of several laws, including the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and 

Golden Eagle Protection Act. 

New power line segments in the study area incrementally would increase the 

collision potential for migrating and foraging bird species (e.g., raptors and 

waterfowl) (APLIC 1994). However, collision potential typically is dependent on 

variables such as the location in relation to high-use areas (e.g., nesting, 

foraging, and roosting), line orientation to flight patterns and movement 

corridors, species composition, visibility, and design. In addition, new power 

lines could pose an electrocution hazard for raptor species attempting to perch 

on the structure. Configurations less than 1 kV or greater than 69 kV typically 

do not present an electrocution potential, based on conductor placement and 

orientation (APLIC 1996). It is assumed that future permitting for power lines 

would require the use of appropriate raptor-deterring designs, thereby 

minimizing potential impacts. For example, SMCRA requires that surface coal 

mine operators use the best technology currently available to ensure that electric 

power lines are designed and constructed to minimize electrocution hazards to 

raptors. In addition, many of the power lines for CBNG development currently 

are being constructed underground. 

4.2.8.3 Fisheries

Potential cumulative effects on fisheries as a result of development activities in 

the Task 3 study area would be closely related to impacts on ground and surface 

water resources. In general, development activities could affect fish species in 

the following ways: 1) alteration or loss of habitat as a result of surface 

disturbance; 2) changes in water quality as a result of surface disturbance or 

introduction of contaminants into drainages; and 3) changes in available habitat 

as a result of water withdrawals or discharge. The potential effects of 

development activities on aquatic communities are discussed below for each of 

these impact topics. 

The predominant type of aquatic habitat in the study area consists of 

intermittent and ephemeral streams and scattered ponds and reservoirs. In 

general, perennial stream habitat in the study area is limited to the Little Powder 

River. Warm water game fish and nongame species are present in the perennial 

stream segments and numerous scattered reservoirs and ponds. Due to a lack 

of water on a consistent basis in most of the potentially affected streams, 

existing aquatic communities are mainly limited to invertebrates and algae that 

can persist in these types of habitats. The removal of stock ponds would 

eliminate habitat for invertebrates and possibly fish species. This loss would be 

temporary if the stock ponds are replaced during reclamation. 

Development activities could result in the loss of aquatic habitat as a result of 

direct surface disturbance. Table 4-9 summarizes the cumulative current (in 

2003) and projected (in 2010, 2015, and 2020) acres of surface disturbance and 

reclamation. Discrete locations for development disturbance and reclamation 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-63 

areas cannot be determined based on existing information. However, projected 

development that could result in the loss of aquatic habitat would involve the 

construction of additional linear facilities, product gathering lines and road 

systems associated with conventional oil and gas and CBNG activities and any 

additional disturbance that would be associated with extending coal mining 

operations onto lands adjacent to the existing mines. 

Projected activities would result in surface disturbance in each of the six Task 3 

study area subwatersheds. Information relative to the stream crossing locations 

for the majority of the linear facilities is not available at this time. The proposed 

Bison Pipeline project is not currently active. If the project is constructed, it 

would cross Cottonwood Creek, a tributary of the Little Powder River. Typically, 

the associated disturbance would consist of a 100-foot-wide construction ROW; 

however, site-specific stream crossing methods and reclamation would be 

determined at the time of project permitting. Future coal mining also could 

remove intermittent or ephemeral streams and stock ponds in the Little Powder 

River, Upper Belle Fourche River, Upper Cheyenne River, and Antelope Creek 

subwatersheds. Coal mine permits provide for removal of first- through fourthorder drainages. During reclamation, third- and fourth-order drainages must be 

restored; first- and second-order drainages often are not replaced (Martin et al. 

1988). As discussed in Section 3.5.2, Little Rawhide Creek and its tributary, 

Prong Draw, drain the existing Eagle Butte Mine permit area and the general 

analysis area for the entire Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. All streams within and 

adjacent to the tract are typical for the region, in that flow events are ephemeral. 

Under natural conditions, aquatic habitat is limited by the ephemeral nature of 

surface waters in the general analysis area. The results of fish surveys that 

were conducted in Little Rawhide Creek during baseline studies for the Eagle 

Butte Mine in between 1977 and 1984 and again in 1985 are discussed in 

Section 3.10.7.1. 

The PRB Coal Review assumes that surface disturbance activities would not be 

allowed in perennial stream segments or reservoirs on public land that contain 

game fish species. It also assumes that other types of development activities 

would not occur within stream channels nor remove ponds or reservoirs as part 

of construction or operation and, therefore, would not result in the direct loss of 

fish habitat. 

Surface disturbing activities can result in sediment input to water bodies, which 

affects water quality parameters such as turbidity and bottom substrate 

composition. Contaminants also can be introduced into water bodies through 

chemical characteristics of the sediment. Potential related effects on aquatic 

biota could include physiological stress, movement to avoid the affected area, or 

alteration of spawning or rearing areas (Waters 1995). Studies have shown that 

TDS levels in streams near reclaimed coal mine areas have increased from one 

percent to seven percent (Martin et al. 1988). Typically, sedimentation effects are 

short-term in duration and localized in terms of the affected area. TSS 

concentrations would stabilize and return to typical background concentrations 

after construction or development activities have been completed. It is 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-64 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

anticipated that sediment input associated with development disturbance areas 

would be minimized by implementation of appropriate erosion control measures, 

as would be determined during future permitting. 

The removal of streamside vegetation and the resultant reduction in shade and 

potential for increased bank erosion also could degrade aquatic habitats. It is 

assumed these types of impacts would be limited to intermittent and ephemeral 

streams, since a buffer protection zone typically is required for development 

activities near perennial streams. ROW clearing for linear projects could remove 

riparian vegetation at stream crossings. However, effects on aquatic habitat 

would be limited to a relatively small portion of the stream (up to 100 ft in width 

depending on the type of development). It is anticipated that reclamation 

procedures to restore riparian vegetation would be required during future project 

permitting, thereby minimizing impacts. 

CBNG and coal mining are the primary types of development activities that use 

or manage water as part of their operations. Based on current trends, it is 

assumed that most, if not all, of the coal mine-produced water would be 

consumed during operation. As discussed in Section 3.5.2.2, changes in surface 

runoff characteristics and sediment discharges would occur during surface coal 

mining as a result of the destruction and reconstruction of drainage channels as 

mining progresses and the use of sediment control structures to manage 

discharges of surface water from the mine permit area. State and federal 

regulations require treatment of surface runoff from mined lands to meet 

effluent standards. Coal mining-related surface water would be discharged into 

intermittent and ephemeral streams in four subwatersheds (Antelope Creek, 

Little Powder River, Upper Belle Fourche River, and Upper Cheyenne River). It is 

assumed that future permitting would allow a portion of CBNG-produced water 

to be discharged to intermittent and ephemeral drainages as is currently allowed 

in the six subwatersheds in the study area. It is projected that up to 

approximately 39,108, 41,899, and 37,390 mmgpy of water would be produced 

in 2010, 2015, and 2020, respectively. The portion of that water that is 

produced in association with CBNG production would be discharged to 

impoundments or intermittent and ephemeral streams. Based on past 

monitoring in receiving streams, no change in surface flows would be expected 

beyond approximately two miles from the discharge points (BLM 2003b). For 

example, water discharged from CBNG wells has supplied the Belle Fourche 

River and some tributaries, ponds, and playas with water nearly continuously 

for several years, but this reach of the Belle Fourche River has not become 

perennial, even with the addition of CBNG discharge water. 

4.2.8.4 Special Status Species

Special status species are those species for which state or federal agencies afford 

an additional level of protection by law, regulation, or policy. Included in this 

category are federally listed and federally proposed species (species that are 

protected under the ESA), BLM Sensitive Species, USDA-FS Sensitive Species, 

and WGFD Species of Special Concern in Wyoming. Further discussions of 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-65 

species that are protected under the ESA and BLM Sensitive Species are 

included in Appendices E and F of this Final EIS. The USFWS also has a list of 

Migratory Bird Species of Management Concern in Wyoming, which is discussed 

in Section 3.10.6 and in the Supplementary Information Document for this EIS. 

Special status species potentially occurring in the Task 1 study area are 

identified in Section 2.4.3.5 of the PRB Coal Review Task 1D Report (BLM 

2005c). 

Potential impacts to special status terrestrial species would be similar to those 

discussed above for nongame wildlife (e.g., small mammals, birds, amphibians, 

and reptiles). Potential direct impacts would include the incremental loss or 

alteration of potential habitat (native vegetation and previously disturbed 

vegetation) from construction and operation of development activities (e.g., 

vegetation removal for coal mines and CBNG wells, ancillary facilities, and 

transportation and utility corridors). Impacts also could result in mortalities of 

less mobile species (e.g., small mammals, reptiles, and amphibians), nest or 

burrow abandonment, and loss of eggs or young as a result of crushing from 

vehicles and equipment. Indirect impacts would include increased noise levels 

and human presence, dispersal of noxious weeds, and dust effects from unpaved 

road traffic. 

In general, direct and indirect impacts to special status species would result in a 

reduction in habitat suitability and overall carrying capacity in the study area. 

Development within potential habitat for special status species likely would 

decrease its overall suitability and potentially would reduce or preclude use of a 

species habitat due to increased activity and noise. Future use of habitat by a 

special status species would be strongly influenced by habitat quality, the degree 

of impact would depend on a number of variables including the location of the 

nest or den site, the species’ relative sensitivity, breeding phenology, and 

possible topographic shielding. 

Bird species that have been identified as occurring within the PRB and are on 

two or more of the special status species lists include common loon, American 

bittern, white-faced ibis, trumpeter swan, greater sandhill crane, mountain 

plover, upland sandpiper, long-billed curlew, black tern, yellow-billed cuckoo, 

Lewis’ woodpecker, pygmy nuthatch, sage thrasher, loggerhead shrike, Baird’s 

sparrow, sage sparrow, Brewers sparrow, and greater sage-grouse. Any 

development activities (oil and gas and related development, coal mining and 

related development, or other development) that occur during the breeding 

season (April 1 through July 31) could result in the abandonment of a nest site 

or territory or the loss of eggs or young, resulting in the loss of productivity for 

the breeding season. As discussed previously, loss of an active nest site, 

incubating adults, eggs, or young as a result of any of these development 

activities would not comply with the intent of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and 

potentially could affect populations of important migratory bird species that may 

occur in the PRB. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-66 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

A number of raptor species have been documented in the PRB and are on two or 

more of the special status species lists including bald eagle, ferruginous hawk, 

northern goshawk, merlin, peregrine falcon, western burrowing owl, and shorteared owl. Potential direct impacts to raptors would result from the surface 

disturbance of breeding and foraging habitat. Breeding raptors in or adjacent to 

development activities could abandon breeding territories, nest sites, or lose eggs 

or young. As discussed previously, loss of an active nest site, incubating adults, 

eggs, or young would not comply with the intent of several laws, including the 

Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and 

potentially could affect populations of important migratory bird species that may 

occur within the study area. New power line segments in the study area 

incrementally would increase the collision potential for migrating and foraging 

bird species such as raptors. 

A total of 239 greater sage-grouse strutting ground (lek) sites were identified in 

the six subwatersheds in the PRB Coal Review Task 3 study area as of 2003; 

however, the PRB Coal Review did not evaluate the status of these leks (i.e., 

active or inactive). Sage-grouse are susceptible to infection with West Nile virus, 

and the incidence of infection is much higher in northeastern Wyoming than the 

rest of the state. As discussed in Section 3.10.5 and in the PRB Coal Review 

Task 1D report, the trend in the sage-grouse population for the Sheridan Region 

suggests about a 10-year cycle with periodic highs and lows. Subsequent 

population peaks appear lower than the previous peak, suggesting a steadily 

declining sage-grouse population within the Sheridan Region (Oedekoven 2001). 

Direct and indirect effects to greater sage-grouse within the study area as a 

result of development activities would be the similar to the impacts discussed 

above for big game species. Impacts would result from the incremental surface 

disturbance of potential habitat, increased noise levels and human presence, 

dispersal of noxious and invasive weed species, and dust effects from unpaved 

road traffic. 

As discussed above for game species, based on existing information, the spatial 

relationship between projected future disturbance and reclamation areas for the 

projected coal development scenarios and the resource-specific information in 

the GIS layers could not be determined for the PRB Coal Review. However, the 

analysis did use GIS layers for future coal reserves to provide some 

quantification of potential future coal mining-related impacts. The results of 

this analysis are summarized in Table 4-23. The difference in the number of lek 

sites that would occur within two miles of coal mining activities under the lower 

production scenario verses the upper production scenario is due to slight 

variations in the projected disturbance areas. An unquantifiable number of the 

lek sites initially could be impacted by CBNG activity, which would occur in 

advance of coal mine development. Potential direct impacts to sage-grouse, if 

present, could include loss of foraging areas, abandonment of a lek site, or loss 

of eggs or young as a result of development activities. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-67 

Table 4-23. Potential Cumulative Impacts to Greater Sage-Grouse Leks from 

Coal Mine Development--Upper and Lower Coal Production 

Development Scenarios.

Lek Categories 2010/ 

Lower 

2010/ 

Upper 

2015/ 

Lower 

2015/ 

Upper 

2020/ 

Lower 

2020/ 

Upper 

Number of Directly 

Affected Leks 10 10 15 15 15 15 

Number of Leks within 

Two Miles of Coal 

Mining Activity 

47 47 47 49 50 49 

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 3D Report (BLM 2005f)

Seven special status fish species potentially occur in the PRB Coal Review Task 

3 study area subwatersheds: flathead chub (Little Powder River, Antelope Creek, 

and Upper Cheyenne River subwatersheds), plains topminnow (Upper Cheyenne 

River subwatershed), goldeye (Little Powder River subwatershed), lake chub 

(Little Powder River subwatershed), mountain sucker (Little Powder River 

subwatershed), silvery minnow (Little Powder River subwatershed), and plains 

minnow (Little Powder River, Upper Cheyenne River, and Upper Belle Fourche 

River subwatersheds). Potential impacts to special status fish species as a result 

of development activities would be similar to effects discussed above for 

fisheries. Surface disturbance in three subwatersheds (Little Powder River, 

Upper Belle Fourche River, and Upper Cheyenne River) could alter habitat or 

affect water quality conditions for special status fish species. Erosion control 

measures, as required by 2003 (PRB Coal Review baseline year) and future 

permits, and NPDES permit requirements would be implemented for each 

project. These measures would help decrease disturbance-related sediment 

input to stream segments that may contain one of more of the special status fish 

species. Therefore, it is anticipated that impacts to special status fish species 

would be low. 

4.2.9 Land Use and Recreation

The PRB Coal Review Task 3D report (BLM 2005f) discusses potential 

cumulative impacts to land use and recreation as a result of projected 

development activities in the PRB Coal Review Task 3 study area (Figure 4-4). 

The baseline year (2003) area of disturbance and reclamation and the projected 

cumulative areas of disturbance and reclamation for 2010, 2015, and 2020 

related to surface coal mining are shown in Tables 4-2 and 4-3. The baseline 

year area of total disturbance and reclamation and the projected cumulative 

total areas of disturbance and reclamation for 2010, 2015, and 2020 are shown 

in Table 4-9. 

The PRB is a predominantly rural, wide open landscape. With little rainfall and 

limited alternative sources of water, the primary land use is grazing. 

Nevertheless, there is a range of other land uses. The major categories include 

agriculture, forested, mixed rangeland, urban, water, wetlands, coal mines, and 

barren land. The relative amounts of these lands in the PRB Coal Review Task 1 

and Task 2 study area (Figure 4-1) is tabulated in Table 4-24. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-68 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Table 4-24. Land Use by Surface Ownership. 

Surface Ownership Total 

Use Category BLM USDA-FS1 State Private Acres Percent 

Agriculture 2,627 14,197 13,770 472,811 503,405 6.3 

Barren 165 205 187 9,396 9,953 0.1 

Forested 137,555 14,604 48,645 332,062 532,866 6.7 

Mixed Rangeland 732,014 218,156 561,363 5,271,644 6,783,177 86.0 

Urban 893 17 1,039 25,469 27,418 0.3 

Water 35 73 334 4,773 5,215 <0.1 

Wetlands 0 104 559 1,566 2,229 <0.1 

Coal Mines 149 7,236 2,805 40,917 51,107 0.6 

Total 873,438 254,592 628,702 6,158,638 7,915,370 100.0 1 Thunder Basin National Grassland, administered by the Medicine Bow – Routt National Forest. 

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 1D Report (BLM 2005c) 

A large part of the PRB consists of split estate lands (privately owned surface 

lands underlain by federally owned minerals). This results in conflicts between 

surface users, which are mainly ranching interests, and mineral developers. 

There also may be conflicts with some dispersed rural residences, although 

specific locations cannot be identified until development is proposed. 

Much of the study area is also used for dispersed recreational activities such as 

hunting. The study area includes surface lands that are federally, state, and 

privately owned. With nearly 80 percent of the area privately owned, public 

lands provide important open space and recreation resources including both 

developed recreation facilities and areas to pursue dispersed recreation 

activities. The private sector contributes the elements of commercial recreation 

opportunities and tourism services such as motels and restaurants. Some 

private land owners also allow hunting with specific permission, sometimes for a 

fee. 

4.2.9.1 Grazing and Agriculture

Potential impacts to grazing in the Task 3 study area as a result of development 

activities can be classified as short-term and long term. Potential short-term 

impacts arise from: 

• the temporary loss of forage as a result of vegetation removal/ 

disturbance; 

• temporary loss of AUMs; 

• temporary loss of water-related range improvements, such as improved 

springs, water pipelines, and stock ponds; 

• temporary loss of other range improvements, such as fences and cattle 

guards; and 

• restricted movement of livestock within an allotment due to the 

development and operation of projects like surface coal mines, which 

would cease after successful reclamation had been achieved and 

replacement of water-related and other range improvements had been 

completed. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-69 

The discharge of produced water could increase the availability of water to 

livestock, which may offset the temporary loss of water-related range 

improvements. Potential long-term impacts consist of permanent loss of forage 

and forage productivity in areas, such as power plants, that would not be 

reclaimed in the near term. Indirect impacts may include dispersal of noxious 

and invasive weed species within and beyond the surface disturbance 

boundaries, which decreases the amount of desirable forage available for 

livestock grazing in the long term. 

Development activities could result in short- and long-term impacts to 

agricultural land, depending on their spatial relationship. Short-term impacts 

would include the loss of crop production during development and operational 

phases of the projects. Long-term impacts would result from the permanent loss 

of agricultural land due the development of permanent facilities such as power 

plants and railroads. 

Table 4-25 contains an estimate of the number of AUMs unavailable on lands 

disturbed and not yet reclaimed through 2020 for the high and low levels of 

predicted development activity, along with the acreage of cropland estimated to 

be affected. 

4.2.9.2 Urban Use

It is expected that there would be additional expansion of urban residential and 

commercial development as a result of the projected 48 percent growth in 

population (between 2003 and 2020) in Campbell County. Section 4.2.12 and 

the Task 3C Report of the PRB Coal Review (BLM 2005e) contain additional 

information on employment and population issues in the study area. A majority 

of the new urban development would be expected to occur adjacent to existing 

communities, primarily Gillette, which accounts for approximately 60 percent of 

the Campbell County population and, to a lesser extent, Wright and other small 

communities. Most of this development would occur on land that is currently in 

use for grazing or agriculture. 

Table 4-25. AUMs and Acres of Cropland Estimated Unavailable on Lands 

Disturbed and Not Yet Reclaimed as a Result of Development 

Activities. 

Category 2003/ 

Baseline 

2010/ 

Lower 

2010/ 

Upper 

2015/ 

Lower 

2015/ 

Upper 

2020/ 

Lower 

2020/ 

Upper 

Unavailable 

AUMs1 18,150 22,467 22,792 23,245 23,761 22,514 23,333 

Unavailable Crop 

Land (acres) 48 59 60 134 139 206 289 1 Based on an average stocking rate of six acres per AUM. 

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 3D Report (BLM 2005f) 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-70 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

4.2.9.3 Recreation

Accessible public lands provide diverse opportunities for recreation, including 

hunting, fishing, ORV use, sightseeing, and wildlife observation. Public lands 

generally provide dispersed recreational uses in the study area. Some developed 

recreational facilities occur in special management areas, including recreation 

areas. While opportunities are available on BLM lands throughout the PRB, the 

majority of dispersed recreational uses occur in the western part of the PRB Coal 

Review Task 1 and Task 2 study area, including the South Big Horn Mountains 

area and along the Powder River. BLM lands elsewhere consist mainly of isolated 

tracts of land that are too small to provide a quality recreational experience. 

Within the PRB Coal Review Task 1 and Task 2 study area, the larger parcels of 

federal public lands occur in the southwest part of Johnson County and along 

the Powder River (administered by BLM) and in the Thunder Basin National 

Grassland (administered by the Forest Service). Public lands are accessible via 

public roads or across private land with the landowner’s permission. 

Hunting is a major recreation use of state and federal lands in the study area. 

Various big game and upland game bird species are hunted in the region. 

Fishing is a popular year-round activity for residents of the study area. 

Mule deer and pronghorn hunting are by far the most popular hunting activities 

in the Task 1 study area, accounting for 35,529 and 21,304 hunter days, 

respectively, in 2003 (Stratham 2005). The next highest were cottontail rabbit 

(2,348 hunter days) and elk (2,055 hunter days), followed by wild turkey (1,019), 

sharp-tailed grouse (508), and sage-grouse (38). Consistent trends in hunter 

activity are not discernible from the WGFD data reviewed for the PRB Coal 

Review. All of the most prominent species hunted in the study area have had 

high years and low years. Pronghorn hunting, or example, was greatest from 

1993 to 1996, while elk hunting was at its peak in 2001 and 2002. Mule deer 

hunting has been the most consistent, ranging from a low of 28,311 hunter days 

in 1996 to a high of 37,307 hunter days in 2002. 

ORV use in the Task 1 study area is available on most BLM-managed lands. 

Most of the public land in Johnson, Sheridan, and Campbell Counties has been 

inventoried and designated as open, limited, or closed to ORV use. For the 

baseline year, approximately 20,386 acres were open to unlimited vehicle travel 

on and off roads. There were 4,680 acres in the area that were closed to all ORV 

use and approximately 867,534 acres were available for limited use. Limited use 

typically means ORVs are restricted to existing roads and vehicle routes. 

Recreational use of public lands in the Task 1 study area has increased 

substantially over the past two decades, and is expected to continue to increase 

by about five percent every five years for most recreational activities (BLM 

2003b). Total visitor use by residents and nonresident visitors in Campbell and 

Converse Counties in 1980 was projected at 1,276,000 visitor days (BLM 1979). 

The total visitor days of 1,881,763 estimated for 1990 was approximately 47 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-71 

percent higher than the 1980 visitor days (BLM 2001c). Fewer than three 

percent of visitor days were estimated to occur on public lands. 

Few, if any, of the developed recreation sites in the PRB Coal Review Task 3 

study area would be affected by development related disturbance. As most of 

the projected disturbance area would occur on privately owned surface land, the 

extent of effects on dispersed recreation activities largely would depend on 

whether the disturbance areas had been open to public or private lease hunting. 

It is projected that cumulative development activities, especially the dispersed 

development of CBNG and, to a lesser extent, conventional oil and gas, would 

tend to exacerbate the trend toward a reduction in private land available for 

public hunting, which has been observed by WGFD in recent years (Shorma 

2005). A reduction in available private land for dispersed recreation would 

contrast with the anticipated increase in demand for recreational opportunities 

and would tend to push more recreationists toward public lands where the BLM 

has projected a five percent increase in use every five years (BLM 2001a). After 

coal- and oil and gas-related development activities have been completed and the 

disturbed areas have been reclaimed, many of the adverse effects on dispersed 

recreation activities would be reduced. 

It is expected that the development activities also would tend to expand and 

exacerbate the qualitative degradation of the dispersed recreation experience, in 

general, and of the hunting experience, in particular, as reported by the WGFD 

(Jahnke 2005). As noted in the Task 1D Report of the PRB Coal Review (BLM 

2005c), reductions in land available for hunting also make herd management 

more difficult for the WGFD and reduce its hunting-derived revenues (Shorma 

2005). 

No direct effects on wilderness or roadless areas would be expected from the 

projected development activities. There are no designated wilderness areas in 

the study area, and mineral development would not be permitted in the 

Fortification Creek Wilderness Study Area until and unless Congress acts to 

remove it from Wilderness consideration. 

There would be no effects on Wild and Scenic Rivers as the only river segment 

identified as both “eligible” and “suitable” in the Task 1D Report of the PRB Coal 

Review is not in the PRB Coal Review Task 3 study area. 

4.2.10 Cultural Resources and Native American Concerns

The PRB Coal Review Task 3D report (BLM 2005f) discusses potential 

cumulative impacts to cultural resources as a result of projected development 

activities in the PRB Coal Review Task 3 study area. The baseline year (2003) 

area of disturbance and reclamation and the projected cumulative areas of 

disturbance and reclamation for 2010, 2015, and 2020 related to surface coal 

mining are shown in Tables 4-2 and 4-3. The baseline year area of total 

disturbance and reclamation and the projected cumulative total areas of 

disturbance and reclamation for 2010, 2015, and 2020 are shown in Table 4-9. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-72 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Cultural sites occur throughout the study area. Table 4-26 contains an estimate 

of the amount of projected disturbance through 2020 for the projected lower and 

upper levels of coal development activity, along with an estimate of the number 

of cultural sites that would potentially be affected. The sites fall into two 

categories; prehistoric sites and historic sites, as described below. A description 

of Native American traditional cultural places and a summary of the program to 

protect sites in any of these categories follow. 

4.2.10.1 Prehistoric Sites

All recognized prehistoric cultural periods, from Clovis through Protohistoric 

(about 11,500 to 200 years ago), are represented in the PRB Coal Review study 

area. (See Section 3.12 for additional discussion about the prehistoric cultural 

periods.) The earliest prehistoric cultural periods, Paleoindian through Early 

Plains Archaic, are represented by only a small number of sites. Archaic and 

later prehistoric period sites (Archaic to Protohistoric) are represented in 

increasing numbers as a result of higher populations through time and better 

preservation of more recent sites. Important prehistoric site types in the region 

include artifact scatters, stone circles, faunal kill and processing sites, rock 

alignments and cairns, and stone material procurement areas. 

Artifact scatters dominate prehistoric sites in the study area. When there is 

adequate information to evaluate these types of sites, most are not eligible to the 

NRHP. However, complex sites and sites with buried and dateable material are 

often field evaluated as eligible. The proportion of unevaluated sites is lower in 

subwatersheds in which more studies and more follow-up studies have been 

conducted, such as Antelope Creek, Upper Cheyenne River, and Upper Belle 

Fourche River. Some portions of some of the subwatersheds which have more 

varied habitats or conditions more conducive to preservation are very rich in 

significant prehistoric sites. Within the PRB Coal Review Task 3 study area, 

these areas include the lower Antelope Creek drainage and eastern portions of 

the Upper Belle Fourche River. More detailed information on the known cultural 

sites that are present in the PRB based on the existing surveys is included in the 

Task 1D Report for the PRB Coal Review (BLM 2005c). 

4.2.10.2 Historic Sites

Historic site categories documented for the study area are based on broad 

historic themes. The site categories are Rural, Urban, Mining, Transportation, 

Military, Exploration, and Communication. Each of these site categories and the 

types of sites they include are detailed in the Task 1D Report for the PRB Coal 

Review (BLM 2005c). Evaluation of the importance of historic sites, districts, 

and landscapes must consider aspects of both theme and period in assessing 

the historic character and contributing attributes of the resources. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-73 

Table 4-26. Square Miles of Projected Cumulative Disturbance and Number of Potentially Affected Cultural Resource Sites 

in the PRB Coal Review Task 3 Study Area – Lower and Upper Coal Production Scenarios.

Lower Coal Production Scenario Upper Coal Production Scenario 

Year 2010 Year 2015 Year 2020 Year 2010 Year 2015 Year 2020 

Sub-watershed 

Average 

Number of 

Sites per 

Square Mile1 Square Miles2 Sites3 Square Miles2 Sites3 Square Miles2 Sites3 Square Miles2 Sites3 Square Miles2 Sites3 Square Miles2 Sites3 

Antelope Creek 4.7 74 346 97 484 122 608 75 376 99 496 126 629 Dry Fork Cheyenne River 8.9 8.3 74 12 109 17 151 8.3 74 12 109 17 151 Little Powder River 4.6 90 415 108 495 123 567 91 419 109 502 125 577 Upper Belle Fourche River 4.3 164 704 186 801 209 899 166 713 192 824 219 940 Upper Cheyenne River 5.2 60 314 72 375 83 433 62 321 74 387 85 445 Upper Powder River 5.0 135 674 190 953 232 1,159 135 674 191 953 232 1,159 Total 531 2,527 665 3,217 786 3,817 537 2,577 677 3,271 804 3,901 1 Average number of sites per square mile based on previous surveys in the study area. 2 Calculated, based on database disturbance acreages prepared for the Task 2 Report for the PRB Coal Review, Past and Present and Reasonably Foreseeable 

Development Activities (Appendices A and D) (BLM 2005d). 

3 The number of sites was calculated by multiplying the average density of known cultural sites per square mile (based on previous surveys) by the number of 

square miles of projected cumulative disturbance. 

Source: Task 3D Report for the Powder River Basin Coal Review Cumulative Environmental Effects (BLM 2005f) 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-74 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

4.2.10.3 Native American Traditional Cultural Places

General ethnographies of the tribes that may have had traditional ties to this 

region do not provide information on specific resources in the study area that 

are likely to be traditional cultural concerns because these resources are 

considered confidential by the tribes. Within this region, there are prominent 

and identifiable places such as the Medicine Wheel to the west in the Big Horn 

Mountains and Devils Tower to the east in the Black Hills area. These known 

sites offer some indication of the types of places valued by the Plains horse 

cultures in the historic period. Any identification of sacred or traditional 

localities must be verified in consultation with authorized tribal representatives. 

4.2.10.4 Site Protection

At the time an individual project is permitted, the development activities 

considered in this study would be subject to the following regulations relative to 

cultural resources. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 

as amended, its implementing regulations, including but not limited to 36 CFR 

800, 36 CFR 61, Executive Order 11593, and NEPA and its implementing 

regulations, including 40 CFR 1500 - 1508, provide the legal environment for 

documentation, evaluation, and protection of historic properties (i.e., cultural 

resources eligible for inclusion on the NRHP) that may be affected by 

development activities. In cases of split estate (where surface ownership and 

mineral ownership differ), surface resources, such as cultural sites, belong to 

the surface owner. The surface owner must be consulted about investigation, 

mitigation, or monitoring. 

4.2.11 Transportation and Utilities

The PRB Coal Review Task 3D report (BLM 2005f) discusses potential 

cumulative impacts to transportation and utilities systems as a result of 

projected development activities in the PRB Coal Review Task 3 study area. The 

baseline year (2003) area of disturbance and reclamation and the projected 

cumulative areas of disturbance and reclamation for 2010, 2015, and 2020 

related to surface coal mining are shown in Tables 4-2 and 4-3. The baseline 

year area of total disturbance and reclamation and the projected cumulative 

total areas of disturbance and reclamation for 2010, 2015, and 2020 are shown 

in Table 4-9. 

Generally, transportation systems in the study area would not be directly 

affected by the disturbance associated with projected development. Site-specific 

instances of disturbance may require that segments of highways, pipelines, 

transmission lines, or railroads be moved to accommodate expansion of certain 

coal mines. In such cases, the agencies authorized to regulate such actions 

would have to approve any proposal to move any segments of any transportation 

systems and construction of alternative routing would be required prior to 

closing existing links so that any disruptive effects on transportation systems 

would be minimized. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-75 

The coal mines in the North Gillette subregion currently ship most of their coal 

via the east-west BNSF rail line through Gillette. That subregion produced 55 

mmtpy in the baseline year (2003), which was just 22 percent of the estimated 

250 mmtpy capacity of the BNSF rail line (BLM 2005f). The coal mines in the 

South Gillette and Wright subregions produced approximately 308 mmtpy in 

2003, which was 88 percent of the estimated 350 mmtpy capacity of the joint 

BNSF & UP line serving those areas in the baseline year. 

Potential effects of development activities on transportation and utilities may be 

either short- or long-term in nature, varying with the type of development. A 

power plant or an urban community development would be considered longterm, and the demand for transmission line capacity would be virtually 

permanent, lasting for the economic life of the activity. The effects of coal 

production and the related demand for rail capacity would vary with market 

changes. In recent years, coal production has been increasing and the PRB Coal 

Review projects that the trend would continue, as shown in Tables 4-2 and 4-3. 

Similarly, the demand for pipeline capacity would vary with market conditions 

as well as with the rate of depletion of the oil or gas resource. 

Potential direct effects of projected development on roads and highways would 

include increased vehicular traffic and risk of traffic accidents on existing 

roadways in the PRB Coal Review Task 3 study area from daily travel by workers 

and their families. Indirect effects would include increased wear and tear on 

existing roads, additional air emissions from vehicles, additional fugitive dust 

from roads, noise, increased potential access to remote areas, and an increased 

risk of vehicle collisions with livestock and wildlife. Direct effects on railroads, 

pipelines, and transmission lines primarily would include increased demand for 

capacity to move coal, oil and gas, and electricity from production locations in 

the study area to markets outside the area. 

The socioeconomic analysis conducted as a part of Task 3C of the PRB Coal 

Review projects a population increase of approximately 48 percent between 2003 

and 2020 in Campbell County under the upper coal production scenario (BLM 

2005e). Campbell County accounts for most of the population in the PRB Coal 

Review Task 3 study area. Based on traffic studies conducted independently of 

the PRB Coal Review, vehicle miles traveled tend to increase at or above the rate 

of population growth. Consequently, highway traffic would be expected to 

increase by at least 48 percent by 2020. Approximately 60 percent of the 

population growth would occur in or near Gillette, which would indicate that the 

same proportion of traffic would originate in the Gillette area. The remainder of 

the traffic growth would be dispersed throughout the study area. Under this 

scenario, the greatest impact on traffic would occur in the Gillette area, where 

existing traffic volume to capacity ratios are highest. The increased traffic would 

be expected to cause delays in the Gillette area and might require widening of 

some streets and roads or other measures to increase traffic capacity. It is 

anticipated that there would be an increase in the risk of traffic accidents 

approximately proportional to the increase in traffic. Highway capacity on major 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-76 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

routes away from Gillette would be expected to be sufficient to accommodate the 

growth without substantial constraints. 

Existing rail lines, together with upgrades currently under way on the joint 

BNSF & UP line would be expected to accommodate the projected coal 

transportation traffic through 2015 (Table 4-27). The PRB Coal Review Task 2 

Report (BLM 2005d) projects that the proposed DM&E line would be built and 

operational by 2015 (pending availability of funding), which would add 100 

mmtpy in additional shipping capacity for the South Gillette and Wright 

subregions. 

Table 4-27. PRB Rail Lines Coal Hauling Capacity and Projected Use. 

2010 Projected 2015 Projected 2020 Projected 

2010 

Capacity

Rail Use 

Increase1

2015 

Capacity

Rail Use 

Increase1

2020 

Capacity

Rail Use 

Rail Increase1

Line mmtpy mmtpy % mmtpy mmtpy % mmtpy mmtpy % 

North 

BNSF 250 62-78 25-31 250 74-104 30-42 250 78-121 31-48

South 

BNSF & 

UP 

400 349- 

401 

87- 

100 500 393-

4392 79-882 500 417- 

4552 83-912

DM&E 0 0 0 - 2 - 3 - 3 - 2 - 3 - 3 

1 The range of increases in use shown for each year reflects the increases that are projected for the Lower and Upper 

Production Scenarios, respectively. 2 The DM&E is assumed to be built and operational by 2015, adding 100 mmtpy of capacity for the mines served by the 

BNSF & UP South line. 3 The BNSF & UP South figures represent the projected combined traffic and percent capacity on the BNSF & UP South 

line and the projected DM&E line. 

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 3D Report (BLM 2005f) 

Gas pipeline capacity out of the PRB for the PRB Coal Review baseline year 

(2003) was approximately 1.9 bcf per day; while total conventional natural gas 

and CBNG production was slightly below 1.1 bcf per day. The Task 2 Report for 

the PRB Coal Review projected that basin-wide production of CBNG would 

increase by about 54 percent by 2020. This potential is pipeline-capacity 

limited, suggesting additional pipelines could be built. One potential additional 

pipeline (Bison Project) was identified in the PRB Task 2 Report for completion 

by 2010, but no filing for the project has been made with FERC. Several other 

proposed projects are listed on the Wyoming Pipeline Authority projects website 

(http://www.wyopipeline.com/projects.asp, accessed 7/6/2007). 

An estimated 1,700 MW of new power production capacity is anticipated in the 

cumulative effects area by 2020. This level of production would require 

construction of additional transmission line capacity. It is assumed that new 

transmission lines would be constructed to connect new power plants to the 

grid. However, no specific projects have been identified so the location(s), 

capacities, and effects on the existing system cannot be determined at this time. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-77 

4.2.12 Socioeconomics

The socioeconomic impact analysis focuses on Campbell County, but also 

considers Converse, Crook, Johnson, Sheridan, and Weston Counties as directly 

affected and Niobrara and Natrona Counties as indirectly affected. Current and 

projected socioeconomic conditions are described in more detail in the Task 1C 

and 3C reports for the PRB Coal Review (BLM 2005b and 2005e). 

REMI Policy Insight (REMI), a regional economic model, was used to develop the 

cumulative employment and population projections presented below. The 

version of the REMI model for this study was calibrated to represent two 

economic regions: the first consisting of Campbell County alone, and the second 

composed of the counties in Wyoming that border Campbell County and are 

linked to its economy by established industrial and consumer trade linkages and 

by work force commuting patterns. Results for the second region were then 

analyzed to focus on the five counties, Converse, Crook, Johnson, Sheridan, and 

Weston, that are the most directly linked. Collectively, these five counties are 

referred to in the PRB Coal Review Task 3C report (BLM 2005e) as the 

surrounding counties. Additional analysis was undertaken to “disaggregate” 

REMI’s population and employment forecasts for each of the surrounding 

counties and to derive housing requirements and project future school 

enrollment. 

During the 1970s and early 1980s, the PRB emerged as a major coal producing 

region. Federal coal leasing has been a high profile activity since over 90 

percent of the coal resources in the PRB are federally owned. The surface coal 

mines that were developed during the 1970s and early 1980s are now mature 

operations, providing a stable economic and social foundation for the region. 

While energy development has produced periodic surges in population, followed 

occasionally by population loss in some communities, the growth in domestic 

energy consumption, coupled with the PRB’s vast energy resource base, has 

resulted in a 50-year growth trend in the region without the absolute economic 

busts that have characterized some other western U.S. resource booms. This 

period of extended energy development has been accompanied by substantial 

benefits, including economic growth, employment opportunity, tax revenue 

growth, and infrastructure development for local governments in the region and 

across Wyoming as tax revenues generated by production of coal and other 

energy resources have funded infrastructure development programs statewide. 

At the same time, periods of rapid growth have stressed communities and their 

social structures, housing resources, and public infrastructure and service 

systems. 

The emergence of the coal and other energy resource development industries in 

the PRB has had a long-term cumulative influence on social and economic 

conditions in the region. In general, Campbell County and the entire PRB 

region have developed a greater capacity to respond to and accommodate 

growth. The regional coal industry also provides a measure of insulation from 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-78 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

dramatic economic and social dislocations. Key current cumulative social and 

economic conditions are described below. 

4.2.12.1 Employment and the Economic Base

Energy resource development since 1970 has resulted in substantial economic 

expansion across the PRB. Total employment expanded by 156 percent as 

38,948 net new jobs were added between 1970 and 2002. The most rapid 

expansion occurred between 1975 and 1980. After modest growth and slight 

decline in the 1980s and early 1990s, employment growth resumed in the late 

1990s, led by increases in coal mine employment, including subcontractors, 

and CBNG development. Across the six-county area, total employment was 

63,871 in 2002. Nearly half of the net job gain occurred in Campbell County, 

where total employment increased from 6,026 jobs in 1970 to 25,453 jobs in 

2002. Strong gains also were posted in Sheridan County (9,052 jobs) and 

Converse County (4,323 jobs). 

The economic stimuli associated with the gains in mining and CBNG 

employment and the long-term population growth triggered secondary job gains 

in construction, trade, services, and government. In 2002, business and 

consumer services accounted for 55.5 percent of all jobs in the region, while 

mining and government accounted for 10.7 percent and 14.5 percent of all 

jobs, respectively. Farm employment in the region, as a share of total 

employment, declined from 14.3 percent in 1970 to 5.0 percent in 2002. 

However, that shift is primarily due to growth in non-farm employment rather 

than declines in farming, as total farm employment in the PRB recorded a net 

decline of only 333 jobs, from 3,571 to 3,238. 

The largest impetus to future growth over the PRB Coal Review study period 

(2003 to 2020) is expected to occur by 2010. Under the lower coal production 

scenario, employment in 2010 related to coal mining, oil and gas production, 

and oil field services is projected to increase by one-third, or more than 2,300 

jobs, as compared to 2003 levels. A large portion of the jobs gained would be the 

result of increased oil and gas development. While the number of coal mining 

jobs would increase, the projected coal mine-related productivity gains would 

limit increases in the number of mine employees required for operations. 

Beyond 2010, as major infrastructure development (e.g., additional CBNG 

compression capacity) is completed and the pace of conventional oil and gas 

drilling decreases, total employment related to coal mining, oil and gas 

production, and oil field services would decline. Increases in CBNG production 

and coal mining employment would occur thereafter, such that total mining 

employment would approach pre-2010 levels by the end of the forecast period 

(2020). Under the development scenarios, construction of the three new power 

plants, having a combined capacity of 1,000 MW, is assumed to occur 

concurrently with the increases in mining employment, with a peak work force of 

approximately 1,550 workers in 2007-2008. Under the upper coal production 

scenario, a second temporary construction work force impact would occur 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-79 

between 2016 and 2020 in conjunction with the construction of an additional 

700-MW power plant. 

The net effects of these activities, including secondary effects on suppliers, retail 

merchants, service firms, and state agencies and local government in the region, 

would be the creation of more than 8,700 new jobs in the region between 2003 

and 2010. Of those, more than 5,600 jobs (a 22 percent increase over 2003 

employment) would be based in Campbell County. The pace of economic 

expansion, at least in terms of jobs, would moderate after 2010. Total 

employment growth of 2,017 additional jobs is projected in Campbell County 

between 2010 and 2020, with 1,741 additional jobs projected in the surrounding 

counties. 

Several important issues arise in the context of the rapid economic expansion 

implied by the growth projections through 2010. One issue is that achieving the 

projected levels of energy and mineral development activity assumes that 

industry has access to the necessary equipment, materials, labor, and other vital 

inputs. Current oil and gas exploration and development interest across the 

Rocky Mountain region has absorbed the available inventory of drilling rigs and 

crews. A lack of additional resources could delay or limit the job gains below the 

levels projected, even though prospects for such growth remain. Secondly, the 

competition for equipment could combine with tight labor markets to negate the 

productivity gains that underlie the projections, such that the employment and 

associated impacts do materialize, but are associated with lower levels of activity 

(e.g., a lengthier construction period for a power plant or fewer new wells drilled 

each year). 

Employment effects associated with the upper coal production scenario, 

assuming productivity gains in coal mining equivalent to those in the lower coal 

production scenario, would result in total employment gains of 11,563 jobs by 

2010 in the six-county study area, with an additional 3,667 jobs by 2020. 

(Projected coal mining employment under the upper production scenario was 

estimated assuming future productivity gains comparable to those under the 

lower production scenario. This assumption reflects a departure from the 

assumptions established for the upper production scenario in the Task 2 report, 

whereby a 16 percent higher production rate would be achieved with a 2.5 

percent increase in workforce. Those assumptions, although based on a 

continuation of historic productivity gains, may underestimate population and 

employment growth and related socioeconomic effects if the production is 

achieved but the productivity gains lag. Using the productivity gains from the 

lower production scenario thus provides a more conservative perspective on 

potential long-term population growth for the purposes of the cumulative 

analysis). As compared to the employment projections under the lower coal 

production scenario, those gains would include 2,821 additional jobs in 2010 

and 3,214 additional jobs in 2020. Most of the incremental gains would be 

based in Campbell County, further stressing labor markets, housing, and other 

community resources. Such pressures could delay or affect the development 

plans of individual firms and operators, such that the projected employment 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-80 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

levels would not be realized in the time frames shown. Nonetheless, substantial 

growth in employment is expected to occur, and even if the projected total 

employment levels are not realized, substantial social and economic impacts still 

would be anticipated. 

The economic stimuli associated with the projected development also would 

stimulate increases in employment in other nearby counties beyond the five 

surrounding counties identified above. However, the potential effects in these 

areas are not addressed in the PRB Coal Review Task 3C Report because most of 

the effects would comprise indirect or induced growth that would be limited in 

scale relative to the size of the respective economies. Furthermore, the economic 

outlook for those areas is influenced by factors that are beyond the scope of this 

study, such as the role of the oil and gas support services industry based in 

Natrona County in supporting energy development in the south-central and 

southwestern portions of Wyoming. 

4.2.12.2 Labor Market Conditions

Labor market conditions in the PRB reflect a generally healthy economy, with 

average annual county unemployment rates between 3.2 percent and 4.8 

percent in 2003. Johnson County recorded the lowest unemployment (3.2 

percent) and Converse County registered the highest (4.8 percent). Statewide 

and national unemployment rates for the period were 4.4 percent and 6.0 

percent, respectively. 

Over time, local unemployment levels and rates have reflected the influences of 

the large, relatively stable employment baseline associated with the coal mining 

industry and the more transitory and variable influences of natural gas 

development and other industries. Prior to the beginning of CBNG development 

in 1989, unemployment in Campbell County fluctuated between 4.8 and 5.35 

percent, slightly above the corresponding statewide averages. Labor demand 

associated with CBNG development contributed to a decline in unemployment to 

below 3.0 percent in 2001. As the pace of CBNG development has stabilized, 

labor demand eased and unemployment rates climbed to 5.2 percent in 2003, 

before abating. 

The employment effects identified above from 2003-2020 imply substantial 

pressures on local labor markets. Strong demand for labor would lower local 

unemployment, creating upward pressure on wages and salaries. Those 

influences would stimulate substantial economic migration into Campbell 

County, causing impacts to population, housing demand, and other economic 

and social conditions. Similar influences would occur in the surrounding 

counties, although the implications are less severe because the scale of the 

effects would be smaller and would be distributed over multiple communities 

and service providers. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-81 

4.2.12.3 Personal Income

A benefit associated with energy resource development, whether it is mineral 

mining or oil and gas development, is wages and salaries that are among the 

highest in the state. Personal income registered strong gains across the region, 

but especially in Campbell County, during the late 1970s and early 1980s. In 

1981, per capita personal income in Campbell County was $17,520, compared 

to the national average of $11,280 and the statewide average of $12,879. 

Personal income growth was tempered by several years of economic stagnation 

during the late 1980s. Renewed economic vitality since then resulted in per 

capita personal income in Campbell County reaching $30,253 in 2002. Those 

gains notwithstanding, per capita income among Campbell County’s residents 

was below statewide and national norms, as well as that for Sheridan ($32,563) 

and Weston ($31,388) Counties. When measured on a median household or 

family income basis in the 2000 census, Campbell County led statewide, 

national, and other counties in the PRB by considerable margins. 

In terms of total personal income, Campbell County leads the six-county region 

with $1.093 billion in 2002. Sheridan County residents recorded aggregate 

personal income of $878 million in 2002. Total personal income in the other 

counties was substantially lower, ranging from $177.8 million in Crook County 

to $347.8 million in Converse County. 

Personal incomes in the region would increase over the time period 2003-2020, 

both in aggregate and on a per capita basis, in conjunction with the economic 

outlooks foreshadowed by the projected development scenarios. In 2003, total 

personal income was $1.12 billion in Campbell County and approximately 

$1.88 billion in the surrounding counties. Under the lower coal production 

scenario, total personal income would more than triple to $3.34 billion in 2020, 

and personal income in the surrounding counties would increase by 

approximately 136 percent to $4.43 billion (all in nominal dollars). The upper 

coal production scenario would generate an additional $266 million per year in 

Campbell County and an additional $35 to $40 million per year in the 

surrounding counties by 2020. Annual per capita incomes are projected to 

increase by approximately 27 percent (in real terms) across the region between 

2003 and 2020. Households with one or more workers employed directly in the 

energy industry, associated key suppliers, and the construction industry likely 

would realize larger shares of the overall gains. 

4.2.12.4 Population and Demographics

Population change over time is perhaps the single best indicator of cumulative 

social and economic change in the PRB. Campbell County was not among the 

original 13 counties when Wyoming was admitted to statehood, but it was 

carved from Weston and Crook Counties in 1911. Campbell County’s 

population of 5,233 in the 1920 census ranked it seventeenth among 

Wyoming’s counties. Forty years later and prior to the onset of coal 

development in the region, Campbell County, with a population of 5,861, 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-82 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

ranked eighteenth among Wyoming’s counties in terms of population, with 

neighboring Converse, Sheridan, and Weston Counties each having a larger 

population. 

By 1980, Campbell County’s population had increased by more than 300 

percent, to 24,367, seventh among Wyoming’s counties. Energy development 

also contributed to population growth in Sheridan, Converse, Johnson, and 

Crook Counties during that period. Weston County recorded a population 

decline during the period; however, the combined population of the PRB 

climbed from 49,311 in 1960 to 82,598 in 1980. 

Annual coal production in the PRB has increased by nearly 500 percent since 

1980, accompanied by expanded mine service and rail transportation capacity, 

stimulating further growth. The impetus for growth was tempered by 

substantial productivity increases in the mining industry, coupled with 

declining production of other energy resources. Consequently, the region’s 

population gained a relatively modest 11 percent, 9,318 residents, between 

1980 and 2000, reaching 91,916. Campbell County registered a net gain of 

9,331 residents during that period, raising its total population to 33,698 in 

2000, fourth highest in the state. Across the rest of the PRB, the loss of about 

2,000 residents in Converse County was offset by modest gains in the other 

four counties (U.S. Census Bureau 2001). 

More recently, the PRB has seen renewed population growth, primarily linked 

to CBNG development. Population estimates for 2003 indicate a total regional 

population of 96,078, a 4.4 percent increase over the 2000 census population. 

Gains were reported for all six counties, ranging from 29 persons in Weston 

County to 2,740 persons in Campbell County (Table 4-28). City officials 

estimate that Gillette’s populations grew by almost 2,000 people (6.2 percent) 

in 2006 (Gillette News-Record 2007). 

The magnitude and timing of projected employment changes from 2003-2020 

under either coal production scenario would trigger corresponding effects to 

population across the PRB, particularly in Campbell County (Figure 4-6). 

Under the lower coal production scenario, Campbell County’s population is 

projected to increase by more than 14,550 residents between 2003 and 2020, of 

which nearly 9,500 additional residents are anticipated by 2010. Growth over 

the next five to six years would result in substantial pressures on housing and 

other community resources. The projected energy and mineral development in 

the lower coal production scenario would also result in substantial population 

growth elsewhere in the PRB, with Sheridan, Johnson, and Converse Counties 

all projected to gain substantial population. Population growth, like employment 

growth, would moderate after 2010. 

Projected population growth between 2003 and 2020 ranges from 0.5 percent 

CAGR in Weston County to 2.0 percent CAGR in Campbell County. In absolute 

terms, the net change ranges from 537 additional residents in Weston County to 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-83 

Table 4-28. Recent and Projected PRB Population. 

Year 

Campbell 

County 

Converse 

County 

Crook 

County

Johnson 

County 

Sheridan 

County 

Weston 

County 

Total 

Study 

Area 

Census 

2000 33,698 12,104 5,895 7,108 26,606 6,642 92,053 

2003 36,438 12,314 5,986 7,554 27,115 6,671 96,078 

Lower Coal Production Scenario 

2010 45,925 13,103 6,542 8,389 28,459 7,108 109,526 

2015 48,905 13,671 6,759 8,867 30,016 7,174 115,392 

2020 50,995 14,193 6,989 9,326 31,467 7,208 120,178 

Upper Coal Production Scenario 

2010 47,662 13,160 6,570 8,424 28,579 7,137 111,532 

2015 51,558 13,763 6,802 8,924 30,214 7,219 118,480 

2020 54,943 14,313 7,045 9,403 31,733 7,266 124,703 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2005 (2000 and 2003 data) 

Figure 4-6. Projected Campbell County Population and Employment to 2020. 

a gain of 14,557 residents in Campbell County. The combined population of the 

six-county study area is projected to climb from 96,078 in 2003 to 120,178 in 

2020, a 1.3 percent CAGR. 

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 3C Report (BLM 2005e)
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-84 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

As with employment, changing development conditions could result in actual 

population growth varying from projected population growth. If project 

schedules or levels of development vary from the projected levels, there could be 

corresponding effects on population growth (e.g., delays could result in lower 

growth). Another possibility is that population demographics could change in 

response to migration and commuting, with relatively more immigrating 

construction workers being single-status, rather than being accompanied by 

families. Another alternative is that the spatial distribution of population growth 

could shift as a result of housing or labor constraints, such that less growth 

would occur in Gillette and Campbell County, and more growth would occur 

elsewhere. 

Projected population growth through 2020 under the upper coal production 

scenario is approximately 19 percent higher than under the lower coal 

production scenario (28,625 compared to 24,100, with the six- county 

population reaching 124,703 by 2020). Much of the incremental population 

growth would occur by 2010 in Campbell County, and in particular in and near 

Gillette. 

Community population growth under the upper coal production scenario 

generally would mirror growth under the lower coal production scenario but with 

higher growth in Wright, Douglas, and Newcastle due to the effects of higher coal 

production, coal transportation, and power generation concentrated in the 

southern portion of Campbell County. 

Demographic characteristics from the 2000 census reveal many similarities to 

the statewide population, but also many minor differences across the PRB as 

shown in Table 4-29. 

Table 4-29. Demographic Characteristics. 

Characteristic Wyoming 

Campbell 

County Other PRB Counties 

Median Age 36.2 32.2 37.5 – 43.0 

Percent Residents < 18 

Years Old 26.1 31.0 24.1 – 28.5 

Average Household Size 2.48 2.73 2.31 – 2.55 

Percent Minority 

Residents 7.9 3.9 3.0 - 5.3 

Source: PRB Coal Review Task1C Report (BLM 2005b) 

4.2.12.5 Housing

While the population grew by 55 percent in the 1970s, the housing stock in the 

study area grew by almost 78 percent. Housing growth was especially rapid 

during the 1970s in Campbell County, where population grew by 88 percent and 

the housing stock grew by 140 percent. In 2000, the housing inventory in the 

six-county study area was 41,203 units (Table 4-30). 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-85 

Table 4-30. Total Housing Stock in 2000. 

Campbell 

County 

Converse 

County 

Crook 

County 

Johnson 

County 

Sheridan

County 

Weston 

County 

Six-county 

PRB Region 

13,288 5,669 2,935 3,503 12,577 3,231 41,203 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2001)

This expansion in housing supply, combined with the slowdown in the rate of 

population growth produced double-digit vacancy rates for rental housing in the 

late 1980s and early 1990s. At the same time, vacancy rates among ownership 

housing remained tight. After growth resumed in the mid-1990s, most countylevel vacancy rates for ownership units were at or below the state levels in 2000. 

Vacancy rates for rental units declined even more sharply. By 2000, rental 

vacancy rates in Campbell County were below the state average and were well 

below the average in Johnson County and Sheridan County. Monthly costs for 

rental housing in the PRB, measured in the fourth quarter of 2003, generally 

were highest in Campbell County (Table 4-31). 

Table 4-31. Monthly Housing Rents in 20031 in the PRB Study Area. 

County Apartments Mobile Home Lots Houses 

Mobile Homes 

on a Lot 

Campbell $563 $228 $707 $590 

Converse $385 $150 $488 $374 

Crook $345 $120 - - 

Johnson $443 $208 $606 $414 

Sheridan $465 $273 $667 $502 

Weston $333 $99 $380 $365 

Wyoming $466 $195 $658 $484 

1 2003 data are for the fourth quarter. 

Source: Wyoming Department of Administration and Information, Division of Economic Analysis (2004)

In 2002, the average sale price of homes in the study area varied from $70,674 

in Weston County to $142,565 in Sheridan County. The average home price 

statewide in 2002 was $120,314. In addition to Sheridan County, Campbell 

($133,482) and Johnson ($131,782) Counties also had average home sale prices 

above the statewide average in 2002. A combined total of 1,242 new housing 

units were issued permits from 1998 through 2002 in the PRB, including 

permits for 400 housing units in Campbell County and 509 units in Sheridan 

County. Although not all local governments in the study area issue permits, 

these data are general indicators of residential construction activity. 

Temporary housing resources are available in the PRB in the form of hotelmotel rooms, private and public campgrounds, two large special event facilities, 

and vacant spaces in mobile home parks. In all, there are an estimated 71 

lodging establishments with a total of more than 2,500 rooms. These housing 

resources, supplemented by pockets of persistently vacant apartments, 

townhouses, and mobile home spaces in Gillette and Wright, have 

accommodated temporary housing needs associated with natural resource and 

energy projects in the past. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-86 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Both projected coal development scenarios suggest a strong demand for housing 

across the six-county study area in the period 2003-2020. Net new housing 

requirements under the lower coal production scenario would include 

approximately 11,270 units through 2020, a 26 percent increase above the total 

existing inventory in 2003 (Figure 4-7). New housing requirements under the 

upper coal production scenario are estimated at 13,060 units, a 31 percent 

increase compared to the 2003 inventory and 1,790 units more than under the 

lower coal production scenario. From 2003 to 2010, the demand for new 

housing under the lower coal production scenario would concentrate in 

Campbell County, as approximately 60 percent of the overall demand for 

additional housing under either projected coal development scenario would 

occur in Campbell County, and approximately two-thirds of that (between 4,300 

and 5,000 additional units) would be needed within the next three to five years. 

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

2003-2010 2011-2015 2016-2020

Cam pbell

Converse

Crook

Johnson

Sheridan

W eston

Figure 4-7. Projected Housing Demand in the PRB Study Area Under the Lower 

Production Scenario.

A substantial portion of the near-term housing demand in Campbell County 

would be associated with the assumed concurrent construction of three power 

plants. If that occurs, one or more project sponsors may be required by the 

Wyoming Industrial Siting Administration to pro-actively provide housing (e.g., a 

construction camp for single-status workers). Such actions could temper the 

needs for additional housing; however, the remaining needs would nonetheless 

be substantial, straining public and private sector residential development 

capacity. Although smaller in scale than those in Campbell County, housing 

demands in the surrounding counties also could strain the capabilities of the 

residential construction sector to respond. Furthermore, residential contractors 

would be competing for available labor, contributing to the population growth 

and housing demand, and fueling increases in construction costs and housing 

prices. 

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 3C Report (BLM 2005e)
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-87 

The relative scale of the housing needs may be evaluated in comparison to past 

growth in the study area. One benchmark for comparison is the rapid growth 

that occurred in the PRB in the 1970s. During that decade, the number of 

housing units in the six-county study area grew by approximately 14,900 units, 

approximately 1,500 units per year on average compared to the 850 to 975 new 

units per year projected under these scenarios through 2010. The rapid pace of 

development in the 1970s also coincided with a period of economic expansion 

and strained the region’s construction trade and building supplier industries. 

Although the underlying economies of the region are larger now, the projected 

needs would tax the ability of communities to respond. Signs of strain are 

apparent in Gillette and could surface elsewhere as relatively more housing need 

would arise in the remaining counties of the six-county study area during the 

second five-year period under the low scenario. 

Projected housing demands under either scenario, although lower than what 

Campbell County and the region experienced in the “boom” years of the 1970s, 

would exert substantial pressure on housing markets, prices, and the real estate 

development and construction industries, all at a time when demand for labor 

and other resources would be high overall. 

4.2.12.6 Public Education

There are 10 school districts in the six-county PRB study area, ranging in size 

from CCSD No. 1 with 7,368 students in the 2003 school year to SCSD No. 3 

(based in Clearmont, Wyoming) with fewer than 100 students. CCSD No. 1, 

based in Gillette, serves the primary energy and resource development region. 

Trends in public school enrollment generally mirrored population trends during 

the period of rapid population growth. District-wide enrollment in Campbell 

County grew by more than 4,600 students (131 percent) between 1975 and 

1985. Enrollment increased in all districts in Converse and Sheridan Counties 

as well. Enrollment in CCSD No. 1 subsequently peaked, but remained near 

the record high level for nearly a decade. Elsewhere in the region, enrollments 

generally have declined, and the combined enrollments in the study area’s 

other districts are now below 10,000, its lowest level since 1975. Recent CBNG 

development has tempered, but not reversed, the trend of declining school 

enrollments across the region. 

Communities across the PRB study area would see population growth due to 

economic migration from 2003 to 2020; however, the effect on public school 

enrollments would vary. As the demographic structure of the population 

changes, school districts in the PRB would be affected by new trends. In some 

counties, the size of that population (generally aged five to 17 years) may even 

trend in the opposite direction of total population in the short-term due to 

underlying demographics of the established resident population. 

The demographic forecasts developed from the development scenarios project 

growth in the elementary school enrollments in Campbell County through 2010 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-88 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

and after 2010 for almost all PRB school districts. Projected enrollments in 

CCSD No. 1 would be approximately 10 percent higher by 2020 under the upper 

production scenario, with those in the surrounding districts only about one 

percent higher. However, several districts still may have enrollments in 2020 

that would be below current levels, as growth from 2010 to 2020 would not 

offset recent declines or those projected to occur before 2010. 

Under the lower coal production scenario, Campbell County would experience a 

substantial increase in school enrollment through 2020 (an added 1,587 

students or 22 percent above recent levels). However, the impact on CCSD No. 1 

would be composed of two trends, with a substantial increase in grades K-8 and 

small increases in grades 9-12 (Figure 4-8). School districts in the surrounding 

counties are projected to experience declining elementary and middle school 

enrollments through 2010 and declining high school enrollments through 2015. 

Thereafter, growth and the associated influences on demographics would 

generate renewed enrollment growth, particularly in the elementary grades in 

Johnson, Sheridan, and Converse Counties. 

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

C C SD #1,G rades K-8 C C SD #1,G rades 9-12

O therD istricts,K-8 O therD istricts,9-12

Figure 4-8. Projected School Enrollment Trends to 2020 Under the Lower 

Production Scenario. 

Under either scenario, projected enrollments may cause short-term school 

capacity shortages, depending on the specific grade-levels and residential 

locations of the additional students. Under the Wyoming School Facilities 

Commission planning guidelines, impacted school districts generally would be 

asked to accommodate minor capacity shortages through the use of temporary 

facilities, such as portable classrooms. For larger and more long-term 

increases, the Commission’s policy is to fund capital expansion where 

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 3C Report (BLM 2005e)
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-89 

warranted by projections developed during annual updates of school districts’ 

five-year plans. 

4.2.12.7 Facilities and Services

The types and levels of facilities and services provided by local governments 

reflect service demand, revenue availability, and community values regarding 

appropriate services and service levels. As with most socioeconomic 

characteristics, the level and availability of local government facilities and 

services varies by county and community across the PRB. There are literally 

several hundred different service providers in the region. Although all local 

government facilities and services are affected by energy development, the 

critical facilities and services include municipal water and sewer systems, law 

enforcement at the county level, and hospitals. A comprehensive inventory and 

assessment of facilities and services is beyond the scope of the PRB Coal Review 

socioeconomic analysis. However, an initial screening revealed no critical needs 

or shortfalls and indicated that most providers are engaged in an ongoing longterm process to maintain and improve facilities and services to meet community 

needs and to comply with various regulations and standards. 

The PRB Coal Review socioeconomic analysis focuses on water supply and 

wastewater systems (two essential services that are costly and have the longest 

lead times to develop) and law enforcement, emergency response, and road 

maintenance (three services that typically are most affected by energy 

development). 

Water supply and wastewater systems in all communities would have the 

capacity to accommodate the cumulative population growth associated with 

either projected coal development scenario through 2020, assuming ongoing or 

currently planned improvements are completed. In Gillette, there may be a 

timing issue with the water supply system, as completion of planned 

improvements in the 2005 to 2009 period would occur when substantial growth 

is anticipated to occur under both projected coal development scenarios. 

Consequently, Gillette may experience water shortages in the summer months 

during the 2003 to 2010 period, particularly under the upper coal development 

scenario. 

The ability to provide desired levels of services to the anticipated energy-related 

population and development is less clear in Campbell County, Gillette, Wright, 

and outlying rural communities. Campbell County and its communities would 

experience a 25 percent increase in population between 2003 and 2010 under 

the lower coal production scenario and 30 percent under the upper coal 

production scenario. 

Growth rates and the resultant facility and service demand in other counties 

within the study area would be substantially less during the 2003 to 2010 

period under either scenario; all communities other than Johnson County and 

Buffalo would grow substantially less than 10 percent during the period. The 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-90 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

populations of Johnson County and Buffalo would increase 10 percent by 2010, 

driven primarily by CBNG development. 

Growth rates and resultant increases in service demands would slow 

substantially during both the 2011 to 2015 and 2016 to 2020 periods under 

either projected coal development scenario. In most communities except 

Sheridan County and the city of Sheridan, there would be little difference in 

population growth and service demand between the two development scenarios. 

4.2.12.8 Fiscal Conditions

Federal mineral royalties and state and local taxes levied on coal and other 

mineral production are major sources of public revenue in Wyoming. Taxes, 

fees, and charges levied on real estate improvements, retail trade, and other 

economic activity supported by energy development provide additional revenues 

to support public facilities and services. These revenues benefit not only those 

jurisdictions within which the production or activity occurs, but also the federal 

treasury, state coffers, school districts, and local governments across the state 

through revenue-sharing and intergovernmental transfer mechanisms.

Coal and other minerals produced in Wyoming, regardless of ownership, are 

subject to ad valorum taxation by local taxing entities and a statewide levy to 

support public education. Statewide ad valorum taxable valuation on coal 

production in 2003 was $1,760.3 million. Of that total, 91 percent was based 

on production in the PRB. 

The total assessed valuation of Campbell County, boosted by increases in 

CBNG production, was $2,687 million in 2003. Valuations on aggregate 

mineral production accounted for 82 percent of that total. Because Campbell 

County has been the primary beneficiary of mineral production gains over the 

past three decades and the more recent gains tied to CBNG, the county’s 

assessed valuation of $2,687 million in 2003 was nearly 35 times that of 

Weston County ($77.7 million) and 29 times that of Crook County ($92.1 

million). The 2004 valuation of 2003 coal production in Campbell County was 

$1,561.2 million (Wyoming Business Council 2004). 

Wyoming levies a severance tax on coal and many other minerals produced in 

the state. The severance tax rate, levied on the value of production, has varied 

from 1.0 percent to 10.5 percent over time. The rate has been 7.0 percent 

since 1992. Cumulative statewide severance tax proceeds total $2.22 billion 

since 1970. Cumulative severance tax revenues on coal produced in Campbell 

County total $1.42 billion. Cumulative severance tax revenues for the 

corresponding period total $67.4 million from Converse County, $60.5 million 

from Sheridan County, and $675.9 million from the remainder of the state. 

Producers pay a 12.5 percent royalty to the federal treasury on the value of all 

surface coal production from federal leases. Half of this royalty is returned to 

the state. Cumulative royalty receipts on coal produced in Wyoming exceeded 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-91 

$2.76 billion between 1970 and 2003. Estimated 2004 mineral royalties from 

federal coal in Campbell County were about $268.3 million, based on an 

average sale price of $6.10 per ton of coal (WSGS 2005b). 

At the foundation of the mineral development revenue projections for the period 

2003 to 2020 are projected levels of future energy and mineral resource 

production. The projected total value of annual mineral production under the 

lower coal production scenario will climb by $3.49 billion (2004 dollars) over 

2003 levels, reaching $8.54 billion by 2020, a 69 percent increase over the 

current (2003) value. The aggregate value of energy and mineral resource 

production under the upper coal production scenario would increase to $9.21 

billion in 2020. The incremental difference, compared to the value under the 

lower production scenario, would be $670 million per year, all of which 

represents the value of higher annual coal output. 

Presently, the overwhelming majority of future mineral production value is 

anticipated to be in Campbell County. Over time, the future value of production 

in Sheridan and Johnson Counties would climb. Total annual mineral 

production value by 2020 is projected to reach $6.37 billion in Campbell County 

and $2.17 billion in the surrounding counties. 

Between 2005 and 2020, total royalty and tax receipts derived from the key 

selected sources range between $21.1 and $22.6 billion for the lower and upper 

coal production scenarios, respectively. Receipts derived from coal production 

would account for the majority of the totals under either scenario, with federal 

mineral royalties on coal at $4.9 to $5.7 billion being the single largest source. 

Severance taxes, ranging from $6.3 to $6.7 billion, also would accrue to the state 

(Tables 4-32 and 4-33). 

Table 4-32. Summary of Mineral Development Tax Revenues Associated with 

Energy Resource Production Under the Lower Production Scenario 

(million $). 

Industry and Taxes 2005-2010 2011-2015 2016-2020 Total 

Coal1 $3,164.8 $3,178.9 $3,756.3 $10,100.0 

CBNG $2,915.2 $3,076.4 $3,288.7 $9,280.3 

Conventional Oil and Gas $568.5 $576.4 $614.0 $1,759.0 

Totals $6,648.5 $6,831.7 $7,659.0 $21,139.3 

Severance Tax $1,995.9 $2,012.4 $2,249.3 $6,257.6 

Federal Mineral Royalties $2,754.1 $2,839.4 $3,166.3 $8,759.8 

State Mineral Royalties $233.5 $225.8 $251.4 $710.7 

Ad Valorum Tax (Counties) $417.6 $443.0 $502.8 $1,363.3 

Ad Valorum Tax (Schools) $1,247.5 $1,311.1 $1,489.3 $4,047.9 

Totals $6,648.6 $6,831.7 $7,659.1 $21,139.3 

1 Does not include coal lease bonus bids due to the uncertainty regarding timing. 

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 3C Report (BLM 2005e) 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-92 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

Table 4-33. Summary of Mineral Development Tax Revenues Associated with 

Energy Resource Production Under the Upper Production 

Scenario (million $).

Industry and Taxes 2005-2010 2011-2015 2016-2020 Total1

Coal1 $3,538.0 $3,703.0 $4,350.0 $11,591.0 

CBNG $2,915.2 $3,076.4 $3,288.7 $9,280.3 

Conventional Oil and Gas $568.5 $576.4 $614.0 $1,759.0 

Totals $7,021.7 $7,355.8 $8,252.7 $22,630.3 

Severance Tax $2,104.1 $2,159.0 $2,415.4 $6,678.5 

Federal Mineral Royalties $2,946.3 $3,099.9 $3,461.4 $9,507.6 

State Mineral Royalties $233.5 $225.8 $251.4 $710.7 

Ad Valorum Tax (Counties) $435.8 $472.0 $535.0 $1,442.8 

Ad Valorum Tax (Schools) $1,302.3 $1,398.9 $1,589.8 $4,291.0 

Totals $7,022.0 $7,355.6 $8,253.0 $22,630.6 

1 Does not include coal lease bonus bids due to the uncertainty regarding timing. 

Source: PRB Coal Review Task 3C Report (BLM 2005e) 

The federal and state governments also would benefit from coal lease bonus bids 

derived from future coal leasing. Bonus bids have risen over time, with one 

recent bid of almost $1.00 per ton range. There is no guarantee of that trend 

continuing. Considerable uncertainty also exists with respect to the timing and 

scale of future leases, although BLM currently has pending applications for more 

than four billion tons of federal coal (Table 1-2). The state also receives 50 

percent of the bonus bid revenue. 

Taxes and mineral royalties levied on energy and mineral resource production 

accruing to the state are disbursed to the Permanent Water Development Trust 

Fund, Wyoming School Foundation and Capital Facilities funds, capital 

construction fund for state and local government facilities, and other programs 

according to a legislatively-approved formula. Through these funds, the 

revenues derived from resource development benefit the entire state, not just 

agencies, businesses, and residents of the PRB. 

County governments and school districts also would realize benefits from future 

energy and mineral resource development in the form of additional property 

taxes. Such taxes, estimated on the basis of future coal, oil, and natural gas 

production, are estimated to range between $5.4 billion and $5.7 billion through 

2020. Those sums do not include future property taxes levied on the new power 

plants, expanded rail facilities, or new residential and commercial development 

associated with future growth, or sales and use taxes levied on consumer and 

some industrial purchases. These latter revenues are not estimated in this 

study, but would be substantially lower than those on resource production. 

Local governments would benefit from property taxes on new development, as 

well as from sales and use taxes on taxable sales within their boundaries. Such 

revenues are not estimated for this study due to the large number of 

jurisdictions and other analytical considerations. 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 4-93 

4.2.12.9 Social Setting

The past 30 years have seen sweeping social change in the U.S. and throughout 

much of the world. But in addition to the broad forces that have driven social 

change in the U.S. as a whole, social conditions in some PRB communities have 

been substantially influenced by energy development. Factors that have affected 

social conditions in the PRB include industrial and natural resource 

development, economic and demographic change, housing and public 

infrastructure development, and institutional change at the local and state 

government levels. 

One of the key drivers of social change in the PRB has been energy-related 

population growth. When the first oil boom occurred in the late 1950s, 

Campbell County was a relatively stable, sparsely-populated rural county. Like 

many places in Wyoming and throughout the rural west, Campbell County was 

a small, relatively homogeneous ranching community (ROMCOE 1982). The oil 

booms of the 1950s and 1960s brought an influx of new people. Development 

of coal mines, continued oil and gas drilling, and power plant construction 

precipitated another round of growth. In all, Campbell County population grew 

by almost 600 percent between 1950 and 2000. 

On the one hand, this population growth, combined with a robust economy, 

generated a variety of positive social effects. Financial and technical resources 

poured into the community as it mobilized to accommodate the new 

population. Job opportunities were created in the construction industry, as the 

community responded to demands for housing, public facilities, and retail 

goods and services. The large and rapid influx of new residents, eager to take 

advantage of the employment opportunities, created energy, vitality, and sense 

of economic optimism about the community. Where economic advancement 

had been limited before the boom, there was now opportunity (Gardiner 1985). 

On the other hand, it is likely that many residents had mixed feelings about 

these changes (Heinecke 1985). New residents brought new ideas, new ways of 

doing things, new preferences for goods and services, and new demands for 

government services. Some long-time residents, particularly those who were 

not directly participating in the economic benefits of energy development, 

viewed these changes as negative. 

Today, almost any organization, committee, or government body is made up of 

a cross-section of energy employees, ranchers, and other community members 

whose tenure in the community may be long or short (Bigelow 2004, Spencer 

2004). Moreover, because of the turnover in the energy companies, the 

community has become accustomed to newcomers. 

Cumulative energy development in the PRB through the year 2020 has the 

potential to generate both beneficial and adverse effects on community social 

conditions. Social effects of development activities in the PRB would vary from 

county to county and community to community under the coal production 
4.0 Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

4-94 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

scenarios developed for this study, based on the existing social setting and the 

type of development that would occur. 

Beneficial social effects would be associated with an expanding economy and 

employment opportunities associated with energy development and resulting 

improvements in living standards for those employed in energy-related 

industries. Adverse social effects could occur as a result of conflicts over land 

use and environmental values. Negative social effects also could occur if the 

pace of growth exceeds the abilities of affected communities to accommodate 

energy-related employees and their families with housing and community 

services. 

In the PRB, social conditions in Campbell County, the city of Gillette, and the 

town of Wright are most likely to be affected because the county would host 

much of the cumulative energy development workforce, and the county and its 

municipalities would receive the largest increments in population growth. 

Campbell County and its municipalities have a long history of energy 

development, and they have developed infrastructure and management 

systems to plan for and manage growth; consequently, major adverse social 

effects would not be anticipated. However, under either coal production 

scenario, the county and the two municipalities may face challenges in 

providing adequate housing and expanding community services in anticipation 

of population growth through 2010, particularly if several power plant and coal 

mine construction projects occur simultaneously. As municipalities receive 

only sales and use tax revenues directly from development and purchases 

made within their boundaries, Gillette and Wright could face challenges in 

securing the necessary funding to improve municipal facilities and services. 

Housing shortages and limitations in public services could contribute to 

adverse community social effects in these communities. 

Many of the people who would immigrate to Campbell County for energy-related 

jobs are likely to share characteristics with much of the current population; 

therefore, few barriers to social integration are anticipated. 

Social effects on other communities in the PRB are likely to be minimal to 

moderate. Energy-related population growth is anticipated to be moderate in 

other communities. Sheridan County, also familiar with coal mining, is the only 

other county anticipated to host a major construction project under the 

development assumptions used for either projected development scenario. 

Converse, Weston, and Crook Counties could experience spillover growth from 

projects in Campbell County. 

Johnson, Sheridan, and Campbell Counties could experience continued conflict 

over split estate and water issues associated with CBNG development, and the 

pace and scale of energy development across the PRB is likely to continue to 

generate social and political conflict over environmental issues under either coal 

production scenario. 
 5.0 Consultation and Coordination 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 5-1 

5.0 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION 

In addition to this EIS1, other factors and consultations are considered and play a 

major role in determining the decision on this proposed lease application. These 

include the following. 

Regional Coal Team Consultation

The Eagle Butte West coal lease application was reviewed and discussed at public 

meetings held on May 30, 2002, in Casper, Wyoming and on April 27, 2005, in 

Gillette, Wyoming. FCW presented information about the existing Eagle Butte 

Mine and the pending lease application to the PRRCT at those meetings. Voting 

and nonvoting members of the PRRCT include the governors of Wyoming and 

Montana, the Northern Cheyenne Tribe, the Crow Tribal Council, the USDA-FS, 

OSM, USFWS, NPS, and USGS. The PRRCT determined that the lands in the 

application met the qualifications for processing as a production maintenance 

tract. The PRRCT recommended that the BLM continue to process the Eagle Butte 

West lease application. 

Governor's Consultation

The BLM Wyoming State Director notified the Governor of Wyoming prior to the 

May 30, 2002 PRRCT public meeting that the Eagle Butte West lease application 

would be reviewed at the public meeting. 

Public Notice

A notice announcing the receipt of the Eagle Butte West coal lease application was 

published in the Federal Register on March 8, 2005. This notice also announced 

the date, time, and place of the PRRCT meeting to be held on April 27, 2005 to 

discuss this application. BLM published a Notice of Intent to Prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement and Notice of Scoping in the Federal Register on 

May 2, 2005. The publication served as public notice that the Eagle Butte West 

coal lease application had been received, announced the time and location of a 

public scoping meeting, and requested public comment on the lease application. 

Parties on the distribution list were sent letters in April 2005 announcing the time 

and location of a public scoping meeting. The public scoping meeting was held on 

May 17, 2005 in Gillette, Wyoming. At the public meeting, the applicant orally 

presented information about the Eagle Butte Mine and their need for the coal. 

The presentation was followed by a question and answer period, during which 22 

oral comments were made. The scoping period extended from May 2 through 

August 1, 2005, during which time BLM received comments from 16 entities. 

1 Refer to page xv for a list of abbreviations and acronyms used in this document. 
5.0 Consultation and Coordination 

5-2 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

The EPA published a Notice of Availability for the DEIS in the Federal Register on 

October 20, 2006. The BLM published a Notice of Availability and Notice of Public 

Hearing for the DEIS in the Federal Register on October 20, 2006. The 60-day 

comment period on the DEIS ended on December 19, 2006. A formal public 

hearing was held on November 14, 2006, at 7:00 pm at the Clarion Hotel in 

Gillette, Wyoming to solicit public comments on the DEIS and on the fair market 

value, the maximum economic recovery, and the proposed competitive sale of coal 

from the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. The applicant and one member of the 

public made statements during the public hearing, and the BLM received eight 

written comments on the DEIS. The written comments are included, with agency 

responses, as Appendix I in this FEIS. 

Parties on the distribution list will be sent copies of the FEIS when it is completed, 

and the EPA and BLM will publish a Notice of Availability for the FEIS. After a 30-

day availability period, BLM will make a decision to hold or not to hold a 

competitive lease sale for the federal coal in this LBA tract and a ROD will be 

signed. Copies of the ROD will be mailed to parties on the mailing list and others 

who commented on this LBA during the NEPA process. After the ROD is signed, 

there will be a 30-day appeal period before the ROD is implemented. 

Department of Justice Consultation

After a competitive coal lease sale, but prior to issuance of a lease, BLM will solicit 

the opinion of the Department of Justice on whether the planned lease issuance 

creates a situation inconsistent with federal anti-trust laws. The Department of 

Justice is allowed 30 days to make this determination. If the Department of 

Justice has not responded in writing within the 30 days, BLM can proceed with 

issuance of the lease 

Other Consultations

Other federal, state, and local governmental agencies that were consulted in 

preparation of this EIS are listed in Table 5-1. 

List of Preparers

This EIS was prepared by WWC Engineering, a third-party contractor, under the 

direction of the BLM. Representatives from cooperating agencies reviewed and 

contributed to the EIS. Tables 5-2 and 5-3 provide listings of the BLM, OSM, and 

WDEQ interdisciplinary team and the third-party consultant personnel who 

prepared and reviewed this EIS. 
 5.0 Consultation and Coordination 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 5-3 

Distribution List

This EIS was distributed to Congressional offices, federal agencies, state 

governments, local governments, industry representatives, interest groups, and 

individuals for their review and comment (Tables 5-4a and 5-4b). 

Table 5-1. Federal, State, Tribal, and Local Governmental Agencies.

Agency or Organization Individual Position 

Powder River Regional Coal Team 5 Voting Members and 

21 Nonvoting Members 

Wyoming Game and Fish 

Department 

Lynn Jahnke 

Bill Wichers 

John Emmerich 

Vern Stelter 

Wildlife & Fish Supervisor 

Deputy Director (DEIS) 

Deputy Director (FEIS) 

Wildlife Biologist 

Wyoming Department of 

Environmental Quality/ 

Air Quality Division Bernard Daily Program Manager for New 

Source Review Program 

(DEIS) 

 Chad Schlichtemeier Program Manager for New 

Source Review Program 

(FEIS) 

 Judy Shamley Senior Analyst (DEIS) 

Engineering Consultant 

(FEIS) 

Program Manager for New 

Source Review Program 

(DEIS) 

 Darla Potter NEPA & Policy Program 

Supervisor (DEIS) 

 Kelly Bott NEPA & Policy Program 

Supervisor (FEIS) 

 Cara Keslar Monitoring Section 

Manager 

Land Quality Division Kurt King Senior Analyst 

Tribal Governments 

Apache Tribe of Oklahoma Lower Brule Sioux 

Cheyenne River Sioux Northern Arapaho 

Comanche Tribe Northern Cheyenne 

Crow Oglala Sioux 

Crow Creek Sioux Rosebud Sioux 

Eastern Shoshone Santee Sioux 

Flandreau Santee Sioux Southern Cheyenne/Southern Arapahoe 

Kiowa Tribe Standing Rock Sioux 
5.0 Consultation and Coordination 

5-4 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Table 5-2. List of Contributors and Reviewers.

Name Project Responsibility 

BLM Casper Field Office

Mike Karbs Project Supervisor 

BLM Wyoming State Office

Bob Janssen Coal Program Coordination 

Janet Kurman NEPA Coordination 

Julie Weaver Land Adjudication 

Susan Caplan Air Quality and Climate 

Rick Schuler Water Resources 

BLM Wyoming Reservoir Management Group 

Dwain McGarry CBNG Geology 

Lee Almasy CBNG Reservoir Engineering 

BLM Buffalo Field Office

B.J. Earle Cultural Resources 

Larry Gerard Wildlife Resources 

BLM National Science and Technology Center

Craig Nicholls Air Quality and Climate 

Paul Summers Water Resources 

Campbell County Board of Commissioners

Marilyn Mackey DEIS Cooperating Agency Representative 

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 

Western Region

Floyd McMullen DEIS Project Coordinator 

Heather Erickson FEIS Project Coordinator 

 

Wyoming Department of Transportation 

Tim Stark, Cheyenne Environmental Services/Cooperating Agency Representative 

Mark Gillet, Sheridan District Engineer/Cooperating Agency Representative 

Wyoming State Planning Office

Ben Brandes DEIS Coal Issues Coordination/Cooperating Agency 

Representative 

Steve Furtney FEIS Coal Issues Coordination/Cooperating Agency 

Representative 
 5.0 Consultation and Coordination 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 5-5 

Table 5-2. List of Contributors and Reviewers (Continued).

Name Project Responsibility 

Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality

Kathy Muller Ogle – Land Quality 

Division 

CHIA Program Supervisor/Cooperating Agency 

Representative 

Darla Potter – Air Quality Division DEIS NEPA & Policy Program Supervisor/Cooperating 

Agency Representative 

Kelly Bott FEIS NEPA & Policy Program Supervisor/Cooperating 

Agency Representative 

ENSR International 

(Powder River Basin Coal Review) 

Valerie Randall Project Manager 

Dolora Koontz Assistant Project Manager and Task 2 Manager 

(Existing Development and Reasonably Foreseeable 

Development) 

Eldon Strid, Matt Reilly Existing and Projected Coal Development and Coal 

Transportation Scenarios 

Doree Dufresne Database Development 

Bruce MacDonald, PhD Air Quality 

Robert Berry, PhD Water Resources 

James Rumbaugh Ground Water Modeling 

Brad Anderson Surface Water 

Ron Dutton, George Blankenship Socioeconomics 

Bernhard Strom Land Use, Transportation, and Utilities 

William Berg Topography, Geology, and Minerals 

James Burrell, James Nyenhuis Soils and Alluvial Valley Floors 

Jon Alstad Vegetation, Wetlands, and Grazing 

Charles Johnson Wildlife 

Rollin Daggett Fisheries 

Kim Munson Native American Concerns, and Paleontological Resources 

 
5.0 Consultation and Coordination 

5-6 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Table 5-3. List of Preparers.

Name Education/Experience Responsibility 

BLM Casper Field Office

Nancy Doelger M.S., B.S. Geology, 

31 years professional experience 

EIS Project Leader/Editor

WWC Engineering

Third-Party Contractor 

Ken Collier B.S. Geology, 

29 years professional experience 

(Licensed Wyoming Geologist) 

Project Management 

Report Preparation 

John Berry B.S. Wildlife Biology, 

28 years professional experience 

Report Preparation 

Heidi Robinson 15 years professional experience Document Production 

Mal McGill 7 years professional experience CADD/Figure Preparation

 

Subcontractors for FCW Responsibility 

Habitat Management, Inc. Vegetation Survey 

T&E Vegetation Survey 

Preliminary Wetland Survey 

Environmental Solutions, Inc. Land Use Study 

Thunderbird Wildlife Consulting, Inc. Wildlife Survey 

T&E Animal Survey 

James Nyenhuis Soil Survey 

McVehil-Monnett Associates, Inc. Air Quality Assessment 

ACR Consultants, Inc. Class III Cultural Resource Survey 

Planera, Inc. Socioeconomic Study 

WWC Engineering Water Resources Study 

Preliminary AVF Assessment 
5.0 Consultation and Coordination 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 5-7 

Table 5-4a. BLM Distribution List for Coal Leasing.

Federal and State Officials 

Governor of Montana 

Governor of Wyoming 

US Rep Barbara Cubin 

US Senator John Barrasso 

US Senator Mike Enzi 

Wyoming Representative Timothy Hallinan

Wyoming Representative Erin Mercer

Wyoming Representative Sue Wallis

Wyoming Representative Thomas Lubnau 

Wyoming Representative Dave Edwards 

Wyoming Senator Jim Anderson

Wyoming Senator John Hines

Wyoming Senator Michael Von Flatern 

Federal Agencies 

BLM, Billings MT 

BLM, Buffalo WY 

BLM, Casper WY 

BLM, Cheyenne WY 

BLM, Miles City MT 

BLM, Washington DC 

Bureau of Indian Affairs, Billings MT 

Bureau of Indian Affairs, Washington DC 

Bureau of Reclamation, Denver CO 

Department of Energy, Casper WY 

Department of Energy, Washington DC 

Dept. of Interior Natural Resources Library 

Department of Interior, Denver CO 

Devils Tower National Monument 

EPA Region VIII, Denver CO 

MMS, Denver CO 

MMS, Herndon VA 

NPS, Denver CO 

NPS, Washington DC 

NRCS, Douglas, WY 

OSM, Casper WY 

OSM, Denver CO 

OSM Library, Denver CO 

OSM, Washington DC 

Rocky Mountain Regional Solicitor 

US Air Force 

US Army Corps of Engineers, Cheyenne WY 

US Fish & Wildlife Service, Arlington VA 

US Fish & Wildlife Service, Cheyenne WY 

US Geological Survey, Cheyenne WY 

US Geological Survey, Denver CO 

US Geological Survey, Reston VA 

USDA-FS Douglas Ranger District 

USDA-FS Medicine Bow Forest, Laramie WY 

USDA-FS Rocky Mountain Region, Denver CO 

State Agencies 

Montana Office of the Governor 

WY Office of the State Treasurer 

WDEQ Air Quality Division 

WDEQ Land Quality Division, Cheyenne WY 

WDEQ Land Quality Division, Sheridan WY 

WDEQ Water Quality Division 

WY Business Council/NE Region 

WY Department of Education 

WY Dept of Employment Research & Planning 

WY Dept of Environmental Quality, Director 

WY Dept of Transportation 

WY Division of Economic Analysis 

WY O&G Conservation Commission 

WY Office of State Lands & Investments 

WY Parks & Cultural Resources Dept 

WY State Engineer's Office 

WY State Geological Survey 

WY State Historic Preservation Office 

WY State Inspector of Mines 

WY State Planning Office 

WY Dept of Agriculture 

WY Game & Fish Dept, Cheyenne WY 

WY Game & Fish Dept, Sheridan WY 

WY Game & Fish Dept, Lander WY 

WY Industrial Siting Division 

WY Water Development Commission 

Local Government and Agencies 

Big Horn County Commission, MT 

Campbell County Conservation District, WY 

Campbell County Commission, WY 

Campbell County School District, WY 

City of Douglas, WY 

City of Gillette, WY 

Converse County Commission, WY 

Converse County Planning Office, WY 

Converse County School District, WY 

Gillette Dept of Community Development, WY 

Powder River County, MT 

Rosebud County Commission, MT 

Town of Wright, WY 

Weston County Commission, WY 

Tribal Organizations and Individuals 

Apache Tribe of Oklahoma 

Arapahoe Business Council 

Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe 

Comanche Business Committee 

Crow Creek Sioux Tribe 

Crow Tribal Council 

Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe 

Kiowa Business Committee 

Lower Brule Sioux Tribal Council 

Northern Cheyenne Tribal Council 

Oglala Sioux Tribal Council 

Rosebud Sioux Tribal Council 

Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribe of Oklahoma 

Santee Sioux Tribal Council 

Shoshone Business Council 

Standing Rock Sioux Tribal Council 
5.0 Consultation and Coordination 

5-8 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Table 5-4a. BLM Distribution List for Coal Leasing (Continued).

Organizations 

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 

Biodiversity Conservation Alliance 

Campbell County Econ Development 

CANDO 

Fdn for North American Wild Sheep 

Izaak Walton League of America 

Medicine Wheel Coalition 

National Mining Association 

National Wildlife Federation 

Natural Resources Defense Council 

Petroleum Association of Wyoming 

Powder River Basin Resource Council 

Sierra Club 

Thunder Basin Coalition 

WY Assoc of Professional Archeologists 

Wyoming Bankers Association 

Wyoming Business Alliance 

Wyoming Mining Association 

Wyoming Outdoor Council 

Wyoming Stock Growers Association 

Wyoming Wildlife Federation 

Wyoming Wool Growers Association 

Companies/Businesses 

Jacobs Ranch Coal Company 

All American Equipment 

American Colloid Co 

Antelope Coal Company 

Ark Land Company 

Arnjac 

Bjork Lindley Little PC 

BKS Environmental 

BNSF Railway Company 

Bridgeview Coal Co 

Buckskin Mine 

Burns & McDonnell 

CE&MT Inc 

CH Snyder Company 

CONSOL Inc Expl & Land 

Cordero Rojo Mine 

Decker Coal Co 

Dry Fork Coal Company 

Ducker Montgomery et al 

Environmental Solutions Inc 

EOG Resources 

Evergreen Enterprises 

Foster-Wheeler Environmental 

Foundation Coal West Inc 

Great Points Energy 

Hardin & Associates 

Intermountain Resources 

Interwest Mining 

JIREH Exploration & Consulting 

Kenneth R Paulsen Consultants 

Kiewit Mining Company 

Kiewit Mining Group Inc 

Kiewit Mining Properties Inc 

KN Energy 

LE Peabody & Associates 

M&K Oil Company Inc 

Marston & Marston 

McGraw-Hill 

McVehil-Monnett Assoc Inc 

Meineadair Consultants 

Mine Engineers Inc 

Mining Associates of Wyoming 

Nerco Coal Company 

Norwest Mine Services 

P&M Coal Mining Co 

Peabody Energy 

Powder River Coal Co 

Powder River Energy Corp 

Rio Tinto Energy America 

Riverside Technology Inc 

Royal Gold Inc 

San Juan Coal Company 

Thunder Basin Coal Co 

Thunderbird-Jones & Stokes 

TRC Environmental 

Union Pacific Railroad 

URS Greiner Woodward 

US West Communications 

Western Energy Company 

Western Fuels Association 

WWC Engineering 

Press 

Associated Press 

Casper Star Tribune 

Cheyenne-Wyoming Eagle 

Douglas Budget 

Gillette News-Record 

Rocky Mountain Oil Journal 

Western Coal Newsletter 

Educational Institutions 

CSU Libraries 

NWU Policy Research Institute 

UW Libraries 

Individuals 

Barbero, Ralph

Benson, Scott

Bierman, Sheldon

Cundy, Cecil

Daub, Jerry

Glustrom, Leslie

Nyenhuis, Jim 

Papp, Alex

Saulcy, Bill 

Williams, John

Winland, Mark 
5.0 Consultation and Coordination 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 5-9 

Table 5-4b. Eagle Butte Mine Distribution List for Final EIS, Eagle Butte West 

Coal Lease Application. 

Individuals 

Abbott, Susan D Kutz 

Allen, Lem B and L F 

Anderson, Marsha 

Andresen, Roxanne 

Armstrong, Kathryn 

Baalman, Lynne M & Mark E 

Ballard, Lexi 

Barbour, Margaret L, Trustee, 

Barbour, Steven R & Georgia L 

Batzer, Patricia 

Bender, Margaret L & Alfred J 

Bergner, Elizabeth S & William S 

Beulah Marylander Estate 

Blum, Adam D 

Boldt, Jay James 

Borlz, John 

Bostick, Victoria E 

Brewer, Shari Ann Yates 

Bricker, Mark C 

Brown, Geraldine 

Brown, H Kirk III 

Carl, Warren L & Joanne 

Carlisle, Rochelle L 

Carlson, Norris A & Jane T, Trustees 

Carroll, John 

Carter, Wilma McGee 

Chotvacs, Wade R & Margie R 

Clark, Gloria L 

Cole, Helen 

Cole, Raymond D 

Coltrane, Mary K Wagensen 

Coulter, Milton L 

Craig, Darrel E 

Croskey, Lois J 

Dabney, Eva L 

Dale, George J & Dawn S 

Daly, John 

Davidhizar, Elizabeth A 

Davis, Richard M 

Davis, Robert A & Amy L 

Dickerson, Lucy H 

Dillinger, Lawrence & Shirley A 

Drew, Jack A 

Dunlap, Charles M 

Dunlap, Larry E/ Virginia/ Katherine, Trustees 

Edwards, Glenn Robert & Jean 

Edwards, Rosemary I 

Erickson, Arnold F & Dixie D 

Falotico, Anne L & John 

Fisher, Leslie Jan Wagensen 

Foote, Alvin Dale 

Franklin, Irving Lee & Walter W 

Fulkerson, James T & Rachel 

Fulkerson, Richard L 

Fulton, William M III 

Geer, Tracey Marie 

Geer, Willis Blaine II 

Gillett, Mark 

Gilsdorf, Joseph M 

Goodman, Kelli R 

Grams, Allen R 

Grams, Howard L 

Grams, Marilyn F 

Grams, Norman E 

Grams, Raymond 

Gray, Kenn 

Gulley, Steven & Candace 

Guthrie, Michael T & Gillette Ptnrship 

Haines, Thomas D and Joyce M 

Hanslip, Richard 

Hanson, Bert C & Betty 

Hanson, Bert, Trustee 

Hanson, Daniel P & Kathleen M 

Hardy, Dorothy D 

Hart, Sharlene K 

Helsper, Kathleen M 

Hewit, Betty R 

Hladky, Delano B & Margaret A 

Hladky, Robert G & Shirley 

Hoffman, Stan 

Hogue, Barbara & Charles, Co-Trustees 

Hottell, Skeeter 

Hoy, Philip L 

Hurm, Dennis D 

Hutchinson, Wendy 

Ilsley, John P and Helen L 

Isenberger, Peg 

Jevas, Mary M 

Johnson, Edith B, Trustee 

Jones, Richard A 

Jones, Terry 

Jordan, Christine S 

Jundt, Josh 

Kauvar, A J 

Keck, Mary V & Cletus J 

Kehr, Tom 

Kirlough, Marcia A & Thomas A 

Klein, Blair, Trustee 

Kline, Robert E & Heather 

Kutz, Albert G 

Kutz, Robert M 

Lasley, Catherine H & James M 

Lawson, Wayne H & Deanette A 

Lynch, Edward P 

Lynde, Judy K 

Maki, Rodney & Alberta 

Marshall, Daniel L 

Marshall, Debra S 

Marshall, Joseph L & Betty M 

Martin, Francis S Waslee 
5.0 Consultation and Coordination 

5-10 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Table 5-4b. Eagle Butte Mine Distribution List for Final EIS, Eagle Butte West 

Coal Lease Application (Continued). 

McGee, Carl & Ola Birdsong 

McGee, John E 

Merritt, Gloria 

Michelena, Marilyn K & Santiago N 

Middleswart, Freda M & Milton 

Miller, Charles H 

Miller, Douglas D, et al. 

Miller, Duane R 

Miller, Faustine 

Miller, Herbert D & Danene R 

Miller, Kenneth 

Miller, Kenneth L & Kelli M 

Miller, Mary, Trustee 

Miller, Mike W 

Mills, Don & Jasmine 

Mines, David L 

Morgan, Jack B, Augusta, & Thomas K 

Morrissey, Marge 

Morrow, Margaret L & Robert E 

Nanneman, Gayle & Ginny 

Nanneman, Virginia 

Nichols, Anita Mae 

Nichols, Leonard 

Nichols, Leonard L & Nattie Mae 

Nickerson, Albert A., Jr. 

O’Loughlin, Christopher M 

O'Brien, William E 

Ochs, Anne 

Oedekoven, Edna F 

Oksanen Karla J 

Oswald, Louis A III, Trustee 

Page, Betty J & Charles 

Patenaude, Jeanelle F 

Pearson, Robert L 

Persson, Marguerite 

Podenski, Raymond & Shirley 

Puckett, Debbie Elder 

Reeves, Antoinette R 

Rehbein, Kevin M & Shelly R 

Richards, William B & Karen S 

Ritter, Donald A & Eva N 

Roe, Douglas R & Carol M 

Rolando, Linda K 

Rosenberry, Ann M 

Rourke, Paul 

Sachau, B 

Scheeler, James R & Anita R 

Schlenker, Kenneth A 

Schlidt, Grant G & Shiloh D 

Scott, Walter & Brownie, Co-Trustees 

Smith, Jessica 

Smith, Raymond M, Trustee 

Stech, Margaret S 

Sterck, Elizabeth 

Stone, Randy 

Stroup, Nancy R 

Sullivan, LaMoine C & James F 

Swearngin, Virginia N 

Taylor, William R & Elaine S 

Thrall, Mark 

Tolar, Jack L and Ada R 

Van Sant, Alta Mae W 

VanDegrift, L E 

Vandekoppel, Clarabel 

Vincent, Jeannie J 

Vines, W H 

Voight, Anne 

Wakefield, W W 

Wall, Ray Lee 

Ward, Linda G 

Watts, Gerald & Wendy 

Weakly, Alan 

Weber, Jeffrey L 

Whitacre, Bette E & Robert W, Trustees 

Wright, Ty C & Gwen H 

Yates, Scott Martin 

Youngberg, Randall M 

Zarlengo, Richard A & Vincent A 

Agencies/Businesses/Organizations 

Anderman Oils Wyoming, et al. 

Anderson Minerals Ltd 

Apache Corp 

AVTAX Inc 

Babit Limited Partnership 

Banque Paribas 

Basic Earth Science Systems Inc 

Belle Fourche Pipeline Co 

Blakeman Propane, Inc 

BP Amoco 

Campbell County Airport Board 

Gillette-Campbell County Airport 

Citation 1994 Investment Ltd Partnership 

Collister Co 

Conley P Smith Operating Co 

ConocoPhillips 

Continental Industries LLC 

Continental Oil Co 

Countrywide Home Loans Inc 

Devon Energy Corp (Nevada) 

EDP Operating Ltd 

Energy Development Partners Ltd 

Eureka Oil Co 

Express Acquisition Co 

Fancher Resources LLC 

Federal Aviation Administration 

First Interstate Bank of Commerce Trust Dept 

First National Bank of Gillette 

Fuller 1999 Family Partnership Ltd 

Garland Brothers 

Gene F Lang & Co 

Glacier Park Co. 

Guanxi LLC 
5.0 Consultation and Coordination 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 5-11 

Table 5-4b. Eagle Butte Mine Distribution List for Final EIS, Eagle Butte West 

Coal Lease Application (Continued). 

Habitat Management Inc 

Headington Oil Co LP 

High Plains Associates Inc. 

Hi-Pro Production LLC 

Jim's Water Service Inc 

K P Kauffman Co Inc 

Karlton Terry Oil Co 

Kerr McGee Corp 

Key Production Co Inc 

Koch Exploration 

KPK Inc 

Lance Oil & Gas Co Inc 

Lario Oil & Gas Co 

Madison Co 

Marlin Oil Co LLC 

Marquiss Minerals Inc 

MidCon Exploration Co-Exeter 

MIGC Inc/MGTC Inc 

Miller Properties LLC 

Nationsbanc Leasing Corp of North Carolina 

NLB Minerals LLC 

Norwest Bank Colorado N.A. 

P&L Receivables Co LLC 

PAMCO Investments Corp 

PD Inc 

Peabody Coal Co 

Presidio of San Francisco 

Puma Petroleum Co 

R & E Thompson & Co 

Ranchers Energy Corp 

Samedan Oil Corp 

Sharbro Oil Ltd Co 

Shell Mining Co 

Southwest Bank of Texas NA 

St. Mary Land & Exploration Co 

St. Paul Bank for Cooperatives 

Star Acquisition III LLC 

Star Investment Corp 

TEAI Oil & Gas Co 

The Daube Co 

Tongue River Royalties 

Twenty Mile Land Co 

U S West Communications Inc 

UBS AG Stamford Branch 

Veterans Administration 

WDEQ, Air Quality Division, Sheridan 

Wenron Inc 

Western Co of North America 

Western Fuels 

Westport Oil & Gas Co LP 

Wrangler Estates Inc 
6.0 References Cited 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 6-1

6.0 REFERENCES CITED

Argonne, 2002, Technical Support Document - Air Quality Impact Assessment 

for the Montana Statewide Oil and Gas Final Environmental Impact 

Statement and Amendment of the Powder River and Billings Resource 

Management Plans and the Wyoming Final Environmental Impact 

Statement and Proposed Plan Amendment for the Powder River Basin Oil 

and Gas Project. Prepared for the U.S. Department of the Interior, 

Bureau of Land Management, Montana and Wyoming State Offices, by 

the Environmental Assessment Division, Argonne National Laboratory. 

Argonne, Illinois. 

Avian Power Line Interaction Committee (APLIC), 1994, Mitigating Bird 

Collisions with Power Lines: The State of the Art in 1994. Edison Electric 

Institute, Washington, D.C. 

, 1996, Suggested Practices for Raptor Protection on Power Lines: The 

State of the Art in 1996. Edison Electric Institute and the Raptor 

Research Foundation, Washington, D.C. 

Bigelow, S., 2004, Personal communication between S. Bigelow, Executive 

Director, Campbell County Economic Development Corporation, and G. 

Blankenship, Blankenship Consulting, LLC, July 9. 

Borden, G.W., R.R. Fletcher, and D.T. Taylor, 1994, Economic Impact of Coal 

on Wyoming’s Economy, Cooperative Extension Service Department of 

Agricultural Economics, College of Agriculture, University of Wyoming, B987. 

Bott, Kelly, 2006, Personal communication between K. Bott, WDEQ/AQD, 

Cheyenne State Office, and Nancy Doelger, BLM, Casper Field Office, 

November 28. 

Braun, C.E., 1998, Sage-Grouse declines in western North America: What are 

the problems? Proceedings of the Western Associated of Fish and 

Wildlife Agencies 78:139-156. 

Braunlin, Deanna, 2004, Personal communication between D. Braunlin, 

Campbell County Planner, Gillette, Wyoming, and B. Strom, Planera, 

Inc., November 18. 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 1974, Final Environmental Impact 

Statement, Eastern Powder River Basin of Wyoming. U.S. Department of 

the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Cheyenne, Wyoming. 

, 1979, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Proposed Development of 

Coal Resources in the Eastern Powder River Wyoming. U.S. Department 

of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Washington, D.C. 
6.0 References Cited 

6-2 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

, 1981, Final Powder River Regional Coal Environmental Impact 

Statement. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land 

Management, Cheyenne, Wyoming. 

, 1983, Final Environmental Impact Statement on the Riley Ridge Natural 

Gas Project, Sublette, Lincoln, and Sweetwater Counties, Wyoming. 

BLM-YA-EA-84-002-1327. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of 

Land Management, Cheyenne, Wyoming. 

, 1984, Final Environmental Impact Statement for Round II Coal Lease 

Sale in the Powder River Region. U.S. Department of the Interior, 

Bureau of Land Management, Cheyenne, Wyoming. 

, 1985, Buffalo Resource Area Resource Management Plan 

Environmental Impact Statement. U.S. Department of the Interior, 

Bureau of Land Management, Buffalo Re-source Area, Casper, Wyoming. 

, 1988, NEPA Handbook H-1790-1. U.S. Department of the Interior, 

Bureau of Land Management, Washington, D.C. 

, 1989, Manual 3420, Competitive Coal Leasing. U.S. Department of the 

Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Washington, D.C. 

, 1991, Powder River Regional Coal Team Operational Guidelines for Coal 

Lease-By-Applications. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land 

Management, Cheyenne, Wyoming. 

, 1992, Final West Rocky Butte Coal Lease Application Environmental 

Impact State-ment. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land 

Management, Casper District Office, Casper, Wyoming. 

, 2001a, Approved Resource Management Plan for Public Lands 

Administered by the Bureau of Land Management Buffalo Field Office. 

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Buffalo 

Field Office, Buffalo, Wyoming. Available from website on the Internet as 

of March 2005: <http://www.wy.blm.gov>. 

, 2001b, Reasonably Foreseeable Development Scenario for Oil and Gas 

Development in the Buffalo Field Office Area, Campbell, Johnson and 

Sheridan Counties, Wyoming. 

, 2003a, Final South Powder River Basin Coal Environmental Impact 

Statement. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land 

Management, Buffalo Field Office, Buffalo, Wyoming, December 2003. 

, 2003b, Final Environmental Impact Statement and Proposed Plan 

Amendment for the Powder River Basin Oil and Gas Project. U.S. 
6.0 References Cited 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 6-3

Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Buffalo Field 

Office, Buffalo, Wyoming, January 2003. 

, 2004, Personal communication between Mike Karbs, BLM, Casper Field 

Office, Assistant Field Manger, Solid Minerals, and Nancy Doelger, BLM, 

Casper Field Office, and Jim Nyenhuis, July 2004. 

, 2005a, Task 1A Report for the Powder River Basin Coal Review – 

Current Air Quality Conditions. Prepared for the BLM Wyoming State 

Office, BLM Wyoming Casper Field Office, and BLM Montana Miles City 

Field Office by ENSR Corporation, Fort Collins, Colorado, September 

2005. 

, 2005b, Task 1C Report for the Powder River Basin Coal Review – 

Current Social and Economic Conditions. Prepared for the BLM 

Wyoming State Office, BLM Wyoming Casper Field Office, and BLM 

Montana Miles City Field Office by ENSR Corporation, Fort Collins, 

Colorado, March 2005. 

, 2005c, Task 1D Report for the Powder River Basin Coal Review – 

Current Environmental Conditions. Prepared for the BLM Wyoming 

State Office, BLM Wyoming Casper Field Office, and BLM Montana Miles 

City Field Office by ENSR Corporation, Fort Collins, Colorado, June 

2005. 

, 2005d, Task 2 Report for the Powder River Basin Coal Review – Past 

and Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Development Activities. 

Prepared for the BLM Wyoming State Office, BLM Wyoming Casper Field 

Office, and BLM Montana Miles City Field Office by ENSR Corporation, 

Fort Collins, Colorado, December 2005. 

, 2005e, Task 3C Report for the Powder River Basin Coal Review – 

Cumulative Social and Economic Effects. Prepared for the BLM 

Wyoming State Office, BLM Wyoming Casper Field Office, and BLM 

Montana Miles City Field Office by ENSR Corporation, Fort Collins, 

Colorado, December 2005. 

, 2005f, Task 3D Report for the Powder River Basin Coal Review – 

Cumulative Environmental Effects. Prepared for the BLM Wyoming State 

Office, BLM Wyoming Casper Field Office, and BLM Montana Miles City 

Field Office by ENSR Corporation, Fort Collins, Colorado, December 

2005. 

, 2006a, Instruction Memorandum No. 2006-153. Policy and Guidance 

on Conflicts between Coalbed Natural Gas and Surface Coal Mine 

Development in the Powder River Basin. Reissued May 11, 2006. 
6.0 References Cited 

6-4 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

, 2006b, Task 3A Report for the Powder River Basin Coal Review – 

Cumulative Air Quality Effects. Prepared for the BLM Wyoming State 

Office, BLM Wyoming Casper Field Office, and BLM Montana Miles City 

Field Office by ENSR Corporation, Fort Collins, Colorado, February 2006. 

,2006c, Powder River Basin Coal Leases by Application Data Sheets. 

Available from website on the Internet as of January 2006: 

<http://www.wy.blm.gov/minerals/coal/prb/LBA_title.htm>. 

, In Preparation, Task 1B Report for the Powder River Basin Coal Review 

– Current Water Resource Conditions. Prepared for the BLM Wyoming 

State Office, BLM Wyoming Casper Field Office, and BLM Montana Miles 

City Field Office by ENSR Corporation, Fort Collins, Colorado. 

, In Preparation, Task 3B Report for the Powder River Basin Coal Review 

– Cumulative Water Effects. Prepared for the BLM Wyoming State Office, 

BLM Wyoming Casper Field Office, and BLM Montana Miles City Field 

Office by ENSR Corporation. 

Byer, Tim, 2003, Personal communication between T. Byer, USDA Forest 

Service Wildlife Biologist, Douglas Ranger District, Douglas, Wyoming, 

and Nancy Doelger, BLM, Casper Field Office, September 11 and 29, 

2003. 

Campbell County, 2005, Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan for Campbell County, 

Town of Wright and City of Gillette. Prepared by Beck Consulting. Final 

– November 2005. Available from website on the Internet as of December 

2005: <http://ccg.co.campbell.wy.us/>. 

Campbell County Assessor’s Office, 2007, Property record search for 2006 tax 

year. Available from website on the Internet as of April 2007: 

<http://www.ccgov.net/Assessor/html/property-record-search.html>. 

Campbell County Economic Development Corporation (CCEDC), 2006, 2005 

Economic Conditions and Outlook, updated January 2006. Available 

from website on the Internet as of January 2006: 

<http://www.ccedc.net/data.html>. 

Campbell County Memorial Hospital (CCMH), 2005, Campbell County 

Memorial Hospital information. Available from website on the Internet as 

of March 2005: <http://www.ccmh.net>. 

Campbell County School District No. 1 (CCSD), 2007, Facts About Campbell 

County School District. Available from website on the Internet as of April 

2007: <http://esc.ccsd.k12.wy.us/hr/distinfo.html>. 
6.0 References Cited 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 6-5

CAM-PLEX, 2005, CAM-PLEX Multi-Event Facilities. (Brochure) Gillette, 

Wyoming. Available from website on the Internet as of November 2005: 

<http://www.cam-plex.com>. 

Cerovski, A., M. Gorges, T. Byer, K. Duffy, and D. Felley, 2001, Wyoming Bird 

Conservation Plan, Version 1.0, Wyoming Partners in Flight, Wyoming 

Game and Fish Department, Lander, Wyoming. July 1, 2001. 

Chancellor, Rick, 2003, Personal communication between R. Chancellor, 

WDEQ, Cheyenne State Office, and Nancy Doelger, BLM, Casper Field 

Office, June 16. 

Christensen, R., 2002, Personal communication between R. Christensen, 

WDEQ/LQD, Cheyenne, Wyoming and C. Florian, Greystone 

Environmental Consultants, regarding summary report of coal permit 

totals to date: Active Coal Mine Permits, Powder River Basin, 1999-2001, 

July 31, 2002. 

Christiansen, Tom, 2004, Wyoming Greater Sage-Grouse Population Trend 

Relative to the 2005 Hunting Season – A Summary Report and 

Recommendation. Available from website on the Internet as of March 

2005: <http://gf.state.wy.us/wildlife/wildlife_management/sagegrouse/

index.asp>. (See 2005 Hunting Summary and Recommendations). 

City of Gillette, 1978, City of Gillette/Campbell County Comprehensive 

Planning Program. June 1978. Updated March 1994. Gillette, 

Wyoming. 

, 2007, Department of Community Development, Planning Division, 2006 

Housing and Demographics Survey, January-December 2007. 

Clark, D.W., 1995, Geotechnical processes in ground water resulting from 

surface mining of coal at the Big Sky and West Decker Mine area, 

southeastern Montana: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 95-4097, 80 p. 

Clark, T.W. and M.R. Stromberg, 1987, Mammals in Wyoming. Museum of 

Natural History, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas. 

Community Strategies Institute (CSI), 2005, Campbell County Housing Needs 

Assessment. Prepared for the Campbell County Economic Development 

Corporation. Denver, Colorado. January 2005. 

Connelly, J.W., S.T. Knick, M.A. Schroedoer, and S.J. Stiver, 2004, 

Conservation Assessment of Greater Sage-grouse and Sagebrush 

Habitats. Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, unpublished 

report, Cheyenne, Wyoming. 
6.0 References Cited 

6-6 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Crist, M.A., 1991, Evaluation of groundwater-level changes near Gillette, 

northeastern Wyoming. U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources 

Investigations Report 88-4196. 

Curtis, Jan, 2004, State Climatologist “The Meaning of Drought in Wyoming”. 

Available from website on the Internet as of June 2006: 

<http://www.wrds.uwyo.edu/wrds/wcs/articles/meanofdrought.pdf>. 

De Bruin, R.H. and R.M. Lyman, 1999, Coalbed Methane in Wyoming. Pages 

61-72 in: Coalbed Methane and Tertiary Geology of the Powder River 

Basin of Wyoming and Montana. Wyoming Geological Association 50th

Field Conference Guidebook. 

Delson, E., 1971, Fossil Mammals of the Early Eocene Wasatchian Powder 

River Local Fauna, Eocene of Northeast Wyoming. American Museum of 

Natural History Bulletin, Vol. 146, pp. 305-364. 

Erathem-Vanir Geological PPLLC (EVG), 2001, Paleontological Inventory and 

Evaluation 2001 Baseline Survey, Cordero Mining Company, Campbell 

County, Wyoming. Prepared for TRC-Mariah & Associates, Inc., Laramie, 

Wyoming, 8 p. 

Emme, Doug, 2003, Personal communication with D. Emme, WDEQ/LQD, 

Blasting Program Principal, May 7. 

, 2007, Personal communication with D. Emme, WDEQ/LQD, Blasting 

Program Principal, April 2. 

Energy Information Administration (EIA), 2007, Annual Coal Report for 2005. 

Available from website on the Internet as of June 2007: 

<http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/page/acr/acr_sum.html>. 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) , 2004, “Major Pipeline Projects 

on the Horizon as of February 2004”. Available from website on the 

Internet as of February 2004: <http://www.ferc.gov/forcitizens/project/

search/SearchProjects aspx>. 

Fitzgerald, J.P., C.A. Meaney, and D.M. Armstrong, 1994, Mammals of 

Colorado. Denver Museum of Natural History, Denver, Colorado. 

Flores, R.M., A.M. Ochs, L.R. Bader, R.C. Johnson, and D. Vogler, 1999, 

Framework Geology of the Fort Union Coal in the Powder River Basin, 

Wyoming and Montana. Chapter PF, pages 1-40, in Fort Union Coal 

Assessment Team. 1999 Resource Assessment of Selected Tertiary Coal 

Beds and Zones in the Northern Rocky Mountains and Great Plains 

Region. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1625-A, Chapter PF. 
6.0 References Cited 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 6-7

Flores, R.M., G.D. Stricker, J.F. Meyer, T.E. Doll, P.H. Norton, Jr., R.J. 

Livingston, and M.C. Jennings, 2001, A Field Conference on Impacts of 

Coalbed Methane Development in the Powder River Basin. U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 01-126. 

Foundation Coal West, Inc. (FWC), 2002, Eagle Butte Mine 2002 Annual 

Report, submitted to WDEQ/LQD December 2002. On file with 

WDEQ/LQD, Sheridan and Cheyenne, Wyoming. 

, 2004a, Eagle Butte Mine Air Quality Permit Application, submitted to 

WDEQ/AQD September 2004. Prepared for Foundation Coal West, Inc. 

by McVehil-Monnett Associates, Inc. On file with WDEQ/AQD, Sheridan, 

Wyoming. 

, 2004b, Eagle Butte Mine 2004 Annual Report, submitted to 

WDEQ/LQD December 2004. On file with WDEQ/LQD, Sheridan and 

Cheyenne, Wyoming. 

, 2005a, Eagle Butte Mine Permit, WDEQ/LQD Surface Mine Permit No. 

428-T5, approved November 1, 2005. On file with WDEQ/LQD, Sheridan 

and Cheyenne, Wyoming. 

, 2005b, Eagle Butte Mine 2005 Annual Report, submitted to 

WDEQ/LQD December 2005. On file with WDEQ/LQD, Sheridan and 

Cheyenne, Wyoming. 

Frankel, A.C., C. Mueller, T. Barnhand, D. Perkins, E.V. Leyendecker, N. 

Dickman, S. Hanson, and M. Hopper, 1997, Seismic-hazard Maps for the 

Coterminous United States, Map F - Horizontal Spectral Response 

Acceleration for 0.2 Second Period (5% of critical damping) with 10 % 

Probability of Exceedance in 50 Years. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 97-131-F. 

Frison, George, 1978, Prehistoric Hunters of the High Plains. Academic Press: New 

York, New York. 

, 1991, Prehistoric Hunters of the High Plains. Academic Press: New York, 

New York. 

, 2001, Hunting and Gathering Tradition: Northwestern and Central 

Plains, in Plains, edited by Raymond J. DeMaille, pp. 131-145. 

Handbook of the North American Indians, Vol. 13, Part I, William C. 

Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 

Gardiner, S., 1985, editor, Rumblings from the Razor City: The Oral History of 

Gillette, Wyoming, an Energy Boomtown. 
6.0 References Cited 

6-8 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Gillette Convention and Visitor’s Bureau, 2004, “Gillette, Wyoming – Take 

Another Look!” (Brochure). Gillette, Wyoming. 

Gillette News-Record, 2006a, “County backs plan to move highway just east of 

coal mine”, by Peter Gartrell, February 22. 

, 2006b, “Weary travelers compete with workers who need a place to 

stay”, by Kelsey Dayton, July 10. 

, 2006c, “Campground owner says proposed city RV law is unjust”, by 

Christa Meland, September 14. 

, 2006d, “Population growth may mean new school plan”, by staff and 

wire reports, December 4. 

, 2007a, “Road plans near mine could be permanent”, by Peter Gartrell, 

May 24. 

, 2007b, “Rawhide makes room for new students”, by Christa Meland, 

April 24. 

, 2007c, “Curb the water use”, by staff, April 4. 

, 2007d, “Taking more crap”, by J.D. Stetson. 

Hodson, W.G., R.H. Pearl, and S.A. Druse, 1973, Water Resources of the 

Powder River Basin and Adjacent Areas, Northeastern Wyoming. U.S. 

Geological Survey Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA-465. 

Heffern, E.L. and D.A. Coats, 2000, Hydrogeology and Ecology of Clinker in the 

Powder River Basin, Wyoming and Montana, Plate 1, in 50th Annual Field 

Conference Guidebook, pp. 231-252. Wyoming Geological Association, 

Casper, Wyoming. 

Heinecke, B., 1985, Director Mental Health Service, Northeast Wyoming Mental 

Health Center, Oral History in Rumblings from Razor City: The Oral 

History of Gillette, Wyoming, an Energy Boomtown. Edited by S. 

Gardiner. 

HKM Engineering, Inc., Lord Consulting, and Watts and Associates, 2002a, 

Powder/Tongue River Basin Plan. Prepared for Wyoming Water 

Development Commission Basin Planning Program, February 2002. 

, 2002b, Northeast Wyoming River Basin Plan. Prepared for Wyoming 

Water Development Commission Basin Planning Program, February 

2002. 
6.0 References Cited 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 6-9

Holcomb, J., 2003, Rocky Mountain Pipeline Assessment, prepared for PACE 

Global Energy Services and presented at the Rocky Mountain Association 

of Geologists and Petroleum Technology Transfer Council CBM 

Symposium, Denver, Colorado, June 10, 2003. 

Holwell, R., 2006, Personal communication between Ronda Holwell, WYDOT, 

and Nancy Doelger, BLM, July 25, 2006. 

Hydro-Engineering, 1991, GAGMO 10-Year Report. Prepared for Gillette Area 

Groundwater Monitoring Organization by Hydro-Engineering, LLC, 

Casper, Wyoming. 

, 1996, GAGMO 15-Year Report. Prepared for Gillette Area Groundwater 

Monitoring Organization by Hydro-Engineering, LLC, Casper, Wyoming. 

, 2000, 2000 GAGMO Annual Report. Prepared for Gillette Area 

Groundwater Monitoring Organization by Hydro-Engineering, LLC, 

Casper, Wyoming. 

, 2001, GAGMO 20-Year Report. Prepared for Gillette Area Groundwater 

Monitoring Organization by Hydro-Engineering, LLC, Casper, Wyoming. 

, 2004, 2004 GAGMO Annual Report. Prepared for Gillette Area 

Groundwater Monitoring Organization by Hydro-Engineering, LLC, 

Casper, Wyoming. 

, 2006, 2005 GAGMO Annual Report. Prepared for Gillette Area 

Groundwater Monitoring Organization by Hydro-Engineering, LLC, 

Casper, Wyoming, January 2006. 

, 2007, GAGMO 25-Year Report. Prepared for Gillette Area Groundwater 

Monitoring Organization by Hydro-Engineering, LLC, Casper, Wyoming. 

IHS Energy Services (IHS), 2004, Oil and Gas Production and Well History 

Database. 

IMPROVE, 2005, IMPROVE Summary Data – Summary data through 2003 

(Updated February 2005). Available from website on the Internet as of as 

of April 2005: <http://vista.cira.colostate.edu/improve/Data/IMPROVE/

summary_data.htm>. 

Jahnke, L., 2005, Personal communication between L. Jahnke, Wildlife 

Management Coordinator, Wyoming Game and Fish Department, 

Sheridan, Wyoming and B. Strom, ENSR, May 20. 

Law, B.E., 1976, Large-scale compaction structures in the coal/bearing Fort 

Union and Wasatch Formations, northeast Powder River Basin, 
6.0 References Cited 

6-10 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Wyoming: in Wyoming Geological Association: Guidebook on geology and 

energy resources of the Powder River Basin, pp. 221-229. 

Lewis, B.D. and W.R. Hotchkiss, 1981, Thickness, percent sand, and 

configuration of shallow hydrogeological units in the Powder River Basin, 

Montana and Wyoming. U.S. Geological Survey, Misc. Investigations 

Series Map I-1317. 

Lockman, Christy, 2004, Data provided by USDA Forest Service. Graph taken 

from Little Thunder LBA Record of Decision, USDA Forest Service, 

Douglas, Ranger District, Douglas, Wyoming. 

Luce, B., A. Cerovski, B. Oakleaf, J. Priday, and L. Van Fleet, 1999, Atlas of 

Birds, Mammals, Reptiles, and Amphibians in Wyoming. Wyoming Game 

and Fish Department, Wildlife Division, Cheyenne, Wyoming. 

Lundell, Jay, 2007, Personal communication between J. Lundell, GilletteCampbell County Airport Executive Director, and Nancy Doelger, BLM 

Casper Field Office, April 30. 

Martin, L.J., D.L. Naftz, H.W. Lowham, and J.G. Rankl, 1988, Cumulative 

potential hydrologic impacts of surface coal mining in the eastern Powder 

River Structural Basin, northeastern Wyoming (CHIA). U.S. Geological 

Survey, Water Resources Investigations Report 88-4046. Prepared in 

cooperation with WDEQ and OSM, Cheyenne, Wyoming. 

Martin, W., 1999, Archaeological Investigations Along the Wyoming Segment of 

the Express Pipeline, in Contributions to Archaeology, Volume 5. Project 

Synthesis, pp. 4-1, 4-22. William Martin and Craig S. Smith, series 

editors. TRC Mariah Associates Inc., Laramie, Wyoming. 

McKee, Gwyn, 2007, Personal communication with G. McKee, Biologist with 

Thunderbird-Jones & Stokes, February 2. 

McVehil-Monnett Associates, Inc., 1997, NO2 Concentrations in Northeastern 

Wyoming: Historical Data and Projections. Report prepared and 

submitted to WDEQ/AQD July 1997. 

Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), 1997, 645 Database, Wyoming 

Summary Employment and Injury Information. 

Morovits, Pam, 2005, Senior Water Systems Operator, City of Gillette Water 

Division, Gillette, Wyoming. Personal communication with B. Strom, 

Planera, Inc., January 14, 2005. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 1969, 

Climatography of the United States: Asheville, North Carolina, National 

Climatic Center, Climatological Summaries, No. 20-48. 
6.0 References Cited 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 6-11

Naugle, D.E., C.L. Aldridge, B.L. Walker, T.E. Cornish, B.J. Moynihan, M.J. 

Holloran, K. Brown, G.D. Johnson, E.T. Schimidtman, R.T. Mayer, C.Y. 

Kato, M.R. Matchett, T.J. Christiansen, W.E. Cook, T. Creekmore, R.D. 

Falise, E.T. Rinkes, and M.S. Boyce, 2004, West Nile Virus: a pending 

crisis for greater sage-grouse. Ecology Letters, Vol. 7, p. 704-713. 

Naugle, D.E., K.E. Doherty, and B.L. Walker, 2006, Sage-grouse Winter Habitat 

Selection and Energy Development in the Powder River Basin: 

Completion Report. Available from website on the Internet as of August 

2006: <http://www.voiceofthewild.org/sagegrousestudies>. 

Niering, W.A., 1985, Wetlands. Chanticlear Press, Inc., New York, New York. 

638 p. 

Nyenhuis, James, 2005, Foundation Coal West, Inc. Eagle Butte Mine West 

Extension LBA Soil Resource Assessment – BLM Study Area, Campbell 

County, Wyoming. Prepared for Mine Engineers, Inc., March 9, 2005. 

Oedekoven, O.O., 2001, Sage-Grouse Job Completion Report, Sheridan Region, 

Wyoming Game and Fish Department. 

, 2004, Data provided by Wyoming Game and Fish Department. Graph 

taken from Little Thunder LBA Record of Decision, USDA Forest Service, 

Douglas, Ranger District, Douglas, Wyoming. 

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM), 1980, Noise 

impact assessment for the Caballo Rojo Mine. Unpublished report 

prepared by James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers, Inc. Aurora, 

Colorado. 

, 1984, Correlation and effect of mine facility wells on the Tullock Aquifer 

in the Gillette, Wyoming, vicinity. Prepared by G.E. McIntosh, C.A. 

Harrison and J.V. Wilcox. 

Ogle, K. M., 2004, Spatial Examination of Backfill Aquifer Water Quality, 

Powder River Basin, Wyoming Using GIS. Paper presented at the 2004 

Advanced Integration of Geospatial Technologies in Mining and 

Reclamation, December 7-9, 2004, Atlanta GA. 

Ogle, K.M., M. Calle, G. Mooney, and D.N. Dornak, 2005, Cumulative 

Hydrological Impact Assessment (CHIA) of Coal Mining in the Middle 

Powder River Basin, Wyoming. Wyoming Department of Environmental 

Quality, Land Quality Division, WDEQ-CHIA-14. 

Ogle, K.M., M. Calle, and D.N. Dornak, 2006, Cumulative Hydrological Impact 

Assessment (CHIA) of Coal Mining in the Northern Powder River Basin, 

Wyoming. Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality, Land Quality 

Division, WDEQ-CHIA-15. 
6.0 References Cited 

6-12 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Oil and Gas Journal, 2004, Wyoming, Regional Summary. Oil and Gas 

Journal, July 5, 2004, p 44. 

Pitchford, M.L. and W.C. Malm, 1994, Development and Applications of a 

Standard Visual Index, in Atmospheric Environment, 28(5): 1,049-54. 

Prink, C., R. White, and B. Hayes, 2004, Soil Survey of Campbell County, 

Wyoming, Northern Part. USDA-NRCS, in cooperation with BLM, USFS, 

and Wyoming Experimental Station. 

Rahn, P.H., 1976, Potential for Coal Strip-Mine Spoils as Aquifers in the 

Powder River Basin: Project Completion Report Prepared for Old West 

Regional Committee, Project No. 10470025. 

Rehm, B.W., G.H. Groenewold, and K.A. Morin, 1980, Hydraulic properties of 

coal and related materials. Northern Great Plains: Groundwater, v. 18, 

no. 6, pp 551-561. 

ROMCOE, 1982, Center for Environmental Problem Solving, Rapid Growth 

Communities Project, Community Profiles. Boulder Colorado, July 1982. 

Schneider, E.A., J. Johnston, and J. Lowe, 2000, Appendices D-2 and D-3A for 

the Buckskin Mine Expansion Permit. Report prepared for Triton Coal 

Company’s Buckskin Mine by TRC Mariah Associates, Inc., Laramie, 

Wyoming. 

Scire, J.S., D.S. Strimitis, and R.J. Yamartino, 1999a, A User’s Guide for the 

CALPUFF Dispersion Model (Version 5.0). Earth Tech, Inc., Concord, 

Massachusetts. October 1999. 

Scire, J.S., F.R. Robe, M.E. Fernau, and R.J. Yamartino, 1999b, A User’s Guide 

for the CALMET Meteorological Model (Version 5.0). Earth Tech, Inc., 

Concord, Massachusetts. September 1999. 

Shamley, Judy, 2006, Personal communication with J. Shamley, WDEQ/AQD, 

Senior Engineering Analyst, August 28. 

Shelley, Kevin, 1992, Habitat Reclamation for Birds and Small Mammals on 

Surface Mined Lands in the Powder River Basin, Wyoming. M.S. Thesis 

Department of Zoology and Physiology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, 

Wyoming. 

Shorma, G., 2005, Personal communication between G. Shorma, Regional 

Supervisor, Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Sheridan, Wyoming, 

and B. Strom, ENSR, May 20, 2005. 
6.0 References Cited 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 6-13

Spencer, D.R., 2004, Personal communication between D.R. Spencer, 

Northeast Region Director, Wyoming Business Council and G. 

Blankenship, Blankenship Consulting, LLC, April and July, 2004. 

Stratham, A., 2005, Personal communication between A. Stratham, Wyoming 

Game and Fish Department and B. Strom, ENSR, May 12, 2005. 

Thunder Basin Coal Company (TBCC), 2002, Black Thunder Mine Report for 

Development of Safe Setback Distances for Blasting Activities at the 

Black Thunder Mine, dated July 2002. 

Union Pacific and Burlington Northern Santa Fe (UP and BNSF), 2006, Press 

release entitled: “UP and BNSF announce southern Powder River Basin 

joint line $100 million capacity expansion plan”, May 8, 2006. 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE), 1987, Corps of Engineers Wetlands 

Delineation Manual, by the Environmental Laboratory, Department of 

the Army, Waterways Experiment Station. 

U.S. Census Bureau, 1990, General Population and Housing Characteristics: 

1990. 1990 Summary Tape File (STF-1). Available from website on the 

Internet as of December 2005: <http://factfinder.census.gov/>. 

, 2000, Housing-Physical Characteristics data from 2000 census. 

Campbell County and Gillette, Wyoming. Available from website on the 

Internet as of December 2005: <http://factfinder.census.gov/>. 

, 2001, 2000 Census of Population and Housing – Wyoming. Available 

from website on the Internet: <http://www.census.gov>. 

, 2005, Table 1: Annual Estimates of the Populations for Counties of 

Wyoming: April 1, 2000 to July 4, 2004 (SU-99-7). Available from 

website on the Internet: <http://www.census.gov>. 

U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC), 1990, Economics and Statistics 

Administration, Bureau of the Census, 1990 Census of Population and 

Housing. 

, 2000, Economics and Statistics Administration, Bureau of the Census, 

2000 Census of Population and Housing. 

U.S. Department of Energy (USDOE), 2002, Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in 

the United States 2001, Report 0573(2001), December 2002. Available 

from website on the Internet as of December 2002: 

<http://www.eia.doe.gov>. 
6.0 References Cited 

6-14 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

, 2005a, Energy Information Administration, “Emissions of Greenhouse 

Gases in the United States 2005”. Available from website on the Internet 

as of January 2007: <http://www.eia.doe.gov/fuelcoal.html>. 

, 2005b, Energy Information Administration, “2005 Annual Report”. 

Available from website on the Internet as of January 2007: 

<http://www.eia.doe.gov/fuelcoal.html>. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2001a, Region 8 comment letter 

to Nancy Doelger, BLM, on the North Jacobs Ranch Coal Lease 

Application DEIS, dated March 1. Reference to WMA Report “PRB ShortTerm Exposure NO2 Study”, April 2000. 

, 2001b, Visibility in Mandatory Federal Class I Areas (1994-1998): A 

Report to Congress, Executive Summary, November 2001. 

, 2003, Region 8 comment letter to Nancy Doelger, BLM, on the South 

Powder River Basin Coal DEIS dated April 16. Reference to air quality, 

nitrogen dioxide. 

, 2005a, AirData Monitor Values Report – Criteria Air Pollutants, PM10

and NO2 for Campbell and Converse Counties, Wyoming. Available from 

website on the Internet as of April 2005: <http://www.epa.gov/air/

data/monvals.html>. 

, 2005b, PM10 Monitoring Stations in Wyoming, downloaded from website 

on the Internet as of March 2005: <http://www.epa.gov/air/data/geose.l

html>. 

, 2005c, Effects of Acid Rain: Lakes and Streams. Available from website 

on the Internet as of April 2005: <http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets

/acidrain/effects/surfacewater.html>. 

, 2006a, Particulate Matter – Health and Welfare. Available from website 

on the Internet as of July 2006: <http://www.epa.gov/oar/particle

pollution/health.htm>. 

, 2006b, AirTrends. Available from website on the Internet as of July 

2006: <http://www.epa.gov/air/airtrends>. 

, 2006c, NOx – How Nitrogen Oxides Affect the Way We Live and Breath. 

Available from website on the Internet as of July 2006: <http://www.epa.

gov/air/urbanair/nox/index.html>. 

, 2006d, AirData Monitor Values Report – Criteria Air Pollutants, PM10

and NO2 for Campbell and Converse Counties, Wyoming. Available from 

website on the Internet as of April 2006: <http://www.epa.gov/

air/data/monvals.html>.
6.0 References Cited 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 6-15

, 2006e, Basic information about mercury. Available from website on the 

Internet as of April 21, 2006: <http://www.epa.gov/mercury/about.

htm>. 

, 2007a Particle Pollution, Health and Environment. Available from 

website on the Internet as of April 2007: <http://www.epa.gov/air

/particlepollution/health.html>. 

, 2007b, NOx – How Nitrogen Oxides Affect the Way We Live and Breath – 

What Is It? Available from website on the Internet as of July 2007: 

<http://www.epa.gov/air/urbanair/nox/what.html>. 

, 2007c, NOx – How Nitrogen Oxides Affect the Way We Live and Breath – 

Chief Causes for Concern. Available from website on the Internet as of 

July 2007: <http://www.epa.gov/air/urbanair/nox/chf.html>. 

, 2007d, EPA’s Decision on New Air Quality Standards, Updated Air 

Quality Standards for Smog (ozone) and Particulate Matter. Available 

from website on the Internet as of July 2007: <http://www.epa.gov

/ttn/oarpg/naaqsfin>. 

, 2007e, Clean Air Mercury Rule. Basic information available from 

website on the Internet as of January 2007: <http://www.epa.gov/air/

mercuryrule/basic.html>. 

U.S. Forest Service (USFS), 2006, Environmental Assessment – Yates 

Petroleum Corporation Marine Coal Bed Natural Gas Development 

Project. USDA–FS Douglas Ranger District, Medicine Bow-Routt National 

Forests and Thunder Basin National Grassland, Campbell County, 

Wyoming, June 2006. Available from website on the Internet as of July 

2006: <http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/mbr/projects/mineral/adobepdf/Yates

Marine_EA_Final.pdf>. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 2000a, 12-month administrative 

finding for a petition to list the black-tailed prairie dog from the National 

Wildlife Federation, dated July 30, 1998. Available from website on the 

Internet as of August 2000: <http://www.r6.fws.gov/btprairiedog>. 

, 2000b, 12-month finding for a petition to list the black-tailed prairie 

dog as threatened. Federal Register 65(24): 5476 – 5488. 

, 2001, Annual notice of findings on recycled petitions. Federal Register 

66(5):1295 – 1300. 

, 2002a, Memorandum from Mike Long, Field Supervisor, USFWS 

Wyoming Field Office, Cheyenne, Wyoming to BLM Casper Field Office 

Manager, Casper, Wyoming, dated June 7, 2002. 
6.0 References Cited 

6-16 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

, 2002b, Coal Mine List of Migratory Bird Species of Management 

Concern in Wyoming, based on Wyoming Bird Conservation Plan, 

Version 1.0, report available from Wyoming Field Office, Cheyenne, 

Wyoming. 

, 2003, Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; withdrawal of the 

proposed rule to list the mountain plover as threatened. Federal Register 

68(174): 53083 – 53101. 

, 2004, Letter from Brian Kelly, Field Supervisor, USFWS Wyoming Field 

Office, Cheyenne, Wyoming, to Kimberly Wolf, Cordero Rojo Mine, dated 

August 13, 2004. 

, 2005, Memorandum from Brian Kelly, Field Supervisor, USFWS 

Wyoming Field Office, Cheyenne, Wyoming, to James Murkin, BLM Field 

Office Manager, Casper Field Office, Casper, Wyoming, dated February 

15, 2005. 

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 2002, Assessment of Undiscovered Oil and Gas 

Resources of the Powder River Basin Province of Wyoming and Montana, 

2002. U.S. Geological Survey National Oil and Gas Assessment Fact 

Sheet FS 146-02. 

, 2004, Quaternary Fault and Fold Database for the United States. 

Available from website on the Internet as of December 2004: 

<http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/states.php>. 

, 2005, Romeo Flores and Gary D. Stricker, authors. Unpublished data. 

Van Voast, W.A., and J.C. Reiten, 1988, Hydrogeologic response–twenty years 

of surface coal mining in southeastern Montana: Montana Bureau of 

Mines and Geology Memoir 62. 

Van Voast, W.A., R.B. Hedges, and J.J. McDermott, 1978, Hydrologic 

Characteristics in Coal Mine Spoils, Southeastern Montana, Montana 

Bureau of Mines and Geology, Bull. 102, 43p. 

Vonsik, Brenda, 2005, Campbell County Fire Department. Gillette, Wyoming. 

Personal communication with B. Strom, Planers, Inc. January 14, 2005. 

Waters, T.F., 1995, Sediment in Streams, Sources, Biological Effects and 

Control. American Fisheries Society Monograph 7, 251 pp. 

Western Regional Climate Center (WRCC), 2006, Historical climatological data 

for the Gillette 9ESE Station. Available from website on the Internet as 

of February 2006: <http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?3855>. 
6.0 References Cited 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 6-17

Western Water Consultants (WWC), 1998, Report on Predicted Postmining 

Potentiometric Surface Investigation at the Eagle Butte Mine. Included 

as Appendix 4.6-3, Vol. 13 of Surface Mine Permit 428-T5. Prepared for 

AMAX Coal West, Inc. by WWC, October 2, 1998. 

Winterfeld, G.F., 1978, Unpublished field notes, surveys of coal mines in 

Powder River Basin, Wyoming. 

Wisdom, M.J., B.C. Wales, M.M. Rowland, M.G. Faphael, R.S. Holthausen, T.D. 

Rich, and V.A. Saab, 2002, Performance of Greater Sage-Grouse Models 

for Conservation Assessment in Interior Columbia Basin, USA 

Conservation Biology, 16: 1232-1242. 

Wyoming Business Council, 2004, Wyoming 2004 Mineral and Energy Yearbook. 

Available from website on the Internet as of March 2005: 

<http://www.wyomingbusiness.org/pdf/energy/2004_yearbook.pdf>. 

Wyoming Consensus Revenue Estimating Group (Wyoming CREG), 2007, 

Wyoming State Government Revenue Forecast, Fiscal Year 2007-2012. 

Available from website on the Internet as of December 2006: 

<http://eadiv.state.wy.us/creg/GreenCREG_Oct06.pdf>. 

Wyoming Department of Administration and Information, 2004, Economic 

Analysis Division, Average Monthly Rental Rates for Apartments and 

Houses in Wyoming and Counties. Available from website on the 

Internet as of December 2004: <http://eadiv.state.wy.us/housing>. 

, 2005, Economic Analysis Division. Wyoming population, cost of living, 

economic, and demographic data. Available from website on the Internet 

as of December 2005: <http://eadiv.state.wy.us>. 

, 2007, Economic Analysis Division. Wyoming population, cost of living, 

economic, and demographic data. Available from website on the Internet 

as of June 2007: <http://eadiv.state.wy.us>. 

Wyoming Department of Employment, 1990, Office of the State Inspector of 

Mines, Annual Report for the Year Ending December 31, 1990. 

, 1995, Office of the State Inspector of Mines, Annual Report for the Year 

Ending December 31, 1995. 

, 1997, Office of the State Inspector of Mines, Annual Report for the Year 

Ending December 31, 1997. 

, 1998, Office of the State Inspector of Mines, Annual Report for the Year 

Ending December 31, 1998. 
6.0 References Cited 

6-18 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

, 1999, Office of the State Inspector of Mines, Annual Report for the Year 

Ending December 31, 1999. 

, 2000, Office of the State Inspector of Mines, Annual Report for the Year 

Ending December 31, 2000. 

, 2001, Office of the State Inspector of Mines, Annual Report for the Year 

Ending December 31, 2001. 

, 2002, Office of the State Inspector of Mines, Annual Report for the Year 

Ending December 31, 2002. 

, 2003, Office of the State Inspector of Mines, Annual Report for the Year 

Ending December 31, 2003. 

, 2004, Office of the State Inspector of Mines, Annual Report for the Year 

Ending December 31, 2004. 

, 2005a, Office of the State Inspector of Mines, Annual Report for the 

Year Ending December 31, 2005. 

, 2005b, Research and Planning Division. Table 65N: Employing Units, 

Employment, and Wages by NAICS Subsectors for Campbell County, 

Northeast Region-Fourth Quarter 2003. Available from website on the 

Internet as of December 2005: <http://doe.state.wy.us/lmi/03Q4_202/

03q4t65.htm>. 

, 2005c, Research and Planning Division. Wyoming Labor Force Trends, 

Vol. 42, No. 12. Available from website on the Internet as of June 2006: 

<http://doe.state.wy.us/lmi/1205/1205.pdf>. 

, 2005d, Research and Planning Division. Wyoming Labor Force Trends, 

Vol. 42, No. 9. Available from website on the Internet as of September 

2005: <http://doe.state.wy.us/lmi/0905/0905.pfd>. 

, 2006a, Office of the State Inspector of Mines, Annual Report for the 

Year Ending December 31, 2006. 

, 2006b, Research and Planning Division. Table 66: Employing Units 

Employment and Wages by NAICS Subsectors for Campbell County, 

Northeast Region – First Quarter 2005. Available from website on the 

Internet as of June 2006: <http://doe.state.wy.us/lmi/05Q1_QCEW

/05q1t66.htm>. 

Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality/Air Quality Division 

(WDEQ/AQD), 2005a, Emissions monitoring data available from website 

on the Internet as of December 2005: <http://deq.state.wy.us/aqd

/downloads/AirMonitor>. 
6.0 References Cited 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 6-19

, 2005b, Powder River Basin coal mines, coal and overburden 

production, provided by Judy Shamley, Senior Engineering Analyst, 

Sheridan District Office, April 3, 2005. 

, 2005c, Wyoming’s Long Term Strategy for Visibility Protection, Final 

2003 Review Report, May 29, 2003. Available from website on the 

Internet as of April 2005: <http://deq.state.wy.us/aqd/prop/2003%

20LTSReview.pdf>. 

, 2005d, Wyoming Visibility Monitoring Network. Available from website 

on the Internet as of February 2005: <http://www.wyvisnet.com

/all.html>. 

, 2006a, Natural Events Action Plan for the Coal Mines of the Powder 

River Basin of Campbell and Converse Counties, Wyoming. October 

2006. Available from website on the Internet: <http://deq.state.wy.us

/aqd/NEAP.asp>. 

, 2006b, Emissions monitoring data available from website on the 

Internet as of March 2006: <http://deq.state.wy.us/aqd/downloads

/AirMonitor>. 

Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality/Industrial Siting Council 

(WDEQ/ISC), 2006, “Basin Electric Awarded Permit”, News release dated 

June 22, 2006. 

Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality/Water Quality Division 

(WDEQ/WQD), 2005, Water Quality Rules and Regulations, Chapters 1 

and 8 (Wyoming Surface Water and Groundwater Quality Standards, 

respectively). Available from website on the Internet as of December 

2005: <http://deq.state.wy.us/wqd/WQDrules/>. 

Wyoming Department of Revenue, 2004, Excise Tax Division, Sales and Use 

Tax Distribution Reports for Fiscal Year 2004. Available from website on 

the Internet as of March 2005: <http://revenue.state.wy.us/PortalVBVS

/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabindex=3&tabid=10>. 

Wyoming Department of Transportation (WYDOT), 2005, Letter from Timothy 

Stark, WYDOT Environmental Service Engineer to Nancy Doelger, BLM 

Casper Field Office, May 23, 2005. 

Wyoming Game and Fish Department (WGFD), 2003, Wyoming Greater SageGrouse Conservation Plan, June 24, 2003. Available from website on the 

Internet: <http://gf.state.wy.us/wildlife/wildlife_management/sage

grouse.asp>. 

, 2004, Casper and Sheridan Region 2004 Annual Big Game Herd Unit 

Report. 
6.0 References Cited 

6-20 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

, 2006, Sheridan Region 2005 Annual Big Game Herd Unit Report. 

Wyoming Mining Association (WMA), 2000, Air Quality Subcommittee, “Powder 

River Basin Short-Term Exposure NO2 Study”, April 2000. 

, 2006, Wyoming Bentonite Page from website on the Internet: 

<http://www.wma-minelife.com/bent/bentmine.htm>. 

Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (WOGCC), 2004, Wyoming 

Statistics. Available from website on the Internet: 

<http://WOGCC.state.wy.us/cfdocs/2002stats.html>. 

, 2005a, Rules and Statues. Available from website on the Internet as of

March 2005: <http://wogcc.state.wy.us>. 

, 2005b, Personal communication with W. Berg, ENSR, regarding 

Application for Permit to Drill (APD) approvals, April 14, 2005. 

, 2006, Oil and gas well information downloaded from website on the 

Internet as of May 2006: <http://wogc.state.wy.us>. 

, 2007, Oil and gas well information downloaded from website on the 

Internet as of June 2007: <http://wogc.state.wy.us>. 

Wyoming School Facilities Commission (WSFC), 2005, Five Year Plan 

Information. Available from website on the Internet: <http://sfc.state.

wy.us/ DMPInfo.aspx>. 

Wyoming State BLM Office-Reservoir Management Group (WSO-RMG), 2005a, 

Review of Coalbed Natural Gas and Conventional Oil and Gas Reservoirs, 

Production and Economy, Eagle Butte LBA EIS, Powder River Basin, 

Wyoming, unpublished report, September 2005. 

, 2005b, Personal communication with W. Berg and D. Dufresne, ENSR, 

March and April 2005. 

, 2006, Review of Coalbed Natural Gas and Conventional Oil and Gas 

Resources, Production, and Economics for the Eagle Butte LBA Final 

EIS, Powder River Basin, Wyoming. 

Wyoming State Geological Survey (WSGS), 2002, Wyoming Geo-notes, No. 73, 

April 2002, 44 pp. 

, 2003, Wyoming Geo-Notes No. 78, November 2003, 47 pp. 

, 2004, Digital Industrial Minerals and Construction Materials Map of 

Wyoming, by R.E. Harris. WSGS Map Series MS-47. 
6.0 References Cited 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 6-21

, 2005a, Industrial Minerals and Uranium Section, Uranium Page. 

Available from website on the Internet as of November 2005: 

<http://www.wsgs.uwyo.edu/minerals/uranium.aspx>. 

, 2005b, Wyoming Minerals Update: Coal, by R.M. Lyman and N.F. 

Jones, October 2005. Available from website on the Internet: 

<http://www.wsgs.uwyo.edu/Mineral_Updates/Oct2005/MU_Coal_Oct2

005.pdf>. 

, 2006, Wyoming Minerals Update: Coal. July to December, 2005, by 

Nick Jones. Available from website on the Internet as of November 2006: 

<http://www.wsgs.uwyo.edu/djvu/default.aspx>. 

, 2007, Wyoming Minerals Update: Coal. January to June, 2006, by 

Nick Jones. Available from website on the Internet as of February 2007: 

<http://www.wsgs.uwyo.edu/djvu/default.aspx>. 
7.0 Glossary 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 7-1

7.0 GLOSSARY 

aboriginal - Related to early or primitive cultures in a region.

ad valorem tax - A tax paid as a percentage of the assessed value of property.

adverse impact - An apparent direct or indirect detrimental effect.

aliquot - An exact portion.

alkalinity - The degree to which the pH of a substance is greater than 7.

alluvial deposit - Deposits of clay, silt, sand, gravel, and/or other materials 

carried by moving surface water, such as streams, and deposited at points of 

weak water flow; alluvium. 

alluvial valley floor (AVF) - An area of unconsolidated stream-laid deposits 

holding streams with water availability sufficient for subirrigation or flood 

irrigation agricultural activities (see 30 CFR 701.5). 

alluvium - Sorted or semi-sorted sediment consisting of clay, silt, sand, gravel, 

or other unconsolidated rock material deposited in comparatively recent 

geologic time by a stream or other body of running water in the bed of that 

stream or on its flood plain or delta. 

alternative - In terms of the National Environmental Policy Act, one of several 

substitute or alternate proposals that a federal agency is considering in an 

environmental analysis. 

ambient - Surrounding conditions (or environment) in a given place and time. 

annual precipitation - The quantity of water that falls yearly in the form of 

rain, hail, sleet, and snow. 

approximate original contour - Post-mining surface configuration achieved 

by backfilling and grading of mined-out areas so that the reclaimed land 

surface resembles the general surface configuration of the land prior to mining 

(see 30 CFR 701.5). 

aquatic - Living or growing in or on the water. 

aquifer - A layer of permeable rock, sand, or gravel that stores and transmits 

water in sufficient quantities for a specific use. 

aquitard - A confining bed that retards but does not totally prevent the flow of 

water to or from an adjacent aquifer; a leaky confining bed. 
7.0 Glossary 

7-2 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

area source – A plant site that does not emit any single HAP at a rate of 10 

tons or greater per year, or any combination of HAPs at a rate of 25 tons or 

greater per year. 

arithmetic mean - The sum of the values of n numbers divided by n. It is 

usually referred to as simply the “mean” or “average”. 

ash - The residual non-combustible matter in coal that comes from included 

silt, clay, silica, or other substances. The lower the ash content, the better the 

quality of the coal. 

avian - Of, relating to, or derived from birds. 

backfill - The operation of refilling an excavation. Also, the material placed in 

an excavation when it is refilled. 

baseline - Conditions, including trends, existing in the human environment 

before a proposed action is begun; a benchmark state from which the 

environmental consequences of an action are forecast; the no-action 

alternative. 

beneficial impact - An apparent direct or indirect advantageous effect. 

bentonite - A clay formed by the decomposition of volcanic ash which has the 

ability to absorb large amounts of water and to expand to several times its 

normal volume; used in adhesives, cements and ceramic fillers.

bonus - That value in excess of the rentals and royalties that is paid to the 

United States as part of the consideration for receiving a lease for publicly 

owned minerals [see 43 CFR 3400.0-5(c)].

braided stream - A stream flowing in several dividing and reuniting channels 

resembling the strands of a braid.

buffer zone - An area between two different land uses that is intended to 

resist, absorb, or otherwise preclude development or intrusion between the two 

use areas. 

bypass coal - An isolated part of a coal deposit that is not leased and that can 

only be economically mined in an environmentally sound manner as a part of 

continued mining by an existing adjacent operation [see 43 CFR 3400.0.5(d)]. 

clinker (scoria) - Baked and fused rock resulting from in-place burning of coal 

deposits. 

coal bed natural gas (CBNG) - Natural gas (methane) that is generated during 

the coal-forming process. 
7.0 Glossary 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 7-3

colluvium - Rock fragments, sand, or soil material that accumulates at the 

base of slopes; slope wash. 

confluence - The point at which two or more streams meet. 

conglomerate - A rock that contains rounded rock fragments or pebbles 

cemented together by another mineral substance. 

contiguous - Lands or legal subdivisions having a common boundary, lands 

having only a common corner are not contiguous. 

cooperating agency - An agency which has jurisdiction by law in an action 

being analyzed in an environmental document and who is requested to 

participate in the NEPA process by the agency that is responsible for preparing 

the environmental document [see 40 CFR 1501.6 and 1508.5]. 

crucial wildlife habitat - Parts of the habitat necessary to sustain a wildlife 

population during periods of their life cycle. It may be a limiting factor on the 

population, such as nesting habitat or winter habitat. 

cultural resources - The remains of human activity, occupation, or endeavor 

reflected in districts, sites, structures, buildings, objects, artifacts, ruins, 

works of art, architecture, and natural features that reveal the nature of 

historic and prehistoric human events. These resources consist of (1) physical 

remains, (2) areas where significant human events occurred, and (3) the 

environment immediately surrounding the resource. 

cumulative impact - The impact on the environment which results from the 

incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (federal or nonfederal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can 

result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place 

over a period of time (40 CFR 1508.7). 

decibel - A unit of sound measurement. In general, a sound doubles in 

loudness for every increase of 10 decibels. 

deciview (dv) - A general measure of view impairment (13 deciview equals a 

view of approximately 60 miles) caused by pollution. A 10 percent change in 

extinction corresponds to 1.0 dv. 

dip - The angle at which a rock layer is inclined from the horizontal. 

direct (or primary) impact - An impact caused by an action that occurs at the 

same time and place as the action (see 40 CFR 1508.8). 

discharge - Any of the ways that ground water comes out of the surface, 

including through springs, creeks, or being pumped from a well. 
7.0 Glossary 

7-4 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

dissected upland - An upland or high area in which a large part of the original 

surface has been deeply cut into by streams. 

dragline - A type of excavating crane that casts a rope- or cable-hung bucket a 

considerable distance, collects the dug material by pulling the bucket toward 

itself on the ground with a second rope or cable, elevates the bucket, and 

dumps the material on a backfill bank or pile. 

eolian deposit - Sediment carried, formed, or deposited by the wind, as sand 

dunes. 

ephemeral stream - A stream that flows occasionally because of surface 

runoff, and is not influenced by permanent ground water. 

erosion - The wearing away of the land surface by running water, wind, ice or 

other geologic agents. 

evapotranspiration - The sum total of water lost from the land by evaporation 

and plant transpiration. 

excavation (archeological) - The scientifically controlled recovery of 

subsurface materials and information from a cultural site. Recovery 

techniques are relevant to research problems and are designed to produce 

maximum knowledge about the site's use, its relation to other sites and the 

natural environment, and its significance in the maintenance of the cultural 

system. 

fair market value - The amount in cash, or in terms reasonably equivalent to 

cash, for which in all probability a coal deposit would be sold or leased by a 

knowledgeable owner willing but not obligated to sell or lease to a 

knowledgeable purchaser who desires but is not obligated to buy or lease. 

fixed carbon - In coal, the solid combustible material remaining after removal 

of moisture, ash, and volatile matter. It is expressed as a percentage. 

floodplain - The relatively flat area or lowland adjoining a body of flowing 

water, such as a river or stream, that is covered with water when the river or 

stream overflows its banks. 

forage - Vegetation used for food by wildlife, particularly big game wildlife, and 

domestic livestock. 

formation (geologic) - A rock body distinguishable from other rock bodies and 

useful for mapping or description. Formations may be combined into groups or 

subdivided into members. 

fossil - The remains or traces of an organism or assemblage of organisms that 

have been preserved by natural processes in the earth's crust. Many minerals 
7.0 Glossary 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 7-5

that may be of biologic origin are not considered to be fossils (e.g. oil, gas, 

asphalt, limestone). 

geometric mean - The nth root of the product of the values of n positive 

numbers. 

ground water - Subsurface water that fills available openings in rock or soil 

materials to the extent that they are considered water saturated. 

habitat - A place where a plant or animal naturally or normally lives and 

grows. 

habituation - The process of becoming accustomed to, or used to, something; 

acclimation. 

hazardous materials - Substance which, because of its potential for 

corrosivity, toxicity, ignitability, chemical reactivity, or explosiveness, may 

cause injury to persons or damage to property. 

hazardous waste - Those materials defined in Section 101 (14) of the 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 

1980, and listed in 40 CFR § 261. 

heterogenous - Made up of dissimilar constituents. 

human environment - The natural and physical environment and the 

relationship of people with that environment (see 30 CFR 1508.14). 

hydraulic conductivity - The capacity of a medium to transmit water; 

permeability coefficient. Expressed as the volume of water at the prevailing 

temperature that will move in unit time under a unit hydraulic gradient 

through a unit area. Units include gallons per day per square foot, centimeters 

per second. 

hydraulic - Pertaining to fluid in motion, or to movement or action caused by 

water. 

hydric soil - A soil that is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during 

the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions that favor the growth and 

regeneration of hydrophytic (water-loving) vegetation. Hydric soils that occur in 

areas having positive indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland 

hydrology are wetland soils. 

hydrocarbon - Any organic compound, gaseous, liquid, or solid, consisting 

solely of carbon and hydrogen. 

hydrogeology - The science that deals with subsurface waters and with related 

geologic aspects of surface waters. 
7.0 Glossary 

7-6 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

hydrology - The science dealing with the behavior of water as it occurs in the 

atmosphere, on the surface of the ground, and underground. 

hydrophytic vegetation - The plant life growing in water or on a substrate 

that is at least periodically deficient in oxygen as a result of excessive water 

content. When hydrophytic vegetation comprises a community where 

indicators of hydric soils and wetland hydrology also occur, the area has 

wetland vegetation. 

impermeable - Not capable of transmitting fluids or gasses in appreciable 

quantities. 

incised - Having a margin that is deeply and sharply notched. 

indirect (or secondary) impact - A reasonably foreseeable impact resulting 

from an action but occurring later in time than or removed in distance from 

that action (see 40 CFR 1508.8). 

in-place coal reserves - The estimated volume of all of the coal reserves in a 

lease without considering economic or technological factors that might restrict 

mining. 

in-situ leach mining - Removal of the valuable components of a mineral 

deposit through chemical leaching without physical extraction of the rock. 

interbedded - Layers of one type of rock, typically thin, that are laid between 

or that alternate with layers of another type of rock. 

interburden - A layer of sedimentary rock that separates two mineable coal 

beds. 

interdisciplinary - Characterized by participation or cooperation among two or 

more disciplines or fields of study. 

intermittent stream - A stream that does not flow year-round but has some 

association with ground water for surface or subsurface flow. 

laminated - Consolidated or unconsolidated sediment that is characterized by 

thin (less than 1 cm thick) layers. 

land and resource management plan (LRMP) - A land use plan that directs 

the use and allocation of U.S. Forest Service lands and resources. 

lead agency - The agency or agencies preparing or having taken primary 

responsibility for preparing an environmental document (see 40 CFR 1508.16). 

lease (mineral) - A legal document executed between a mineral owner or lessor 

and another party or lessee which grants the lessee the right to extract 
7.0 Glossary 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 7-7

minerals from the tract of land for which the lease has been obtained [see 43 

CFR 3400.0-5(r)]. 

lek - A traditional breeding area for grouse species where territorial males 

display and establish dominance. 

lenticular - Term describing a body of rock or earth that thins out in all 

directions from the center like a double convex optical lens. 

limb (geologic) - One side of a fold (syncline or anticline). 

limestone - A sedimentary rock consisting chiefly of calcium carbonate. 

lineament - A linear topographic feature of regional extent that is believed to 

reflect crustal structure. 

loadout facilities - The mine facilities used to load the mined coal for 

transport out of the mine. 

loam - A rich, permeable soil composed of a mixture of clay, silt, sand, and 

organic matter. 

maintenance tract - A federal coal tract that would continue or extend the life 

of an existing coal mine. 

major federal action - An action with effects that may be major and which is 

potentially subject to federal control and responsibility (see 40 CFR 1508.18). 

major sources – Those sources that emit more than 10 tons per year of any 

single hazardous air pollutant, or 25 tons of all hazardous air pollutants 

combined. The determination of major is based on all sources of hazardous air 

pollutants at the site, and not just the equipment affected by the MACT 

standard. 

maximum economic recovery (MER) - The requirement that, based on 

standard industry operating practices, all profitable portions of a leased federal 

coal deposit must be mined. MER determinations will consider existing proven 

technology; commercially available and economically feasible equipment; coal 

quality, quantity, and marketability; safety, exploration, operating, processing, 

and transportation costs; and compliance with applicable laws and regulations 

[see 43 CFR 3480.0-5(a)(24)]. 

meteorological - Related to the science dealing with the atmosphere and its 

phenomena, especially as relating to weather. 

methane - A colorless, odorless, and inflammable gas; the simplest 

hydrocarbon; chemical formula = CH4. It is the principal constituent of natural 

gas and is also found associated with crude oil and coal. 
7.0 Glossary 

7-8 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

mineable coal - Coal that can be economically mined using present day 

mining technology. 

mineral rights - The rights of one who owns the mineral estate (subsurface). 

mining permit - A permit to conduct surface coal mining and reclamation 

operations issued by the state regulatory authority pursuant to a state program 

or by the Secretary pursuant to a federal program (see 30 CFR 701.5). 

mitigation - An action to avoid, minimize, reduce, eliminate, replace, or rectify 

the impact of a management practice. 

mudstone - A hardened sedimentary rock consisting of clay. It is similar to 

shale but lacks distinct layers. 

National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) - A list of districts, sites, 

buildings, structures and objects significant in American history, architecture, 

archeology and culture maintained by the Secretary of the Interior. Expanded 

as authorized by Section 2(b) of the Historic Sites Act of 1935 (16 U.S.C. 462) 

and Section 101(a)(1) (A) of the National Historic Preservation Act. 

natural gas - Combustible gases (such as hydrocarbons) or mixtures of 

combustible gases and non-combustible gases (such as helium) that are in a 

gaseous phase at atmospheric conditions of temperature and pressure. 

NEPA process - All measures necessary for compliance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (see 40 CFR 1508.21). 

No Action Alternative - An alternative where no activity would occur. The 

development of a no action alternative is required by regulations implementing 

the National Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR 1502.14). The No Action 

Alternative provides a baseline for estimating the effects of other alternatives. 

outcrop - A rock formation that appears at or near the surface; the intersection 

of a rock formation with the surface. 

overburden - Material of any nature, consolidated or unconsolidated, that 

overlies a coal or other useful mineral deposit, excluding topsoil. 

paleontological resource - A site containing evidence of plant or non-human 

animal life of past geological periods, usually in the form of fossil remains. 

peak discharge or flow - The highest discharge of water recorded over a 

specified period of time at a given stream location; also called maximum flow. 

Often thought of in terms of spring snowmelt, summer, fall or winter rainy 

season flows. 
7.0 Glossary 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 7-9

perennial species (vegetation) - Vegetation that lives over from season to 

season. 

perennial stream - A stream or part of a stream that flows continuously 

during the calendar year as a result of groundwater discharge or surface 

runoff. 

permeability - The ability of rock or soil to transmit a fluid. 

permit application package - A proposal to conduct surface coal mining and 

reclamation operations on federal lands, including an application for a permit, 

permit revision, or permit renewal and all the information required by SMCRA, 

the applicable state program, any applicable cooperative agreement, and all 

other applicable laws and regulations including, with respect to federal leased 

coal, the Mineral Leasing Act and its implementing regulations. 

permit area - The area of land, indicated on the approved map submitted by 

the operator with his or her application, required to be covered by the 

operator’s performance bond under the regulations at 30 CFR Part 800 and 

which shall include the area of land upon which the operator proposes to 

conduct surface coal mining and reclamation operations under the permit, 

including all disturbed areas (see 30 CFR 701.5). 

physiography - Physical geography. 

piezometer - A well, generally of small diameter, that is used to measure the 

elevation of the water table. 

playa - The sandy, salty, or mud-caked flat floor of a basin with interior 

drainage, usually occupied by a shallow ephemeral lake during or after rain or 

snow storms. 

point source (pollution) - A point at which pollution is added to a system, 

either instantaneously or continuously. An example is a smokestack. 

pore volume - The amount of fluid necessary to fill the void space in an 

unsaturated porus medium (i.e., mine backfill). 

porosity - The percentage of the bulk volume of rock, sediment or soil that is 

not occupied by sediment or soil particles; the void space in rock or sediment. 

It may be isolated or connected. 

postmining topography - The relief and contour of the land that remains after 

mining has been completed. 

potentiometric surface - The surface that coincides with the static level of 

water in an aquifer. The surface is represented by the levels to which water 

from a given aquifer will rise under its full hydraulic head. 
7.0 Glossary 

7-10 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

predator - An animal that obtains food by killing and consuming other 

animals. 

prime or unique farmland - Those lands which are defined by the Secretary of 

Agriculture in 7 CFR part 657 (Federal Register Vol. 4 No. 21) and which have 

historically been used for cropland (see 30 CFR 701.5). 

proposed action - In terms of National Environmental Policy Act, the project, 

activity, or action that a federal agency proposes to implement or undertake 

and which is the subject of an environmental analysis. 

qualified surface owner - The natural person or persons (or corporation, the 

majority stock of which is held by a person or persons otherwise meeting the 

requirements of this section) who: 

 (1) hold legal or equitable title to the surface of split estate lands; 

 (2) have their principal place of residence on the land, or personally 

conduct farming or ranching operations upon a farm or ranch unit to 

be affected by surface mining operations; or received directly a 

significant portion of their income, if any, from such farming and 

ranching operations; and 

 (3) have met the conditions of (1) and (2) above for a period of at least 

three years, except for persons who gave written consent less than 

three years after they met the requirements of both (1) and (2) above 

[see 43 CFR 3400.0-5(gg)]. 

raptor - Bird of prey, such as an eagle, falcon, hawk, owl, or vulture. 

recharge - The processes by which groundwater is absorbed into a zone of 

saturation. 

reclamation - Rehabilitation of a disturbed area to make it acceptable for 

designated uses. This normally involves regrading, replacement of topsoil, 

revegetation and other work necessary to restore the disturbed area for postmining use. 

record of decision (ROD) - A document separate from, but associated with, an 

environmental impact statement that publicly and officially discloses the 

responsible official's decision on the proposed action (see 40 CFR 1505.2). 

recoverable coal - The amount of coal that can actually be recovered for sale 

from the demonstrated coal reserve base. 

rental payment - Annual payment from a lessee to a lessor to maintain the 

lessee’s mineral lease rights. 

resource management plan (RMP) - A land use plan, as prescribed by FLPMA, 

that directs the use and allocation of public lands and resources managed by 

BLM. Prior to selection of the RMP, different alternative management plans are 
7.0 Glossary 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 7-11

compared and evaluated in an environmental impact statement (EIS) to 

determine which plan will best direct the management of the public lands and 

resources. 

revegetation - The reestablishment and development of self-sustaining plant 

cover following land disturbance. This may occur through natural processes, 

or the natural processes may be enhanced by human assistance through 

seedbed preparation, reseeding, and mulching. 

right of way (ROW) - The right to pass over property owned by another. The 

strip of land over which facilities such as roadways, railroads, or power lines 

are built. 

riparian - The area adjacent to rivers and streams that lies between the stream 

channel and upland terrain and that supports specific vegetation influenced by 

perennial and/or intermittent water. 

royalty (mineral) - A share of production that is free of the expense of 

production. It is generally paid by a lessee to a lessor of a mineral lease as part 

of the terms of the lease. 

runoff - That portion of rainfall that is not absorbed; it may be used by 

vegetation, lost by evaporation, or it may find its way into streams as surface 

flow. 

salinity - Refers to the solids, such as sodium chloride (table salt) and alkali 

metals, that are dissolved in water. Often in non-saltwater areas, total 

dissolved solids is used as an equivalent term. 

sandstone - A common sedimentary rock primarily composed of sand grains, 

mainly quartz, that are cemented together by other mineral material. 

scoping - A public informational process required by the National 

Environmental Policy Act to determine private and public concerns, scope of 

issues, and/or questions regarding a proposed action to be evaluated in an 

environmental impact analysis. 

scoria (clinker) - Baked and fused rock resulting from in-place burning of coal 

deposits. 

sedimentation pond - An impoundment used to remove solids from water in 

order to meet water quality standards or effluent limitations before the water 

leaves the permit area (see 30 CFR 701.5). 

semi-arid - A climate or region characterized by little yearly rainfall and by the 

growth of a number of short grasses and shrubs. 

severance tax - A tax on the removal of minerals from the ground. 
7.0 Glossary 

7-12 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

shale - A very fine-grained clastic rock or sediment consisting predominately of 

clay-sized particles that is laminated; lithified, layered mud. 

significant impact - A qualitative term used to describe the anticipated 

importance of impacts to the human environment as a result of an action. 

siltstone - A fine-grained clastic rock consisting predominately of silt-sized 

particles. 

socioeconomics - The social and economic situation that might be affected by 

a proposed action. 

soil survey - The systematic examination, description, classification, and 

mapping of soils in an area, usually a county. Soil surveys are classified 

according to the level of detail of field examination. Order I is the most detailed 

and Order V is the least detailed. 

spontaneous combustion - The heating and slow combustion of coal and 

coaly material initiated by the absorption of oxygen. 

stipulations - Requirements that are part of the terms of a mineral lease. 

Some stipulations are standard on all Federal leases. Other stipulations may 

be applied to specific leases at the discretion of the surface management 

agency to protect valuable surface resources or uses existing on those leases. 

storage coefficient - The volume of water that can be released from storage 

per unit surface area of a saturated confined aquifer, per unit decline in the 

component of hydraulic head normal to the surface. It is calculated by taking 

the product of the specific storage and the aquifer thickness. 

stratigraphic - Of, relating to, or determined by stratigraphy, which is the 

branch of geology dealing with the study of the nature, distribution, and 

relations of layered rocks in the earth’s crust. 

stripping ratio - The unit amount of overburden that must be removed to gain 

access to a similar unit amount of coal. 

subirrigation - In alluvial valley floors, the supplying of water to plants from 

underneath, or from a semi-saturated or saturated subsurface zone where 

water is available for use by vegetation (see 30 CFR 701.5). 

subbituminous - A lower rank of coal (35-45 percent carbon) with a heating 

value between that of bituminous and lignite, usually 8,300-11,500 Btu per 

pound. Subbituminous coal contains a high percentage of volatile matter and 

moisture. 

surface disturbance - Any disturbance by mechanical actions that alters the 

soil surface. 
7.0 Glossary 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 7-13

surface rights - Rights to the surface of the land, does not include rights to oil, 

gas, or other subsurface minerals or subsurface rights. 

suspended solids - The very fine soil particles that remain in suspension in 

water for a considerable period of time without contact with the stream or river 

channel bottom. 

tectonic fracture - Fractures caused by deformation of the earth’s crust. 

threatened and endangered (T&E) species - These species of plants or 

animals classified as threatened or endangered pursuant to Section 4 of the 

Endangered Species Act. Any species which is in danger of extinction, or is 

likely to become so within the foreseeable future. 

Category 1 - Substantial biological information on file to support the 

appropriateness of proposing to list as endangered or threatened. 

Category 2 - Current information indicates that proposing to list as 

endangered or threatened is possibly appropriate, but substantial 

biological information is not on file to support an immediate ruling (U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service). 

topography - Physical shape of the ground surface; the configuration of land 

surface including its relief, elevation, and the position of its natural and 

manmade features. 

topsoil - The surface layer of a soil. 

total dissolved solids (TDS) - The total quantity in milligrams per liter of 

dissolved materials in water. 

transmissivity - The rate at which water is transmitted through a unit width 

of an aquifer under a unit hydraulic gradient. Equals the hydraulic 

conductivity multiplied by the aquifer thickness. Values are given in units of 

gallons per day per foot. 

transpiration - The discharge of water vapor by plants. 

truck & shovel - A mining method used to remove overburden and coal in a 

strip mining operation. Truck and shovel operations use large bucketequipped digging and loading machines (shovels) and large dump trucks to 

remove overburden instead of using a dragline for overburden removal. 

typic - Typical. 

unconfined aquifer - An aquifer where the water table is exposed to the 

atmosphere through openings in the overlying materials. 
7.0 Glossary 

7-14 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

unsuitability criteria - The 20 criteria described in 43 CFR 3461, the 

application of which results in an assessment of federal coal lands as suitable 

or unsuitable for surface coal mining. 

uranium - A very hard, heavy, metallic element that is crucial to development 

of atomic energy. 

vegetation type - A kind of existing plant community with distinguishable 

characteristics described in terms of the present vegetation that dominates an 

area. 

vertebrate fossils - The remains of animals that possessed a backbone; 

examples are fish, amphibians, reptiles, dinosaurs, birds, and mammals. 

vesicular - Rock containing many small cavities that were formed by the 

expansion of a bubble of gas or steam during the solidification of the rock. 

visual resources - The physical features of a landscape that can be seen (e.g., 

land, water, vegetation, structures, and other features). 

Visual Resource Management (VRM) - The systematic means to identify 

visual values, establish objectives which provide the standards for managing 

those values, and evaluate the visual impacts of proposed projects to ensure 

that objectives are met. 

volatile matter - In coal, those substances, other than moisture, that are 

given off as gas or vapor during combustion. 

waterfowl - A bird that frequents water, especially a swimming bird. 

wetlands - Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground 

water at a frequency and duration sufficient, under normal circumstances, to 

support a prevalence of vegetative or aquatic life that requires saturated or 

seasonally saturated soil conditions for growth and reproduction. Wetlands 

include marshes, bogs, sloughs, potholes, river overflows, mud flats, wet 

meadows, seeps, and springs [see 33 CFR 328.3(a)(7)(b)]. 

wild and scenic river - Rivers or sections of rivers designated by 

Congressional actions under the 1968 Wild and Scenic Rivers Act as wild, 

scenic, or recreational by an act of the Legislature of the state or states through 

which they flow. Wild and scenic rivers may be classified and administered 

under one or more of the following categories: 

wild river areas - Rivers or sections of rivers that are free of 

impoundments and generally inaccessible except by trail, with 

watersheds or shorelines essentially primitive and waters unpolluted. 

These represent vestiges of primitive America. 

scenic river areas - Rivers or sections of rivers that are free of 

impoundments, with watersheds still largely primitive and shorelines 
7.0 Glossary 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 7-15

largely undeveloped, but accessible in places by roads. 

recreational river areas - Rivers or sections of rivers that are readily 

accessible by road or railroad, that may have some development along 

their shorelines, and that may have undergone some impoundment or 

diversion in the past. 

wilderness - An area of undeveloped Federal land designated wilderness by 

Congress, retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent 

improvements or human habitation, protected and managed to preserve its 

natural conditions and that (1) generally appears to have been affected 

primarily by the forces of nature with the imprint of man's work substantially 

unnoticeable, (2) has outstanding opportunities for solitude or primitive and 

unconfined recreation, (3) has at least 5,000 acres or is of sufficient size to 

make practical its preservation and use in an unimpaired condition, and (4) 

also may contain features that are of ecological, geological, scientific, 

educational, scenic, or historical value. These characteristics were identified 

by Congress in the Wilderness Act of 1964. 
8.0 Index 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 8-1 

8.0 INDEX

agriculture ......................................... 2-11, 2-31, 2-38, 3-6, 3-90, 3-97, 3-

98, 3-99, 4-53, 4-67, 4-68, 4-69, 5-7, 

6-1, 7-10, E-22, E-28 

alluvial valley floor or AVF .................. ES-11, ES-16, ES-19, 1-6, 2-11, 2-12, 

2-31, 2-38, 3-1, 3-85, 3-97, 3-98, 3-

99, 3-100, 4-4, 4-53, 5-5, 5-6, 7-1, 7-

12, B-3 

Little Rawhide Creek .......................... ES-14, ES-16, 2-6, 2-7, 2-29, 2-30, 2-

31, 3-6, 3-7, 3-9, 3-68, 3-69, 3-70, 3-

71, 3-74, 3-76, 3-84, 3-85, 3-86, 3-88, 

3-89, 3-90, 3-91, 3-92, 3-93, 3-96, 3-

97, 3-98, 3-99, 3-100, 3-101, 3-113, 

3-114, 3-124, 3-125, 3-130, 3-131, 3-

132, 3-133, 3-135, 3-144, 4-63, 7-1, 

7-12, E-10, E-12, E-17, 

blasting.............................................. ES-5, ES-12, ES-18, 1-19, 2-11, 2-17, 

2-30, 3-29, 3-30, 3-43, 3-48, 3-49, 3-

51, 3-52, 3-53, 3-54, 3-55, 3-56, 3-57, 

3-58, 3-59, 3-60, 3-64, 3-67, 3-155, 

3-157, 3-165, 4-48, 6-6, 6-13 

bonus payment or bonus 

bid payment ....................................... ES-9, ES-10, ES-19, 1-10, 2-27, 2-28, 

3-168, 3-169 

coal bed natural gas or CBNG ............ ES-8, ES-12, ES-18, ES-21, 1-9, 1-17, 

1-19, 2-3, 2-23, 2-24, 2-25, 2-29, 2-

37, 2-38, 2-39, 3-13, 3-14, 3-15, 3-16, 

3-17, 3-18, 3-19, 3-30, 3-33, 3-49, 3-

50, 3-56, 3-70, 3-71, 3-76, 3-77, 3-78, 

3-79, 3-80, 3-82, 3-84, 3-88, 3-89, 3-

90, 3-91, 3-92, 3-93, 3-94, 3-95, 3-96, 

3-101, 3-102, 3-107, 3-108, 3-113, 3-

114, 3-130, 3-131, 3-132, 3-140, 3-

142, 3-143, 3-145, 3-152, 3-154, 3-

162, 3-175, 3-180, 3-183, 4-1, 4-14, 

4-17, 4-18, 4-19, 4-20, 4-21, 4-25, 4-

28, 4-29, 4-30, 4-39, 4-40, 4-41, 4-42, 

4-43, 4-47, 4-49, 4-50, 4-51, 5-52, 4-

53, 4-54, 4-55, 4-57, 4-58, 4-59, 4-61, 

4-62, 4-63, 4-64, 4-64, 4-66, 4-71, 4-

76, 4-78, 4-80, 4-82, 4-87, 4-90, 4-91, 

4-92, 4-94, 5-4, 6-15, 7-2, E-10, E-12, 

E-15, E-17, E-18, E-22, E-23 
8.0 Index 

8-2 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

fair market value................................ ES-1, ES-4, 1-3, 1-20, 2-5, 2-21, 2-

23, 2-24, 3-145, 5-2, 7-4 

fugitive dust/emissions ...................... ES-12, ES-14, ES-20, 1-19, 2-10, 2-

29, 2-30, 2-40, 3-22, 3-27, 3-28, 3-29, 

3-30, 3-31, 3-33, 3-34, 3-36, 3-39, 3-

42, 3-43, 3-44, 3-46, 3-47, 3-49, 3-51, 

3-52, 3-53, 3-54, 3-55, 3-56, 3-57, 3-

58, 3-59, 3-60, 3-65, 3-66, 3-68, 3-

166, 3-181, 3-182, 4-25, 4-30, 4-31, 

4-32, 4-34, 4-39, 4-40, 4-49, 4-75, 6-

13, 6-14, 6-18, 6-19 

grazing ............................................... ES-18, 1-9, 2-12, 2-13, 2-33, 3-109, 

3-112, 3-137, 3-144, 3-145, 3-146, 3-

148, 3-180, 4-67, 4-68, 4-69, 5-5, E16, E-17 

hunting.............................................. ES-8, 3-123, 3-142, 3-143, 3-144, 3-

145, 3-147, 3-183, 4-68, 4-70, 4-71, 

6-5, 6-7, E-14 

migratory birds................................... 2-32, 3-1, 3-123, 3-129, 3-135, E-8 

mitigation........................................... 1-12, 1-19, 2-8, 2-9, 2-10, 2-11, 2-12, 

2-13, 2-14, 3-1, 3-9, 3-12, 3-18, 3-21, 

3-29, 3-46, 3-49, 3-58, 3-64, 3-65, 3-

68, 3-84, 3-92, 3-96, 3-99, 3-103, 3-

106, 3-111, 3-112, 3-120, 3-121, 3-

134, 3-136, 3-146, 3-149, 3-150, 3-

151, 3-154, 3-158, 3-165, 3-167, 3-

179, 4-30, 4-34, 4-40, 4-49, 4-57, 4-

74, 6-4, 7-8, D-2, D-4, E-i, E-8, E-9, 

E-13, E-21, E-22, E-24, E-25 

MLA mining plan................................ 1-11, 2-24, 3-19, 3-150, A-1, E-21 

monitoring plan.................................. 2-10, 2-11, 2-12, 2-13, 2-14, E-13 

nitrogen oxide or NO2 ......................... ES-12, ES-22, 1-19, 2-11, 2-37, 3-25, 

3-27, 3-28, 3-29, 3-30, 3-31, 3-49, 3-

51, 3-52, 3-53, 3-54, 3-55, 3-56, 3-57, 

3-58, 3-59, 3-60, 3-61, 3-60, 3-61, 3-

62, 3-65, 4-32, 4-33, 4-34, 4-35, 4-36, 

4-39, 6-10, 6-14, 6-15, 6-20 
8.0 Index 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 8-3 

PM10................................................... ES-12, ES-22, 2-10, 2-22, 2-36, 2-37, 

3-23, 3-24, 3-25, 3-27, 3-28, 3-29, 3-

30, 3-31, 3-33, 3-34, 3-35, 3-36, 3-39, 

3-42, 3-43, 3-44, 3-46, 3-49, 3-50, 3-

55, 4-32, 4-33, 4-34, 4-35, 4-36, 4-39, 

6-14 

power plant(s)..................................... 1-10, 1-19, 2-24, 2-30, 3-31, 3-181, 

3-182, 4-8, 4-12, 4-13, 4-14, 4-16, 4-

21, 4-28, 4-30, 4-31, 4-39, 4-47, 4-55, 

4-57, 4-58, 4-69, 4-75, 4-76, 4-78, 4-

79, 4-86, 4-92, 4-93, 4-94, E-22, E-23

reclamation bond ............................... ES-16, 2-12, 2-26, 3-5, 3-109, 3-110, 

3-112, 3-146 

recreation........................................... ES-11, ES-18, ES-19, 2-33, 2-40, 3-1, 

3-26, 3-90, 3-137, 3-146, 3-183, 4-50, 

4-51, 4-67, 4-68, 4-70, 4-71, 7-14, 7-

15, B-1 

royalty................................................ ES-9, ES-10, ES-19, 1-3, 1-10, 2-13, 

2-23, 2-24, 2-25, 2-27, 2-28, 4-90, 4-

91, 7-11, D-4 

sage-grouse........................................ 2-32, 3-110, 3-122, 3-123, 3-124, 3-

125, 3-126, 3-127, 3-128, 3-129, 3-

130, 3-131, 3-134, 3-136, 3-143, 3-

145, 3-180, 4-65, 4-66, 4-67, 4-70, 6-

1, 6-5, 6-11, 6-17, 6-19, E-25 

T&E species ....................................... ES-18, 3-1, 3-135, 7-13, E-i, E-1, E-5, 

E-8, E-9, E-10, E-11, E-13, E-20, E22, E-24, E-25 

total dissolved solids or TDS............... ES-14, 2-30, 3-69, 3-70, 3-74, 3-77, 

3-78, 3-82, 3-83, 3-90, 3-91, 4-48, 4-

53, 4-63, 7-11, 7-13 

total suspended solids or TSS............. 3-90, 4-63 

U.S. Forest Service or USDA-FS.......... 3-66, 3-118, 4-55, 4-64, 4-68, 5-1, 5-

5, 6-15, 7-6, B-3, E-18, E-28 
8.0 Index 

8-4 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

or EPA................................................ ES-1, ES-4, ES-12, ES-20, ES-22, 1-

19, 1-20, 2-9, 2-10, 3-22, 3-23, 3-24, 

3-25, 3-27, 3-29, 3-31, 3-34, 3-35, 3-

42, 3-44, 3-46, 3-49, 3-51, 3-52, 3-53, 

3-61, 3-62, 3-66, 3-93, 3-182, 4-31, 

4-33, 4-34, 5-2, 5-5, 6-14, 6-15 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or 

USFWS............................................... ES-16, ES-17, 1-18, 2-33, 3-100, 3-

101, 3-102, 3-112, 3-117, 3-118, 3-

121, 3-122, 3-123, 3-129, 3-130, 3-

134, 3-136, 4-65, 5-1, 6-15, 6-16, 7-

13, B-2, B-3, E-8, E-9, E-12, E-13, E14, E-15, E-16, E-18, E-19, E-25, E28, E-29 

wetland(s)........................................... ES-8, ES-16, ES-19, 1-19, 2-11, 2-12, 

2-31, 2-39, 3-1, 3-100, 3-101, 3-102, 

3-103, 3-104, 3-108, 3-11, 3-112, 3-

132, 3-135, 4-54, 4-57, 4-58, 4-61, 4-

67, 4-68, 5-5, 5-6, 6-11, 6-13, 7-5, 7-

6, 7-14, A-1, E-12, E-13, E-16 

Wyoming Department of 

Environmental Quality or 

WDEQ................................................ ES-4, ES-5, ES-12, ES-16, ES-24, 1-

3, 1-4, 1-11, 1-12, 2-6, 2-9, 2-11, 2-

15, 2-17, 2-22, 2-24, 2-31, 3-2, 3-4, 

3-7, 3-9, 3-19, 3-23, 3-24, 3-25, 3-27, 

3-28, 3-29, 3-30, 3-31, 3-34, 3-35, 3-

36, 3-39, 3-42, 3-43, 3-46, 3-47, 3-48, 

3-49, 3-50, 3-52, 3-53, 3-54, 3-55, 3-

57, 3-58, 3-59, 3-60, 3-61, 3-62, 3-64, 

3-65, 3-68, 3-74, 3-77, 3-78, 3-79, 3-

80, 3-82, 3-83, 3-84, 3-85, 3-86, 3-90, 

3-92, 3-93, 3-94, 3-95, 3-97, 3-98, 3-

99, 3-102, 3-103, 3-107, 3-109, 3-

110, 3-111, 3-112, 3-114, 3-117, 3-

121, 3-123, 3-128, 3-133, 3-146, 3-

165, 3-166, 4-6, 4-14, 4-31, 4-34, 4-

40, 4-41, 4-42, 4-44, 4-46, 4-48, 4-53, 

4-55, 4-57, 5-2, 5-3, 5-5, 5-7, 5-11, 6-

1, 6-5, 6-6, 6-7, 6-10, 6-11, 6-12, 6-

18, 6-19, 7-5, 7-6, 7-14, E-9, E-10, E12, E-20, E-21, E-24, E-27 
APPENDIX A

FEDERAL AND STATE AGENCIES 

AND PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS 
Appendix A 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application A-1 

APPENDIX A: 

FEDERAL AND STATE AGENCIES & PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS

Agency Lease/Permit/Action

FEDERAL

Bureau of Land Management Coal Lease 

Resource Recovery & Protection Plan 

Scoria Sales Contract 

Exploration Drilling Permit 

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and 

Enforcement 

Preparation of MLA Mining Plan Approval Document 

SMCRA Oversight 

Office of the Secretary of the Interior Approval of MLA Mining Plan 

Mine Safety and Health Administration Safety Permit and Legal ID 

Ground Control Plan 

Major Impoundments 

Explosives Use and Storage Permit 

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Explosive’s Manufacturer’s License 

Explosives Use and Storage Permit 

Federal Communication Commission Radio Permit: Ambulance 

Mobile Relay System Radio License 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Radioactive By-Products Material License 

Army Corps of Engineers Authorization of Impacts to Wetlands and Other Waters 

of the U.S. 

Department of Transportation Hazardous Waste Shipment Notification 

Federal Aviation Administration Radio Tower Permits

STATE

State Land Commission Coal Lease 

Scoria Lease 

Department of Environmental Quality-Land 

Quality Division 

Permit and License to Mine 

Department of Environmental Quality-Air 

Quality Division 

Air Quality Permit to Operate 

Air Quality Permit to Construct 

Air Quality Permit to Modify 

Department of Environmental Quality-Water 

Quality Division 

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Water 

Discharge Permit 

Permit to Construct Sedimentation Pond 

Authorization to Construct Septic Tank & Leach Field 

Authorization to Construct and Install a Public Water 

Supply and Sewage Treatment System 

Department of Environmental Quality-Solid 

Waste Management Program 

Solid Waste Disposal Permit-Permanent and 

Construction 

State Engineer’s Office Appropriation of Surface Water Permits 

Appropriation of Ground Water Permits 

Industrial Siting Council Industrial Siting Certificate of Non-Jurisdiction 

Department of Health Radioactive Material Certificate of Registration
APPENDIX B 

UNSUITABILITY CRITERIA 

FOR THE EAGLE BUTTE WEST LBA TRACT 
Appendix B 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application B-1 

APPENDIX B. UNSUITABILITY CRITERIA FOR THE EAGLE BUTTE WEST 

LBA TRACT

UNSUITABILITY CRITERIA

GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 

BUFFALO RESOURCE AREA (BLM 1985, 

2001a)

FINDINGS FOR EAGLE BUTTE WEST LBA 

TRACT

1. Federal Land Systems. With 

certain exceptions that do not 

apply to this tract, all federal lands 

included in the following systems 

are unsuitable for mining: 

National Parks, National Wildlife 

Refuges, National System of Trails, 

National Wilderness Preservation 

System, National Wild and Scenic 

Rivers, National Recreation Areas, 

Lands acquired through the Land 

and Water Conservation Fund, 

National Forests and Federal lands 

in incorporated cities, towns and 

villages.

There are Federal lands located around 

Gillette, Sheridan, and Wright that were 

determined to be unsuitable under this 

criterion.

None of the federal lands determined to be 

unsuitable under Criterion 1 are present 

on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 

Therefore, there are no unsuitable 

findings under this criterion.

2. Rights-Of-Way and Easements. 

Federal lands that are within 

ROWs or easements or within 

surface leases for residential, 

commercial, industrial or other 

public purposes, on federally 

owned surface, are unsuitable for 

mining.

Portions of the BNSF & UP railroad 

ROWs, the Tri-County 230-Kv 

transmission line ROW, the Wyoming 

State Highway 450 ROW, and the I-90 

ROW on federal surface were found to be 

unsuitable under this criterion within the 

general review area. 

The portions of the BNSF & UP railroad 

ROWs, Tri-County 230-Kv transmission 

line ROW, the Wyoming State Highway 

450 ROW, and the I-90 ROW that were 

determined to be unsuitable are not 

located on the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract. Therefore, there are no unsuitable 

findings under Criterion 2 for the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract.

3. Buffer Zones for Rights-Of-Way, 

Communities, and Buildings. 

Federal lands within 100 ft of a 

ROW of a public road or a 

cemetery; or within 300 ft of any 

public building, school, church, 

community or institutional 

building or public park; or within 

300 ft of an occupied dwelling are 

unsuitable for mining.

Portions of Wyoming State Highway 450, 

Interstate Highway I-90, and one 

cemetery were found to be unsuitable 

under this criterion. Decisions were 

deferred on other highways/roads, 

occupied dwellings, and one school until 

an application to lease is filed.

The portions of Highway 450, I-90, and 

the cemetery that were determined to be 

unsuitable are not located on the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract. A portion of U.S. 

Highway 14-16, a public road, is located 

on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 

Therefore, the portion of the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract within the highway ROW 

and the associated 100-ft buffer zone are 

designated unsuitable for mining and the 

lease will be stipulated to exclude mining 

within these areas unless a permit to 

move the highway is approved by WYDOT. 

In addition, a public school, the public 

road to the school, and a number of 

occupied dwellings are located within the 

northern portion of the additional area 

evaluated under Alternative 1. Therefore, 

the lands included within the northern 

portion of the additional area evaluated 

under Alternative 1 that lie within 300 ft 

of the Rawhide Elementary School 

building, within 300 ft of occupied 

dwellings, or within 100 ft of the ROW of 

the public road are designated unsuitable 

for mining.

4. Wilderness Study Areas. Federal 

lands designated as wilderness 

study areas are unsuitable for 

mining while under review for 

possible wilderness designation.

No lands in the general review area are 

within a wilderness study area.

There are no unsuitable findings under 

Criterion 4 for the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract.

5. Scenic Areas. Scenic federal 

lands designated by visual 

resource management analysis as 

Class I (outstanding visual quality 

or high visual sensitivity) but not 

currently on National Register of 

Natural Landmarks are unsuitable.

No lands in the general review area meet 

the scenic criteria as outlined.

There are no unsuitable findings under 

Criterion 5 for the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract.
Appendix B 

B-2 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

UNSUITABILITY CRITERIA

GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 

BUFFALO RESOURCE AREA (BLM 1985, 

2001a)

FINDINGS FOR EAGLE BUTTE WEST LBA 

TRACT

6. Land Used for Scientific Study. 

Federal lands under permit by the 

surface management agency and 

being used for scientific studies 

involving food or fiber production, 

natural resources, or technology 

demonstrations and experiments 

are unsuitable for the duration of 

the study except where mining 

would not jeopardize the purpose 

of the study.

Two vegetation monitoring study sites on 

the TBNG (NE1⁄4 of Sec. 1, T.41N., R.71W. 

and NW1⁄4 NW1⁄4 of Sec. 30, T.41N., 

R.69W.), and the Hoe Creek Site (Sec. 7, 

T.47N., R.72W.) were found to be 

unsuitable under this criterion.

The vegetation monitoring sites and the 

Hoe Creek site are not located on the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. There are no 

unsuitable findings under Criterion 6 for 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract.

7. Cultural Resources. All publicly 

or privately owned places which 

are included in or are eligible for 

inclusion in the NRHP and an 

appropriate buffer zone are 

unsuitable.

On the basis of the consultation with 

SHPO, there were no unsuitable findings 

under this criterion in the general review 

area. Continue using the “Standard 

Archeological Stipulation” to new leases.

There are no unsuitable findings under 

Criterion 7 for the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract. The “Standard Archeological 

Stipulation” should be applied if this tract 

is leased.

8. Natural Areas. Federal lands 

designated as natural areas or 

National Natural Landmarks are 

unsuitable.

No lands in the general review area are 

designated as natural areas or as 

National Natural Landmarks.

There are no unsuitable findings under 

Criterion 8 for the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract.

9. Critical Habitat for Threatened 

or Endangered Plant and Animal 

Species. Federally designated 

critical habitat for threatened or 

endangered plant and animal 

species, and scientifically 

documented essential habitat for 

threatened or endangered species 

are unsuitable.

There is no federally designated critical 

habitat for threatened or endangered 

plant or animal species within the 

general review area.

There are no unsuitable findings under 

Criterion 9 for the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract.

10. State Listed Threatened or 

Endangered Species. Federal 

lands containing habitat 

determined to be critical or 

essential for plant or animal 

species listed by a state pursuant 

to state law as threatened or 

endangered shall be considered 

unsuitable.

Wyoming does not maintain a state list of 

threatened or endangered species of 

plants or animals. Therefore, this 

criterion does not apply.

There are no unsuitable findings under 

Criterion 10 for the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract.

11. Bald or Golden Eagle Nests. An 

active bald or golden eagle nest 

and appropriate buffer zone are 

unsuitable unless the lease can be 

conditioned so that eagles will not 

be disturbed during breeding 

season or unless golden eagle 

nests will be moved.

Defer suitability decisions and evaluate 

bald and golden eagle nests on a case by 

case basis at the time of leasing. 

Establish buffer zones around nests 

during mining and reclamation planning 

after consultation with USFWS.

There are currently no bald or golden 

eagle nests (active or inactive) on the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Evaluate 

suitability prior to lease issuance during 

consultation with USFWS.

12. Bald and Golden Eagle Roost and 

Concentration Areas. Bald and 

golden eagle roost and 

concentration areas on federal 

lands used during migration and 

wintering are unsuitable unless 

mining can be conducted in such a 

way as to ensure that eagles shall 

not be adversely disturbed.

Defer suitability decisions and evaluate 

bald and golden eagle roost areas on a 

case by case basis prior to lease 

issuance. Establish buffer zones after 

consultation with USFWS.

There are no identified roost sites on the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Evaluate 

suitability prior to lease issuance during 

consultation with USFWS. 

13. Falcon Nesting Sites and Buffer 

Zones. Federal lands containing 

active falcon (excluding kestrel) 

cliff nesting sites and a suitable 

buffer zone shall be considered 

unsuitable unless mining can be 

conducted in such a way as to 

ensure the falcons will not be 

adversely affected.

Defer suitability decisions on falcon 

nesting sites and evaluate on a case by 

case basis prior to lease issuance. 

Establish buffer zones around nesting 

sites after consultation with USFWS.

No falcon nesting sites have been 

identified on the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract. There are no unsuitable findings 

under Criterion 13 for the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract.
Appendix B 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application B-3

UNSUITABILITY CRITERIA

GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 

BUFFALO RESOURCE AREA (BLM 1985, 

2001a)

FINDINGS FOR EAGLE BUTTE WEST 

MINE LBA TRACT

14. Habitat for Migratory Bird 

Species. Federal lands which are 

high priority habitat for migratory 

bird species of management 

concern in Wyoming shall be 

considered unsuitable unless 

mining can be conducted in such a 

way as to ensure that migratory 

bird habitat will not be adversely 

affected during the period it is in 

use.

Defer suitability decisions on high 

priority habitat for migratory bird species 

of management concern in Wyoming and 

evaluate on a case by case basis prior to 

lease issuance. Establish buffer zones 

for nesting areas during mining and 

reclamation planning after consultation 

with USFWS.

Evaluate suitability during consultation 

with USFWS.

15. Fish and Wildlife Habitat for 

Resident Species. Federal lands 

which the surface management 

agency and state jointly agree are 

fish, wildlife and plant habitat of 

resident species of high interest to 

the state, and which are essential 

for maintaining these priority 

wildlife species, shall be considered 

unsuitable unless mining can be 

conducted in such a way as to 

ensure no long-term impact on the 

species being provided will occur.

Defer suitability decisions on grouse leks 

and evaluate on a case by case basis 

prior to lease issuance. Establish buffer 

zones after consultation with WGFD.

There currently are no active sage grouse 

leks and one inactive sage grouse lek on 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. There 

are currently three sage grouse leks, 

which have been active within the last five 

years, identified on lands adjacent to the 

LBA tract: one within 1⁄4 mile and two just 

over two miles from the Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract. Evaluate this criterion prior to 

lease issuance. Establish buffer zones 

during mining and reclamation planning 

after consultation with WGFD.

16. Floodplains. Federal lands in 

riverine, coastal, and special 

floodplains shall be considered 

unsuitable where it is determined 

that mining could not be 

undertaken without substantial 

threat of loss of life or property.

The BLM and USDA-FS have determined 

that the identified floodplains in the 

general review area could potentially be 

mined. Therefore, all lands within the 

general review area are considered 

suitable.

Site-specific stipulations and resource 

protection safeguards will be applied if 

necessary during mining and reclamation 

planning. There are no unsuitable 

findings under Criterion 16 for the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract.

17. Municipal Watersheds. Federal 

lands which have been committed 

by the surface management agency 

to use as municipal watersheds 

shall be considered unsuitable.

There are no designated municipal 

watersheds in the general review area.

There are no unsuitable findings under 

Criterion 17 for the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract.

18. National Resource Waters. 

Federal lands with national 

resource waters, as identified by 

states in their water quality 

management plans, and 1/4-mile 

buffer zones shall be unsuitable.

There are no designated national 

resource waters within the general 

review area.

There are no unsuitable findings under 

Criterion 18 for the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract.

19. Alluvial Valley Floors. Federal 

lands identified by the surface 

management agency, in 

consultation with the state, as 

AVFs where mining would 

interrupt, discontinue or preclude 

farming, are unsuitable. 

Additionally, when mining federal 

lands outside an AVF would 

materially damage the quality or 

quantity of water in surface or 

underground water systems that 

would supply AVFs, the land shall 

be considered unsuitable.

Consider areas determined to contain 

AVFs significant to farming as 

unsuitable. Defer decisions on other 

AVFs and analyze on a case-by-case 

basis prior to lease issuance.

No AVFs or potential AVFs have been 

identified on the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract with characteristics indicating 

potential significance to farming. There 

are no unsuitable findings under Criterion 

19 for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract.

20. State or Indian Tribe Criteria. 

Federal lands to which is 

applicable a criterion proposed by 

the state or Indian tribe located in 

the planning area and adopted by 

rulemaking by the Secretary are 

unsuitable.

There are no criterion proposed by state 

or Indian tribes that have been approved 

by the Secretary of the Interior. No tribal 

lands are located in or near the general 

review area.

There are no unsuitability findings for this 

criterion on the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract.
APPENDIX C 

COAL LEASE-BY-APPLICATION 

FLOW CHART
Appendix C 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application C-1 

COAL LEASE-BY-APPLICATION

State Director(SD)notifies

G overnorand RegionalCoalTeam

ofapplication

Field O ffice M anager(FM )ensures 

thatapplication is in conform ance

with Land U se Plan (LUP)

M inerals Staffreceives application

and prepares reporton m axim um

econom ic recovery

BLM STATE O FFICE

RECEIVES APPLIC ATIO N

Conform ance w ith LUP:

FM prepares site-specific 

Environm ental

Analysis

Non-Conform ance w ith LUP:

FM recom m ends am endm ent

ofLUP and/orm odification of

application area

FM prepares Environm ental

Analysis ofLUP am endm ent

and application

Adjudicatorevaluates

applicant’s qualifications

FM HO LDS PUBLIC

HEARIN G

Applicantsubm its/

Adjudicatorreview s surface owner

consentagreem ent(s)(ifnecessary)

SD

DECISIO N

H O LD

SALE

R EJEC T

APPLICATIO N

SD consults w ith 

Surface M anagem entAgency,G overnor,

Attorney G eneral,and Indian Tribes 
APPENDIX D

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT 

SPECIAL COAL LEASE STIPULATIONS 

AND FORM 3400-12 COAL LEASE 
Appendix D 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application D-1 

BLM will attach the following special stipulations to the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract if 

it is leased: 

SPECIAL STIPULATIONS 

In addition to observing the general obligations and standards of performance set 

out in the current regulations, the lessee shall comply with and be bound by the 

following special stipulations. 

These stipulations are also imposed upon the lessee's agents and employees. The 

failure or refusal of any of these persons to comply with these stipulations shall be 

deemed a failure of the lessee to comply with the terms of the lease. The lessee 

shall require his agents, contractors and subcontractors involved in activities 

concerning this lease to include these stipulations in the contracts between and 

among them. These stipulations may be revised or amended, in writing, by the 

mutual consent of the lessor and the lessee at any time to adjust to changed 

conditions or to correct an oversight. 

(a) CULTURAL RESOURCES

(1) Before undertaking any activities that may disturb the surface of the leased 

lands, the lessee shall conduct a cultural resource intensive field inventory in a 

manner specified by the Authorized Officer of the BLM or of the surface 

managing agency, if different, on portions of the mine plan area and adjacent 

areas, or exploration plan area, that may be adversely affected by lease-related 

activities and which were not previously inventoried at such a level of intensity. 

 The inventory shall be conducted by a qualified professional cultural resource 

specialist (i.e., archeologist, historian, historical architect, as appropriate), 

approved by the Authorized Officer of the surface managing agency (BLM, if the 

surface is privately owned), and a report of the inventory and recommendations 

for protecting any cultural resources identified shall be submitted to the 

Regional Director of the Western Region of the Office of Surface Mining (the 

Western Regional Director), the Authorized Officer of the BLM, if activities are 

associated with coal exploration outside an approved mining permit area 

(hereinafter called Authorized Officer), and the Authorized Officer of the surface 

managing agency, if different. The lessee shall undertake measures, in 

accordance with instructions from the Western Regional Director, or 

Authorized Officer, to protect cultural resources on the leased lands. The 

lessee shall not commence the surface disturbing activities until permission to 

proceed is given by the Western Regional Director or Authorized Officer. 

(2) The lessee shall protect all cultural resource properties that have been 

determined eligible to the National Register of Historic Places within the lease 

area from lease-related activities until the cultural resource mitigation 
Appendix D

D-2 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

measures can be implemented as part of an approved mining and reclamation 

or exploration plan unless modified by mutual agreement in consultation with 

the State Historic Preservation Officer. 

(3) The cost of conducting the inventory, preparing reports, and carrying out 

mitigation measures shall be borne by the lessee. 

(4) If cultural resources are discovered during operations under this lease, the 

lessee shall immediately bring them to the attention of the Western Regional 

Director or Authorized Officer, or the Authorized Officer of the surface 

managing agency, if the Western Regional Director is not available. The lessee 

shall not disturb such resources except as may be subsequently authorized by 

the Western Regional Director or Authorized Officer. 

Within two (2) working days of notification, the Western Regional Director or 

Authorized Officer will evaluate or have evaluated any cultural resources 

discovered and will determine if any action may be required to protect or 

preserve such discoveries. The cost of data recovery for cultural resources 

discovered during lease operations shall be borne by the lessee unless 

otherwise specified by the Authorized Officer of the BLM or of the surface 

managing agency, if different. 

(5) All cultural resources shall remain under the jurisdiction of the United 

States until ownership is determined under applicable law. 

(b) PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES

If paleontological resources, either large and conspicuous, and/or of significant 

scientific value are discovered during mining operations, the find will be reported 

to the Authorized Officer immediately. Mining operations will be suspended within 

250 feet of said find. An evaluation of the paleontological discovery will be made 

by a BLM-approved professional paleontologist within five (5) working days, 

weather permitting, to determine the appropriate action(s) to prevent the potential 

loss of any significant paleontological value. Operations within 250 feet of such 

discovery will not be resumed until written authorization to proceed is issued by 

the Authorized Officer. The lessee will bear the cost of any required 

paleontological appraisals, surface collection of fossils, or salvage of any large 

conspicuous fossils of significant scientific interest discovered during the 

operations. 
Appendix D 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application D-3

(c) THREATENED, ENDANGERED, CANDIDATE, or OTHER SPECIAL STATUS 

PLANT and ANIMAL SPECIES

The lease area may now or hereafter contain plants, animals, or their habitats 

determined to be threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act of 

1973, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq., or that have other special status. The 

Authorized Officer may recommend modifications to exploration and development 

proposals to further conservation and management objectives or to avoid activity 

that will contribute to a need to list such species or their habitat or to comply with 

any biological opinion issued by the Fish and Wildlife Service for the Proposed 

Action. The Authorized Officer will not approve any ground-disturbing activity 

that may affect any such species or critical habitat until it completes its 

obligations under applicable requirements of the Endangered Species Act. The 

Authorized Officer may require modifications to, or disapprove a proposed activity 

that is likely to result in jeopardy to the continued existence of a proposed or 

listed threatened or endangered species, or result in the destruction or adverse 

modification of designated or proposed critical habitat. 

The lessee shall comply with instructions from the Authorized Officer of the 

surface managing agency (BLM, if the surface is private) for ground disturbing 

activities associated with coal exploration on federal coal leases prior to approval 

of a mining and reclamation permit or outside an approved mining and 

reclamation permit area. The lessee shall comply with instructions from the 

Authorized Officer of the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 

or his designated representative, for all ground disturbing activities taking place 

within an approved mining and reclamation permit area or associated with such a 

permit. 

(d) MULTIPLE MINERAL DEVELOPMENT

Operations will not be approved which, in the opinion of the Authorized Officer, 

would unreasonably interfere with the orderly development and/or production 

from a valid existing mineral lease issued prior to this one for the same lands. 

(e) OIL AND GAS/COAL RESOURCES

The BLM realizes that coal mining operations conducted on Federal coal leases 

issued within producing oil and gas fields may interfere with the economic 

recovery of oil and gas; just as Federal oil and gas leases issued in a Federal coal 

lease area may inhibit coal recovery. BLM retains the authority to alter and/or 

modify the resource recovery and protection plans for coal operations and/or oil 

and gas operations on those lands covered by Federal mineral leases so as to 

obtain maximum resource recovery. 
Appendix D

D-4 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

(f) RESOURCE RECOVERY AND PROTECTION

Notwithstanding the approval of a resource recovery and protection plan (R2P2) by 

the BLM, lessor reserves the right to seek damages against the operator/lessee in 

the event (i) the operator/lessee fails to achieve maximum economic recovery 

(MER) (as defined at 43 CFR 3480.0-5(21)) of the recoverable coal reserves or (ii) 

the operator/lessee is determined to have caused a wasting of recoverable coal 

reserves. Damages shall be measured on the basis of the royalty that would have 

been payable on the wasted or unrecovered coal. 

The parties recognize that under an approved R2P2, conditions may require a 

modification by the operator/lessee of that plan. In the event a coal bed or portion 

thereof is not to be mined or is rendered unmineable by the operation, the 

operator/lessee shall submit appropriate justification to obtain approval by the 

Authorized Officer to leave such reserves unmined. Upon approval by the 

Authorized Officer, such coal beds or portions thereof shall not be subject to 

damages as described above. Further, nothing in this section shall prevent the 

operator/lessee from exercising its right to relinquish all or portion of the lease as 

authorized by statute and regulation. 

In the event the Authorized Officer determines that the R2P2, as approved, will not 

attain MER as the result of changed conditions, the Authorized Officer will give 

proper notice to the operator/lessee as required under applicable regulations. The 

Authorized Officer will order a modification if necessary, identifying additional 

reserves to be mined in order to attain MER. Upon a final administrative or 

judicial ruling upholding such an ordered modification, any reserves left unmined 

(wasted) under that plan will be subject to damages as described in the first 

paragraph under this section. 

Subject to the right to appeal hereinafter set forth, payment of the value of the 

royalty on such unmined recoverable coal reserves shall become due and payable 

upon determination by the Authorized Officer that the coal reserves have been 

rendered unmineable or at such time that the operator/lessee has demonstrated 

an unwillingness to extract the coal. 

The BLM may enforce this provision either by issuing a written decision requiring 

payment of the Mineral Management Service demand for such royalties, or by 

issuing a notice of non-compliance. A decision or notice of non-compliance issued 

by the lessor that payment is due under this stipulation is appealable as allowed 

by law. 
Appendix D 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application D-5 

(g) PUBLIC LAND SURVEY PROTECTION

The lessee will protect all survey monuments, witness corners, reference 

monuments, and bearing trees against destruction, obliteration, or damage during 

operations on the lease areas. If any monuments, corners or accessories are 

destroyed, obliterated, or damaged by this operation, the lessee will hire an 

appropriate county surveyor or registered land surveyor to reestablish or restore 

the monuments, corners, or accessories at the same location, using surveying 

procedures in accordance with the "Manual of Surveying Instructions for the 

Survey of the Public Lands of the United States." The survey will be recorded in 

the appropriate county records, with a copy sent to the Authorized Officer. 

(h) BUFFER ZONES FOR RIGHTS-OF-WAY OF PUBLIC ROADS, SCHOOL 

BUILDING, AND OCCUPIED DWELLINGS

(1) No mining activity of any kind may be conducted within the U.S. Highway 

14-16 right-of-way and associated 100-feet buffer zone. The lessee shall 

recover all legally and economically recoverable coal from all leased lands not 

within the foregoing right-of-way and associated buffer zone. Provided a permit 

to move the highway is approved by the Wyoming Department of 

Transportation, the lessee shall recover all legally and economically recoverable 

coal from all leased lands within the foregoing right-of-way and associated 

buffer zone. The lessee shall pay all royalties on any legally and economically 

recoverable coal which it fails to mine without the written permission of the 

Authorized Officer. 

(2) No mining of any kind may be conducted within 300 feet of the Rawhide 

public school building, 100 feet of the right-of-way of the public road to the 

school, and 300 feet of occupied dwellings. The lessee shall recover all legally 

and economically recoverable coal from all leased lands not within the 

foregoing right-of-way and buffer zones. Provided written permission is given 

to mine within these buffer zones by the school’s authorized officer and owners 

of the occupied dwellings, the lessee shall recover all legally and economically 

recoverable coal from all leased lands within the foregoing buffer zones. The 

lessee shall pay all royalties on any legally and economically recoverable coal 

which it fails to mine without the written permission of the Authorized Officer. 
Form 3400-12

(February 2005) FORM APPROVED

OMB NO. 1004-0073

Expires: January 31, 2007

UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

COAL LEASE

Serial Number

PART 1. LEASE RIGHTS GRANTED

This lease, entered into by and between the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, hereinafter called lessor, through the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and

(Name and Address)

hereinafter called lessee, is effective (date) / / , for a period of 20 years and for so long thereafter as coal is produced in commercial quantities from the

leased lands, subject to readjustment of lease terms at the end of the 20th lease year and each 10-year period thereafter.

Sec. 1.This lease is issued pursuant and subject to the terms and provisions of the:

Mineral Lands Leasing Act of 1920, Act of February 25, 1920, as amended, 41 Stat. 437, 30 U.S.C. 181-287, hereinafter referred to as the Act;

Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands, Act of August 7, 1947, 61 Stat. 913, 30 U.S.C. 351-359;

and to the regulations and formal orders of the Secretary of the Interior which are now or hereafter in force, when not inconsistent with the express and specific

provisions herein.

Sec. 2. Lessor, in consideration of any bonuses, rents, and royalties to be paid, and the conditions and covenants to be observed as herein set forth, hereby grants and

leases to lessee the exclusive right and privilege to drill for, mine, extract, remove, or otherwise process and dispose of the coal deposits in, upon, or under the

following described lands:

containing acres, more or less, together with the right to construct such works, buildings, plants, structures, equipment and appliances and the right

to use such on-lease rights-of-way which may be necessary and convenient in the exercise of the rights and privileges granted, subject to the conditions herein

provided.

PART II. TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Sec. 1. (a) RENTAL RATE -Lessee must pay lessor rental annually and in

advance for each acre or fraction thereof during the continuance of the lease at the

rate of $ for each lease year.

(b) RENTAL CREDITS -Rental will not be credited against either production or

advance royalties for any year.

Sec. 2. (a) PRODUCTION ROYALTIES - The royalty will be percent of

the value of the coal as set forth in the regulations. Royalties are due to lessor the

final day of the month succeeding the calendar month in which the royalty

obligation accrues.

(b) ADVANCE ROYALTIES - Upon request by the lessee, the BLM may accept,

for a total of not more than 10 years, the payment of advance royalties in lieu of

continued operation, consistent with the regulations. The advance royalty will be

based on a percent of the value of a minimum number of tons determined in the

manner established by the advance royalty regulations in effect at the time the

lessee requests approval to pay advance royalties in lieu of continued operation.

Sec. 3. BONDS - Lessee must maintain in the proper office a lease bond in the

amount of $ . The BLM may require an increase in this amount

when additional coverage is determined appropriate.

Sec. 4. DILIGENCE - This lease is subject to the conditions of diligent

development and continued operation, except that these conditions are excused

when operations under the lease are interrupted by strikes, the elements, or

casualties not attributable to the lessee. The lessor, in the public interest, may

suspend the condition of continued operation upon payment of advance

royalties in accordance with the regulations in existence at the time of the

suspension. Lessee's failure to produce coal in commercial quantities at the

end of 10 years will terminate the lease. Lessee must submit an operation and

reclamation plan pursuant to Section 7 of the Act not later than 3 years after

lease issuance.

The lessor reserves the power to assent to or order the suspension of the

terms and conditions of this lease in accordance with, inter alia, Section 39 of

the Mineral Leasing Act, 30 U.S.C. 209.

5. LOGICAL MINING UNIT (LMU) - Either upon approval by the lessor of

the lessee's application or at the direction of the lessor, this lease will become

an LMU or part of an LMU, subject to the provisions set forth in the

regulations.

The stipulations established in an LMU approval in effect at the time of LMU

approval will supersede the relevant inconsistent terms of this lease so long

as the lease remains committed to the LMU. If the LMU of which this lease

is a part is dissolved, the lease will then be subject to the lease terms which

would have been applied if the lease had not been included in an LMU.

(Continued on page 2)
Sec. 6. DOCUMENTS, EVIDENCE AND INSPECTION - At such times and in

such form as lessor may prescribe, lessee must furnish detailed statements

showing the amounts and quality of all products removed and sold from the

lease, the proceeds therefrom, and the amount used for production purposes or

unavoidably lost.

Lessee must keep open at all reasonable times for the inspection by BLM the

leased premises and all surface and underground improvements, works,

machinery, ore stockpiles, equipment, and all books, accounts, maps, and

records relative to operations, surveys, or investigations on or under the leased

lands.

Lessee must allow lessor access to and copying of documents reasonably

necessary to verify lessee compliance with terms and conditions of the lease.

While this lease remains in effect, information obtained under this section will

be closed to inspection by the public in accordance with the Freedom of

Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552).

Sec. 7. DAMAGES TO PROPERTY AND CONDUCT OF OPERATIONS -

Lessee must comply at its own expense with all reasonable orders of the

Secretary, respecting diligent operations, prevention of waste, and protection of

other resources.

Lessee must not conduct exploration operations, other than casual use, without

an approved exploration plan. All exploration plans prior to the commencement

of mining operations within an approved mining permit area must be submitted

to the BLM.

Lessee must carry on all operations in accordance with approved methods and

practices as provided in the operating regulations, having due regard for the

prevention of injury to life, health, or property, and prevention of waste, damage

or degradation to any land, air, water, cultural, biological, visual, and other

resources, including mineral deposits and formations of mineral deposits not

leased hereunder, and to other land uses or users. Lessee must take measures

deemed necessary by lessor to accomplish the intent of this lease term. Such

measures may include, but are not limited to, modification to proposed siting or

design of facilities, timing of operations, and specification of interim and final

reclamation procedures. Lessor reserves to itself the right to lease, sell, or

otherwise dispose of the surface or other mineral deposits in the lands and the

right to continue existing uses and to authorize future uses upon or in the leased

lands, including issuing leases for mineral deposits not covered hereunder and

approving easements or rights-of-way. Lessor must condition such uses to

prevent unnecessary or unreasonable interference with rights of lessee as may be

consistent with concepts of multiple use and multiple mineral development.

Sec. 8. PROTECTION OF DIVERSE INTERESTS, AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY - Lessee must: pay when due all taxes legally assessed and levied under

the laws of the State or the United States; accord all employees complete

freedom of purchase; pay all wages at least twice each month in lawful money

of the United States; maintain a safe working environment in accordance with

standard industry practices; restrict the workday to not more than 8 hours in any

one day for underground workers, except in emergencies; and take measures

necessary to protect the health and safety of the public. No person under the age

of 16 years should be employed in any mine below the surface. To the extent

that laws of the State in which the lands are situated are more restrictive than the

provisions in this paragraph, then the State laws apply.

Lessee will comply with all provisions of Executive Order No. 11246 of

September 24, 1965, as amended, and the rules, regulations, and relevant orders

of the Secretary of Labor. Neither lessee nor lessee's subcontractors should

maintain segregated facilities.

Sec. 9. (a) TRANSFERS

This lease may be transferred in whole or in part to any person,

association or corporation qualified to hold such lease interest.

This lease may be transferred in whole or in part to another public body

or to a person who will mine coal on behalf of, and for the use of, the

public body or to a person who for the limited purpose of creating a

security interest in favor of a lender agrees to be obligated to mine the

coal on behalf of the public body.

This lease may only be transferred in whole or in part to another small

business qualified under 13 CFR 121.

Transfers of record title, working or royalty interest must be approved in

accordance with the regulations.

(b) RELINQUISHMENT - The lessee may relinquish in writing at any time all

rights under this lease or any portion thereof as provided in the regulations.

Upon lessor's acceptance of the relinquishment, lessee will be relieved of all

future obligations under the lease or the relinquished portion thereof,

whichever is applicable.

Sec. 10. DELIVERY OF PREMISES, REMOVAL OF MACHINERY,

EQUIPMENT, ETC. - At such time as all portions of this lease are returned to

lessor, lessee must deliver up to lessor the land leased, underground timbering,

and such other supports and structures necessary for the preservation of the

mine workings on the leased premises or deposits and place all workings in

condition for suspension or abandonment. Within 180 days thereof, lessee

must remove from the premises all other structures, machinery, equipment,

tools, and materials that it elects to or as required by the BLM. Any such

structures, machinery, equipment, tools, and materials remaining on the leased

lands beyond 180 days, or approved extension thereof, will become the

property of the lessor, but lessee may either remove any or all such property or

continue to be liable for the cost of removal and disposal in the amount

actually incurred by the lessor. If the surface is owned by third parties, lessor

will waive the requirement for removal, provided the third parties do not object

to such waiver. Lessee must, prior to the termination of bond liability or at any

other time when required and in accordance with all applicable laws and

regulations, reclaim all lands the surface of which has been disturbed, dispose

of all debris or solid waste, repair the offsite and onsite damage caused by

lessee's activity or activities incidental thereto, and reclaim access roads or

trails.

Sec. 11. PROCEEDINGS IN CASE OF DEFAULT - If lessee fails to comply

with applicable laws, existing regulations, or the terms, conditions and

stipulations of this lease, and the noncompliance continues for 30 days after

written notice thereof, this lease will be subject to cancellation by the lessor

only by judicial proceedings. This provision will not be construed to prevent

the exercise by lessor of any other legal and equitable remedy, including

waiver of the default. Any such remedy or waiver will not prevent later

cancellation for the same default occurring at any other time.

Sec. 12. HEIRS AND SUCCESSORS-IN-INTEREST - Each obligation of this

lease will extend to and be binding upon, and every benefit hereof will inure

to, the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns of the respective

parties hereto.

Sec. 13. INDEMNIFICATION -Lessee must indemnify and hold harmless the

United States from any and all claims arising out of the lessee's activities and

operations under this lease.

Sec. 14. SPECIAL STATUTES - This lease is subject to the Clean Water Act

(33 U.S.C. 1252 et seq.), the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 4274 et seq.), and to all

other applicable laws pertaining to exploration activities, mining operations

and reclamation, including the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of

1977 (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.).

Sec. 15. SPECIAL STIPULATIONS

(Continued on page 3) (Form 3400-12, page 2)
Sec. 15. SPECIAL STIPULATIONS (Cont’d.) -

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

_____________________________________________________________

(Company or Lessee Name)

By _________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

(Signature of Lessee)

_____________________________________________________________

(BLM)

_____________________________________________________________

(Title)

_____________________________________________________________

(Title)

_____________________________________________________________

(Date)

_____________________________________________________________

(Date)

Title 18 U.S.C. Section 1001, makes it a crime for any person knowingly and willfully to make to any department or agency of the United States any false,

fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations as to any matter within its jurisdiction.

NOTICES

The Privacy Act of 1974 and the regulation in 43 CFR 2.48(d) provide that you be furnished with the following information in connection

with information required by this application.

AUTHORITY: 30 U.S.C. 181-287 and 30 U.S.C. 351-359.

PRINCIPAL PURPOSE: BLM will use the information you provide to process your application and determine if you are eligible to hold a

lease on BLM Land.

ROUTINE USES: BLM will only disclose the information according to the regulations at 43 CFR 2.56(d).

EFFECT OF NOT PROVIDING INFORMATION: Disclosing the information is necessary to receive a benefit. Not disclosing the

information may result in BLM's rejecting your request for a lease.

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 requires us to inform you that:

The BLM collects this information to authorize and evaluate proposed exploration and mining operations on public lands.

Response to the provisions of this lease form is mandatory for the types of activities specified.

The BLM would like you to know that you do not have to respond to this or any other Federal agency-sponsored information collection

unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

BURDEN HOURS STATEMENT: Public reporting burden for this form is estimated to average one hour per response including the time

for reading the instructions and provisions, and completing and reviewing the form. Direct comments regarding the burden estimate or any

other aspect of this form to U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (1004-0073), Bureau Information Collection

Clearance Officer (WO-630), 1849 C Street, Mail Stop 401 LS, Washington, D.C. 20240.

 (Form 3400-12, page 3)
APPENDIX E

BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 

FOR THE EAGLE BUTTE WEST LBA TRACT EIS 
Appendix E 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application E-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page

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

E-2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES........ 4 

E-2.1 The Proposed Action ..........................................................................4 

E-2.2 Alternatives to the Proposed Action....................................................6 

E-2.2.1 Alternative 1................................................................................6 

E-2.2.2 Alternative 2................................................................................7 

E-3.0 CONSULTATION TO DATE.................................................................... 8 

E-4.0 SPECIES HABITAT AND OCCURRENCE AND EFFECTS OF THE 

PROPOSED PROJECT........................................................................... 9 

E-4.1 Threatened Species.......................................................................... 13 

E-4.1.1 Bald eagle (Haliaetus leucocephalus) .......................................... 13 

E-4.1.2 Ute ladies’-tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis).................................... 15 

E-4.2 Endangered Species......................................................................... 18 

E-4.2.1 Black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes) ......................................... 18 

E-5.0 SUMMARY OF DETERMINATIONS...................................................... 20 

E-6.0 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND MITIGATION............................. 21 

E-7.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS...................................................................... 22 

E-8.0 CREDENTIALS OF SURVEY PERSONNEL ........................................... 25 

E-9.0 REFERENCES AND LITERATURE CITED............................................ 27 

LIST OF TABLES 

Table E-1. Effects Evaluation of Federal T&E Species in the Area of the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract........................................................ 20

LIST OF FIGURES 

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

Tracts........................................................................................... 2

Figure E-2. Eagle Butte West LBA Tract Alternatives....................................... 3

Figure E-3. T&E Animal Species Survey Areas for the Eagle Butte Mine 

and Eagle Butte West LBA Tract................................................. 11
Appendix E 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application E-1 

E-1.0 INTRODUCTION 

In 2001, RAG Coal West, Inc., operator of the Eagle Butte Mine in Campbell 

County, Wyoming filed an application with the Bureau of Land Management 

(BLM) to lease the federal coal reserves included in a maintenance coal tract 

under the regulations at 43 CFR 3425, Leasing on Application. Foundation 

Coal West, Inc. (FCW) purchased the Eagle Butte Mine from RAG Coal West, 

Inc., in August 2004. The environmental impacts of leasing this tract are being 

evaluated in the Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application Environmental 

Impact Statement (EIS). The tract, referred to as the Eagle Butte West Lease by 

Application (LBA) Tract, and applicant mine are shown in Figures E-1 and E-2. 

The purpose of this Biological Assessment is to provide information about the 

potential effects that leasing the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would have on 

federally listed threatened or endangered (T&E) species. T&E species are 

managed under the authority of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (PL 

93-205, as amended). The ESA requires Federal agencies to ensure that all 

actions they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the 

continued existence of any federally listed species or result in the destruction 

or adverse modification of their critical habitat. BLM does not authorize 

mining by issuing a lease for federal coal, but the impacts of mining the coal 

are considered at the leasing stage because it is a logical consequence of 

issuing a lease. 

This Biological Assessment was prepared to disclose the possible effects to T&E 

species (plant and animal) that are known to be present or that may be present 

within the area influenced by the Proposed Action and the alternative to the 

Proposed Action being evaluated by the BLM. It was prepared in accordance 

with Section 7 of the ESA. 

Biological Assessment objectives are: 

1. To comply with the requirements of the ESA that actions of federal 

agencies not jeopardize or adversely modify critical habitat of federally 

listed species. 

2. To provide a process and standard by which to ensure that threatened or 

endangered species receive full consideration in the decision making 

process. 
Maysdorf

EAGLE BUTTE WEST

WRIGHT

JUNCTION

Converse County

Campbell County Weston County

Niobrara County

To Douglas 46 Miles

RENO

 LEGEND

GILLETTE

Weston County Crook County

ROZET

Campbell County

MOORCROFT

Johnson CountyCampbell County

To Buffalo 38 Miles

North Antelope Rochelle Mine

To Newcastle 29 Miles

Belle Ayr North

Belle Ayr Mine

Dry Fork Mine

Wyodak Mine

Rawhide Mine

Caballo Mine

Cordero Rojo Mine

Caballo Rojo Mine

Cordero Mine

Coal Creek Mine

Buckskin Mine

Eagle Butte Mine

Antelope Mine

Black Thunder Mine

Jacobs Ranch Mine

West Antelope II

Caballo West

SCALE: 1"= 10 MILES

West Coal Creek

West

Jacobs

Ranch

Hay Creek II

Maysdorf II

Hilight Field

West Hilight

Porcupine

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

Appendix E

E-2 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application
T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

16

1

2 1

11

3

10

4

9

5

8

6

7

12

13

24

25

36

11

14

23

26

35

10

15

22

27

34

9

21

28

33

8

17

20

29

32

7

18

19

30

31

12

13

24

25

36

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

U.S. Highway 14-16

U.S. Highway 14-16

State Highway 59

LEGEND

0 2500 5000 10000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

Eagle Butte Mine Permit Boundary

Existing Eagle Butte Mine Federal Coal Leases

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as Applied for

Additional Area Evaluated Under Alternative 1

Area Added Under BLM's Preferred

Tract Delineation for Alternative 1

City of Gillette Buffer Zone

Figure E-2. Eagle Butte West LBA Tract Alternatives.

Appendix E

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application E-3
Appendix E 

E-4 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

E-2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 

E-2.1 The Proposed Action 

On December 28, 2001, RAG Coal West, Inc. filed an application with the BLM 

to lease federal coal reserves in a tract located west of and immediately 

adjacent to the Eagle Butte Mine (Figure E-1). The tract, which was originally 

referred to as the Eagle Butte Mine West Extension LBA Tract, was assigned 

case file number WYW155132. BLM subsequently renamed the tract the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract and RAG submitted a modification to the application to 

the BLM, effective October 20, 2003, which decreased the size of the lease area 

and increased the coal volume. In August 2004, RAG Coal West, Inc. finalized 

the sale of the Eagle Butte Mine to Foundation Coal West, Inc. (FCW), a directly 

held subsidiary of Foundation Coal Holdings, Inc. 

Under the Proposed Action for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, the tract as 

applied for by FCW would be offered for lease at a sealed-bid, competitive lease 

sale. The boundaries of the tract would be consistent with the tract 

configuration proposed in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract lease application 

(Figure E-2). The Proposed Action assumes that FCW will be the successful 

bidder on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract if it is offered for sale. 

The legal description of the proposed Eagle Butte West LBA Tract coal lease 

lands as applied for by FCW under the Proposed Action is as follows: 

T.51N., R.72W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming

 Acres

Section 19: Lots 13, 14, 19, and 20; 187.79 

Section 20: Lots 10(S1⁄2), 11(S1⁄2), and 12 through 15; 201.74 

Section 29: Lots 1 (W1⁄2), 2 through 7, 8(W1⁄2 and SE1⁄4), and 9 

 through 16; 635.45 

Section 30: Lots 5, 6, 11 through 14, 19, and 20; 372.66 

Total Acreage: 1,397.64

The coal estate underlying this tract described above is owned by the federal 

government and administered by the BLM. The surface estate of the tract is 

owned by FCW. 

The tract as applied for includes approximately 1,397.64 mineable acres. It is 

assumed that an area larger than the tract would have to be disturbed in order 

to recover all of the coal in the tract. The disturbances outside of the tract 

would be due to activities like overstripping, matching undisturbed topography, 

and construction of flood control and sediment control structures. 

Under the Proposed Action for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, if a decision is 

made to hold a competitive lease sale and if there is a successful bidder at that 
Appendix E 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application E-5

sale, a lease would be issued for the tract of federal coal as applied for. The 

tract offered for lease would be subject to standard and special lease 

stipulations developed for the Wyoming Powder River Basin (PRB). The 

stipulations that would be attached to a lease for the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract are listed in Appendix D of the Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application 

EIS. The following stipulation relating to T&E species is one of the special 

stipulations developed for the Wyoming PRB: 

THREATENED, ENDANGERED, CANDIDATE, or OTHER SPECIAL STATUS 

PLANT and ANIMAL SPECIES – The lease area may now or hereafter 

contain plants, animals, or their habitats determined to be threatened or 

endangered under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, 16 

U.S.C. 1531 et seq., or that have other special status. The Authorized Officer 

may recommend modifications to exploration and development proposals to 

further conservation and management objectives or to avoid activity that will 

contribute to a need to list such species or their habitat or to comply with any 

biological opinion issued by the Fish and Wildlife Service for the Proposed 

Action. The Authorized Officer will not approve any ground-disturbing activity 

that may affect any such species or critical habitat until it completes its 

obligations under applicable requirements of the Endangered Species Act. The 

Authorized Officer may require modifications to, or disapprove a proposed 

activity that is likely to result in jeopardy to the continued existence of a 

proposed or listed threatened or endangered species, or result in the 

destruction or adverse modification of designated or proposed critical habitat. 

The lessee shall comply with instructions from the Authorized Officer of the 

surface managing agency (BLM, if the surface is private) for ground disturbing 

activities associated with coal exploration on federal coal leases prior to 

approval of a mining and reclamation permit or outside an approved mining 

and reclamation permit area. The lessee shall comply with instructions from 

the Authorized Officer of the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and 

Enforcement, or his designated representative, for all ground disturbing 

activities taking place within an approved mining and reclamation permit area 

or associated with such a permit. 

The coal mining unsuitability criteria listed in the federal coal management 

regulations (43 CFR 3461) have been applied to high to moderate coal 

development potential lands in the Wyoming PRB (see Section E-3.0 for further 

discussion). As discussed in Chapter 1, Section 1.5 of the Eagle Butte West 

Coal Lease Application EIS, the coal underlying U.S. Highway 14-16, its rightof-way (ROW), and a buffer zone that extends 100 feet on either side of the 

ROW is considered unsuitable for mining at this time under Unsuitability 

Criterion Number 3. An exception under criterion 3, specified in the Surface 

Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA), would allow surface coal mining 

in the ROW and buffer zone for a public road if the regulatory authority (or the 

appropriate public road authority designated by the regulatory authority) 

allows the public road to be relocated or closed after providing public notice 
Appendix E 

E-6 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

and opportunity for a public hearing and finding in writing that the interests of 

the affected public and landowners will be protected (30 CFR 761.11). 

FCW and the Wyoming Department of Transportation (WYDOT), the designated 

public road authority in Wyoming, are working on a plan to relocate U.S. 

Highway 14-16, which would allow recovery of the coal underlying the highway, 

its ROW, and the buffer zone. If the road relocation is approved, the exception 

would be applicable and the unsuitability determination for the coal underlying 

U.S. Highway 14-16, its ROW, and the associated buffer zone could be reconsidered. (See Section 3.15 of the EIS for additional discussion of the 

proposed highway relocation.) 

Although the coal within Highway 14-16, its ROW and the associated buffer 

zone is currently determined to be unsuitable for mining, it is included in the 

tract to allow maximum recovery of all the mineable coal adjacent to the 

highway ROW and associated buffer zone and to comply with the coal leasing 

regulations, which do not allow leasing of less than 10-acre aliquot parts. If a 

lease is issued for this tract, a stipulation will be attached to the lease stating 

that no mining operations may be conducted in the portion of the lease within 

the ROW and buffer zone for U.S. Highway 14-16 unless approval is obtained 

from the appropriate authority to move the highway. 

FCW estimates that about 228 million tons of coal could be recovered from the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract under the Proposed Action if Highway 14-16 is 

moved. If the highway is not moved, FCW estimates that approximately 203 

million tons of coal could be recovered from the tract. 

Under the Proposed Action, it is assumed that the LBA tract would be 

developed as a maintenance lease to extend the life of the adjacent existing 

Eagle Butte Mine. As a result, under the Proposed Action, the coal included in 

the tract would be mined by existing employees using existing facilities and 

roads. 

E-2.2 Alternatives to the Proposed Action 

E-2.2.1 Alternative 1

Under Alternative 1 for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, BLM would reconfigure 

the tract, hold a competitive coal lease sale for the lands included in the 

reconfigured tract, and issue a lease to the successful bidder. Alternative 1, 

holding a competitive coal lease sale for a modified tract, is the BLM’s preferred 

alternative. 

In evaluating the Eagle Butte West coal lease application, BLM identified a 

study area, shown in Figure E-2. The BLM study area includes the tract as 

applied for and unleased federal coal adjacent to the northern and southern 
Appendix E 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application E-7

edges of the tract as applied for. Under this alternative, BLM could add some 

or all of the additional area evaluated under this alternative (shown in Figure 

E-2) to the tract as applied for or BLM could reduce the size of the tract as 

applied for. The tract as modified by BLM would be subject to standard and 

special lease stipulations developed for the PRB and this tract if it is offered for 

sale, as discussed above. Alternative 1 for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

assumes that FCW would be the successful bidder on the tract if a lease sale is 

held and that the tract would be developed as a maintenance lease to extend 

the life of the adjacent Eagle Butte Mine. Other assumptions are the same as 

for the Proposed Action. 

BLM evaluated the potential that adding some or all of the adjacent lands 

shown in Figure E-2 would provide for more efficient recovery of the federal 

coal, increase competitive interest in the tract, and/or reduce the potential that 

some of the potentially mineable federal coal in this area would be bypassed in 

the future if it is not included in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. Based on 

this evaluation, BLM made a decision to add approximately 30 acres to the 

northeast corner of the tract to allow for more efficient recovery of the federal 

coal. The lands that BLM would add to the tract under the preferred tract 

configuration are: 

T.51N., R.72W., 6th P.M., Campbell County, Wyoming

Acres

Section 20: Lot 10(NW1⁄4), and Lot 11(N1⁄2); 30.13 

The area added under BLM’s preferred tract configuration is shown in Figure 

E-2. The coal estate underlying the above described lands that BLM is 

proposing to add to the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is owned by the federal 

government and administered by the BLM. The surface estate on these lands 

is owned by FCW. 

The portion of U.S. Highway 14-16 that is located in the area that would be 

added to the tract under the BLM’s preferred tract configuration would also be 

considered unsuitable for mining under Unsuitability Criterion Number 3, as 

discussed above. 

E-2.2.2 Alternative 2

Under Alternative 2, the No Action Alternative, the application to lease the coal 

included in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would be rejected, the tract would 

not be offered for competitive sale, and the coal included in the tract would not 

be mined. This would not affect permitted mining activities and employment 

on the existing leases at Eagle Butte Mine and would not preclude an 

application to lease the federal coal included in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

in the future. No additional surface of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would 

be disturbed due to overstripping to allow coal to be removed from the adjacent 

existing leases. 
Appendix E 

E-8 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

E-3.0 CONSULTATION TO DATE 

The location of the existing Eagle Butte Mine coal leases, the existing approved 

mine permit area, and the BLM study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

(the tract as applied for and the additional area evaluated by BLM under 

Alternative 1) are shown in Figure E-2. 

The Eagle Butte Mine and Eagle Butte West LBA Tract are included in the area 

determined to be “acceptable for further consideration for leasing” as part of 

the coal screening process. The coal screening process is a four part process 

that includes application of the coal unsuitability criteria, which are defined in 

43 CFR 3461.5. BLM has applied these coal screens to federal coal lands in 

Campbell County several times, starting in the early 1980s. Most recently, in 

1993, BLM began the process of reapplying these screens to federal coal lands 

in Campbell, Converse, and Sheridan Counties. The results of this analysis 

were included as Appendix D of the 2001 Approved Resource Management Plan 

for Public Lands Administered by the BLM Buffalo Field Office (BLM 2001), 

which can be viewed on the Wyoming BLM website at http://www.blm.gov/wy/ 

st/en/info/NEPA/documents.html. Consultation with the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (USFWS) occurred in conjunction with the unsuitability 

findings under criterion 9 (Critical Habitat for Threatened or Endangered Plant 

and Animal Species), criterion 11 (Bald or Golden Eagle Nests), criterion 12 

(Bald and Golden Eagle Roost and Concentration Areas), criterion 13 (Falcon 

Nesting Site(s) and Buffer Zone(s)), and criterion 14 (Habitat for Migratory Bird 

Species). 

Appendix B of the Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application EIS summarizes the 

unsuitability criteria, describes the general findings for the screening analyses 

discussed above, and presents a validation of these findings for the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract based on the current information. 

Consultation with USFWS has previously been completed for the area included 

within the Eagle Butte Mine’s existing approved mining permit area, shown in 

Figure E-2, as part of the mining and reclamation plan approval process. This 

process began when the mine was initially permitted in 1976. 

A letter dated April 7, 2005, from Brian Kelly, USFWS, Cheyenne, Wyoming, to 

Bill Boger, FCW, Gillette, Wyoming, documents approval of the current updated 

Raptor and Migratory Birds of High Federal Interest (MBHFI) Monitoring and 

Mitigation Plan for the Eagle Butte Mine (USFWS 2005a). 

USFWS provided BLM a list of the T&E species that may be present in the 

Eagle Butte West coal lease project area in a memorandum letter from Brian T. 

Kelly, USFWS, Wyoming Field Office, Cheyenne, Wyoming, to Nancy Doelger, 

BLM, Casper Field Office, Casper, Wyoming dated July 26, 2005 (USFWS 

2005b). The following list of federally listed threatened or endangered species 
Appendix E 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application E-9

that may be present in the Eagle Butte West coal lease application project area 

was provided: 

 Bald eagle (Haliaetus leucocephalus): Threatened

 Black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes): Endangered 

 Ute ladies’-tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis): Threatened 

E-4.0 SPECIES HABITAT AND OCCURRENCE AND EFFECTS OF THE 

PROPOSED PROJECT 

The Eagle Butte Mine began producing coal in 1976. Wildlife monitoring has 

been conducted annually for the mine since 1986. This wildlife monitoring was 

designed to meet the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality/Land 

Quality Division (WDEQ/LQD), Wyoming Game and Fish Department (WGFD), 

and federal requirements for annual monitoring and reporting of wildlife 

activity on coal mining areas. Detailed procedures and site-specific 

requirements have been carried out as approved by WGFD and USFWS. The 

monitoring program was conducted in accordance with Appendix B of 

WDEQ/LQD Coal Rules and Regulations. Because the areas covered in the 

wildlife surveys included the mine’s permit area and a large perimeter around 

the permit boundary, the entire Eagle Butte West LBA Tract has been included 

in baseline inventories and annual wildlife surveys conducted for the Eagle 

Butte Mine since wildlife studies began in the early 1970s. 

The approved Eagle Butte Mine Permit 428 Term T5 (FCW 2005) includes 

monitoring and mitigation measures for the Eagle Butte Mine that are required 

by SMCRA and Wyoming State Law. If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is 

acquired by FCW, these required monitoring and mitigation measures would be 

extended to cover operations on the LBA tract when the Eagle Butte Mine’s 

mining permit is amended to include the tract. This amended permit would 

have to be approved before mining operations could take place on the tract. 

These monitoring and mitigation measures are considered to be part of the 

Proposed Action and Alternative 1 during the leasing process because they are 

regulatory requirements. 

Background information on T&E species in the vicinity of the Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract was drawn from several sources, including wildlife survey reports 

submitted by the Eagle Butte Mine to the WDEQ/LQD from 1974 through 

2005, the Final EIS for the West Hay Creek Coal Lease Application (BLM 2004), 

a Wyoming Natural Diversity Database search (University of Wyoming 2001), 

and WGFD and USFWS records and contacts in 2004 and 2005. In addition, 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract wildlife study area falls within the wildlife 

monitoring areas for the nearby Buckskin and Rawhide Mines (Figure E-1). 
Appendix E 

E-10 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Site-specific data for a substantial portion of the tract as applied for and the 

additional area evaluated under Alternative 1 were obtained from several 

sources, including WDEQ/LQD permit applications and annual wildlife reports 

for the Eagle Butte Mine and other nearby coal mines. Baseline wildlife studies 

were conducted by Thunderbird Wildlife Consulting, Inc., (TWC) expressly for 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract beginning in April of 2004 and continuing 

through December of 2004. Figure E-3 depicts TWC’s T&E animal species 

survey areas for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 

The topography within the vicinity of the LBA tract is generally level to gently 

rolling, dissected by locally shallow gullies and the broader meandering 

floodplain of Little Rawhide Creek, an intermittent stream. Unmined lands 

surrounding the LBA tract are characterized by low rolling hills with a 

prominent ridgeline immediately to the west. Lands affected by surface mining, 

both ongoing and reclaimed, dominate the landscape adjacent to the LBA 

tract’s eastern edge. Elevations range from approximately 4,240 to 4,560 feet 

above sea level. 

Predominant wildlife habitat types classified on the LBA tract and adjacent 

area correspond with the major plant communities defined during the 

vegetation baseline study and consist primarily of seeded grassland 

(agricultural pasture), grassland, and sagebrush/grassland. Other habitats 

present in limited extent include bottomland, trees, and open water. Networks 

of road, pipeline, tank battery, and well-pad disturbance areas associated with 

oil and gas development overlay much of the study area. 

Little Rawhide Creek passes through the eastern portion of the LBA tract, 

flowing from south to north. Its tributary, Prong Draw, passes through the 

central portion of the tract, flowing from southwest to northeast (Figure E-3). 

Under natural conditions, Little Rawhide Creek is classified as an intermittent 

stream and its tributaries, including Prong Draw, are all ephemeral streams. 

Essentially all water courses in the study area are currently receiving discharge 

water from coal bed natural gas (CBNG) development and, as a result, the 

frequency and duration of streamflow events have been increased. At least 

seven distinct, in-channel impoundments are located on the Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract as applied for and three others are located on the additional area 

evaluated under Alternative 1. Streamflow is now more persistent and these 

shallow impoundments along Little Rawhide Creek and Prong Draw are seldom 

completely dry, resulting in an increase in habitat for waterfowl, shorebirds, 

and aquatic species. 

FCW’s approved mining plan allows disturbance of a portion of the Little 

Rawhide Creek channel. Approximately four miles of the stream is currently 

diverted from its natural channel to facilitate mining within the existing Eagle 

Butte Mine permit area. Diversion No. 6 (Figure E-3) channel was constructed 

in 1981. FCW would propose another diversion of Little Rawhide Creek if they 

acquire a lease for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract. 
5

8

17

6

7

18

1

12

13

2

11

14

3

10

15

34 35 36 31 32

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

T.

52

N.

T.

51

N.

16

6

7

18

1

12

13

2

11

14

3

10

15

4

9

36

35 33 34

31

R.72W. R.71W.

T.

52

N.

T.

51

N.

Rawhide

Creek

Powder River

Dry

1

12

13

2

11

14

3

10

15

5

8

17

6

7

18

20

29

32

19

30

31

24

25

36

23

26

35

22

27

34

R. 73 W. R. 72 W.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N.

T.

51

N.

T.

50

N. 1

12

13

2

11

14

3

10

15

4

9

16

6

7

18

19

30

31

24

25

36

23

26

35

22

27

34

21

28

33

GILLETTE R. 72 W. R. 71 W.

Little

Rawhide

Creek

Fork

Little

Little

Powder

River

Rawhide

Creek

Little Rawhide

Creek

Diversion #6 Prong

Draw

Eagle Butte Mine Permit Boundary

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as

Applied for

Prairie Dog Colony

Two-Mile Prairie Dog Colony

Survey Area Boundary

LEGEND

0 16000

GRAPHIC SCALE (FEET)

4000 8000

One-Mile Bald Eagle

Additional Area Evaluated Survey Area Boundary

Under Alternative 1

Area Added Under BLM's Preferred

Tract Delineation for Alternative 1

Figure E-3. T&E Animal Species Survey Area for the Eagle Butte Mine and the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract.

Appendix E

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application E-11
Appendix E 

E-12 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

A preliminary wetlands inventory, based on USFWS National Wetlands 

Inventory (NWI) mapping and vegetation mapping in the field, was conducted in 

2004. The wetland analysis area includes the BLM study area for the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract (the tract as applied for and the additional area 

evaluated under Alternative 1) and a 1⁄4-mile disturbance buffer around the 

tract sufficient to mine and reclaim the tract as a part of the existing Eagle 

Butte Mine operation. A formal wetland delineation has been confirmed by the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) for the portion of the wetland analysis 

area (947.94 acres) that is within the current Eagle Butte Mine permit area. 

Wetland areas previously mapped by the USFWS NWI have been recently 

altered due to CBNG-related water production within and upstream of the 

wetland analysis area. The NWI maps were consulted prior to the initiation of 

the preliminary wetlands field survey; however, the boundaries of the existing 

potential jurisdictional wetlands vary to a greater or lesser extent from the 

boundaries shown on the NWI maps. Due to the ephemeral nature of CBNG 

dewatering activities, the boundaries, and therefore wetland areas, are likewise 

ephemeral. A formal jurisdictional wetland survey for the Eagle Butte West 

LBA Tract has not yet been completed due to the fact that the current field 

conditions may not be representative of the field conditions in the future. A 

formal jurisdictional wetland delineation survey would be conducted and 

submitted to the COE for verification as part of the mining and reclamation 

permit process, if the tract is leased. 

Within the wetland analysis area (4,172 acres), the preliminary inventory 

identified a total of 50.4 acres of Waters of the U.S., including a total of 49.8 

acres of jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. Approximately 37.5 of those acres are 

jurisdictional wetlands. Identified jurisdictional wetlands occur along the 

water courses of Little Rawhide Creek and its tributaries. The 12.3 acres of 

jurisdictional other Waters of the U.S. that did not qualify as jurisdictional 

wetlands consist primarily of the open water that is held within the linear 

upland drainage channels and in-channel impoundments and intermittent 

pools. There is an additional 0.5 acre of non-jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. 

in the wetland analysis area that consists of small isolated areas of open water 

where water produced from nearby CBNG development wells has ponded. The 

identified potential jurisdictional wetlands include Riverine-Emergent Marsh 

and Riverene-Wet Meadow. 

Jurisdictional wetlands located in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract that are 

destroyed by mining operations would be replaced in accordance with the 

requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, as determined by COE. 

The replaced wetlands may not duplicate the exact function and landscape 

features of the pre-mine wetlands. COE considers the type and function of 

each jurisdictional wetland that will be impacted and may require restoration 

of additional acres if the type and function of the restored wetlands will not 

completely replace the type and function of the original wetland. Replacement 

of non-jurisdictional and functional wetlands may be required by the surface 

land owner and/or WDEQ/LQD. WDEQ/LQD allows and sometimes requires 
Appendix E 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application E-13

mitigation of non-jurisdictional wetlands affected by mining, depending on the 

values associated with the wetland features. 

Within the BLM study area, there is no “critical” habitat designated by USFWS 

for T&E species. The following discussion describes species’ habitat 

requirements and their occurrence in the area of the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract and evaluates the potential environmental effects of implementing the 

Proposed Action or Alternative 1 on federal T&E species. 

E-4.1 Threatened Species 

E-4.1.1 Bald eagle (Haliaetus leucocephalus)

On February 14, 1978, the bald eagle was listed as endangered in all of the 

coterminous United States except Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Oregon, 

and Washington, where it was classified as threatened (43 F.R. 6233). The 

USFWS reclassified the bald eagle from endangered to threatened throughout 

its range in the lower 48 states on July 12, 1995 (60 F.R. 36000). The bald 

eagle was proposed for delisting on July 6, 1999 (64 F.R. 36454). On July 9, 

2007, the USFWS published a notice in the Federal Register removing the bald 

eagle in the lower 48 states from the list of endangered and threatened wildlife. 

The effective date for this action will be August 8, 2007. According to the 

Federal Register notice, the protections provided to the bald eagle under the 

Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act will 

continue to remain in place after delisting and USFWS has proposed a draft 

post-listing monitoring plan to detect the failure of the bald eagle to sustain 

itself without the protective measures of the ESA. 

Biology and Habitat Requirements: Adult bald eagles establish life-long pair 

bonds and nest primarily in remote areas free of disturbance, in large trees 

that are near rivers, lakes, marshes, or other wetland areas. In Wyoming, this 

species builds large nests in the crowns of large mature trees such as 

cottonwoods or pines. Typically, there are alternate nests within or in close 

proximity to the nest stand. Snags and open-canopied trees near the nest site 

and foraging areas provide favorable perch sites. This species is a common 

breeding resident in some areas of Wyoming (Luce et al. 1999 and USFWS 

2005b). 

Food availability is probably the single most important determining factor for 

bald eagle distribution and abundance (Steenhof 1976). Fish and waterfowl 

are the primary sources of food. Big game and livestock carrion, as well as 

rodents (e.g., ground squirrels, prairie dogs, etc.) also can be important dietary 

components where these resources are available (Ehrlich et al. 1988). Bald 

eagles are opportunistic foragers. They prefer to forage in areas with the least 

human disturbance (USFWS 1978, McGarigal et al. 1991). 
Appendix E 

E-14 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Bald eagles that have open water or alternate food sources near their nesting 

territories may stay for the winter; other eagles migrate southward to areas 

with available prey. During migration and in winter, eagles often concentrate 

on locally abundant food resources and tend to roost communally at night. 

Communal roosts usually are located in large mature trees, usually in secluded 

locations that offer protection from harsh weather. Large, live trees in 

sheltered areas provide a favorable thermal environment and help minimize the 

energy stress encountered by wintering eagles. Communal roosting also may 

facilitate food finding (Steenhof 1976) and pair bonding. Bald eagles often 

return to use the same nest and winter roost year after year (USFWS 2005b). 

Freedom from human disturbance is also important in communal roost site 

selection (Steenhof et al. 1980, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 1981, USFWS 

1986, Buehler et al. 1991). Continued human disturbance of a night roost 

may cause eagles to abandon an area (Hansen et al. 1981, Keister 1981). The 

proximity of night roosts to the other habitats required by wintering eagles, 

such as hunting perches and feeding sites, is important (Steenhof et al. 1980). 

Roosts may be several miles from feeding sites. The absence of a suitable roost 

may limit the use of otherwise suitable habitat. 

Existing Environment: Bald eagles are relatively common winter residents and 

migrants in northeastern Wyoming’s PRB. Qualified biologists with TWC 

conducted searches for bald eagle winter roosts and potential nesting habitat 

within the BLM study area for the LBA tract (the LBA tract as applied for and 

the additional area evaluated under Alternative 1) and a one-mile perimeter 

during 2004 (Figure E-3). No bald eagles, roosts, or potential nesting habitat 

were observed at that time. Over time, individual eagles have infrequently been 

seen during winter foraging within the one-mile survey area, or perched in 

cottonwood trees in residential windbreaks located in Sections 20 and 29, 

T.51N., R.72W., or in the cottonwood trees around an impoundment located in 

the NE1⁄4 of Section 32, T.51N., R.72W. However, no winter roost sites have 

been documented in the vicinity of the survey area during nearly 20 years of 

wildlife monitoring in that area for the Eagle Butte Mine, as well as the nearby 

Buckskin and Rawhide Mines. Additionally, there are no unique or 

concentrated sources of carrion or prey (including sheep ranching operations) 

in the survey area, so foraging bald eagles would not be attracted to the area in 

great numbers. A few isolated bald eagle nesting attempts have been recorded 

in the general region, but none have occurred within several miles of the survey 

area. 

Effects of the Proposed Project: Mining the federal coal lease included in the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, if the tract is leased under the Proposed 

Action or Alternative 1, may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect 

bald eagles. No suitable roosting habitat, known nest sites, or concentrated 

prey or carrion sources for bald eagles are present on the BLM study area for 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract and surrounding survey area. Use of the trees 

that are present in and around the BLM study area for the tract by eagles has 

been infrequent. 
Appendix E 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application E-15

Disturbance to nesting eagles can cause nest failure, nest abandonment, and 

unsuccessful fledging of young; however, no bald eagle nests are known to be 

present in the area and potential nesting habitat is not present. Bald eagle 

foraging habitat would be lost on the tract during mining and before final 

reclamation; however, the Eagle Butte Mine and Eagle Butte West LBA Tract 

areas do not provide any consistent, reliable or concentrated food sources for 

eagles. The loss of any potential foraging habitat would be short-term. 

Foraging habitat that is lost during mining would be replaced as reclamation 

continues on already mined out areas. Eagles may alter foraging patterns as 

they fly around areas of active mining activity. 

The potential for bald eagles to collide with or be electrocuted by electric power 

lines on the mine site would be minimal due to use of raptor-safe power lines, 

which is required under SMCRA (30 CFR 816.97). Use of roads accessing 

Eagle Butte Mine by mine-related traffic would continue when the Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract is mined, which would perpetuate the potential for vehiclewildlife collisions and the associated roadside carcasses. This could result in 

bald eagle foraging along roads in this area, which would perpetuate the 

potential for road kills of foraging bald eagles to occur. 

Cumulative Effects: Mineral development, including CBNG development, 

conventional oil and gas development, and surface coal mining, is a leading 

cause of habitat loss within the PRB. CBNG development in and adjacent to 

the LBA tract is extensive and has been ongoing since the late 1980s. Surface 

coal mining has been ongoing at the Eagle Butte Mine for 30 years. 

E-4.1.2 Ute ladies’-tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis)

Ute ladies’-tresses, a member of the orchid family, was listed as threatened on 

January 17, 1992 due to a variety of factors, including habitat loss and 

modification, hydrological modifications of existing and potential habitat areas, 

and invasion of exotic plant species. At the time of listing, Ute ladies’-tresses 

was only known from north-central Colorado, northern and south-central 

Utah, and southeastern Nevada. As of September 2005, it had also been found 

in western Nebraska, southeastern Wyoming, southwestern Montana, and 

north-central Washington, while new populations had been documented in 

northwestern Colorado and northern Utah (Fertig, et al. 2005). USFWS has 

determined that a petition to remove the Ute ladies’-tresses orchid from federal 

protection under the ESA provides substantial biological information to 

indicate that removal may be warranted. The petition was received from the 

Central Utah Water Conservancy District (USFWS 2004). 

Biology and Habitat Requirements: Ute ladies’-tresses is a perennial, 

terrestrial orchid with erect, glandular-pubescent stems 8 to 20 inches tall 

arising from tuberous-thickened roots. This species typically flowers from late 

July through August. The flowers are white or ivory and clustered into a spike 

at the top of the stem; however, depending on location and climatic conditions, 
Appendix E 

E-16 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

it may bloom in early July or still be in flower as late as early October (USFWS 

2005b). Plants probably do not flower every year and may remain dormant 

below ground during drought years. The total known population of this species 

is currently estimated to be 60,000 individuals (USFWS 2004). Occurrences 

range in size from one plant to a few hundred individuals. 

Ute ladies’-tresses has been found in a variety of habitats, including moist 

meadows associated with perennial stream terraces, floodplain and oxbows, 

seasonally flooded river terraces, subirrigated or spring-fed abandoned stream 

channels and valleys, and lakeshores. They have also been discovered along 

irrigation canals, berms, levees, irrigated meadows, excavated gravel pits, 

roadside barrow pits, reservoirs, and other human-modified wetlands. The 

elevation range of known occurrences is from 720-1,830 feet in Washington to 

7,000 feet in northern Utah (Fertig, et al. 2005). Soils where the orchid has 

been found typically range from fine silt/sand to gravels and cobbles, as well as 

to highly organic and peaty soil types. The Ute ladies’-tresses orchid is not 

found in heavy or tight clay soils or in extremely saline or alkaline soils and 

seems intolerant of shade. Small scattered groups are found primarily in areas 

where vegetation is relatively open (USFWS 2005b). The Ute ladies’-tresses 

orchid is commonly associated with horsetail, milkweed, verbena, blue-eyed 

grass, reedgrass, goldenrod, and arrowgrass. 

Populations are often dynamic and “move” within a watershed as disturbances 

create new habitat or succession eliminates old habitat (Fertig and Beauvais 

1999). The orchid is well adapted to disturbances from stream movement and 

is tolerant of other disturbances, such as grazing, that are common to 

grassland riparian habitats (USFWS 1995). Ute ladies’-tresses colonize early 

successional riparian habitats such as point bars, sand bars, and low-lying 

gravelly, sandy, or cobbley edges, persisting in those areas where the hydrology 

provides continual dampness in the root zone through the growing season. 

The orchid establishes in heavily disturbed sites, such as revegetated gravel 

pits, heavily grazed riparian edges, and along well-traveled foot trails on old 

berms (USFWS 1995). 

This species is known from four occurrences in Wyoming, within Converse, 

Goshen, Laramie, and Niobrara Counties, all discovered between 1993 and 

1997 (Fertig and Beauvais 1999). No occurrences have been recorded in 

Campbell County. 

Existing Environment: Areas of suitable habitat within the BLM study area for 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (the tract as applied for and the additional area 

evaluated under Alternative 1) were surveyed by Habitat Management, Inc. in 

August and September 2004 and in August 2005. Topographical and wetland 

delineation maps for the study area were reviewed to identify all significant 

drainages and potential habitat that may contain the orchid. 
Appendix E 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application E-17

Suitable habitat was traversed on foot during the time of actual flowering of the 

known population, and it involved walking entire lengths of the drainages 

documenting locations of potential habitat and searching for this species. 

No individuals of the Ute ladies’-tresses orchid were located during the 2004 

and 2005 surveys. Most of the land within the BLM study area for the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract is not potential Ute ladies’-tresses habitat. This includes 

highly disturbed or modified sites, upland habitat types, and sites inundated 

by standing water. Potentially suitable habitat within the study area is very 

limited and is mostly found along the CBNG-impacted bottomlands of Little 

Rawhide Creek and its tributaries. Suitable habitat factors included areas 

within and immediately adjacent to wet meadows, stream channels and 

floodplains, less steep stream banks, light soil texture and well drained soils 

having close lateral or vertical distance (within approximately 18 inches) to 

perennial water source during the flowering period, lack of plant competition, 

lack of general soil alkalinity/salinity, and current or historical management 

practices that did not promote overgrazing and extensive use of riparian areas. 

The quality of potential habitat in the survey area is poor for a number of key 

reasons: 

• The soils tend to be heavy and trend from moderately to very 

saline/sodic. The saline/sodic areas typically have monocultural stands 

of inland saltgrass (Distichlis spicata stricta) or foxtail barley (Hordeum 

jubatum). 

• Wet meadow habitat types are heavily colonized by aggressive 

rhizomatous graminoid plant species, including common spikerush 

(Eleocharis palustris), prairie cordgrass (Spartina pectinata), and western 

wheatgrass (Pascopyron smithii). These narrow riparian strips located 

between emergent aquatic vegetation and dry upland prairie are 

probably too dense and too shaded by tall vegetation to provide suitable 

habitat. 

• Surface discharge of groundwater associated with CBNG development, 

within and upstream of the study area has altered historic shallow 

groundwater and soil moisture conditions along all water courses, 

causing major shifts in plant community distributions. 

• Livestock grazing, particularly during the wetter times of the year, has 

impacted the quality of riparian areas. 

Effects of the Proposed Project: Mining the federal coal included in the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, if the tract is leased under the Proposed 

Action or Alternative 1, may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect 

Ute ladies’-tresses. There is limited potential suitable habitat for this species 

on the tract along the CBNG-impacted bottomlands of Little Rawhide Creek 

and its tributaries. However, the quality of the potential suitable habitat is 
Appendix E 

E-18 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

poor. Outside of the narrow riparian strips located along these impacted 

watercourses, potential suitable habitat is rare or non-existent in the surveyed 

area. Multiple surveys of the existing suitable habitat at the Eagle Butte Mine 

and other mines in this area have not found any Ute ladies’-tresses. Because 

of the ability of this species to persist below ground or above ground without 

flowering, single season surveys that meet the current USFWS survey 

guidelines may not detect populations. If undetected populations are present, 

they could be lost to surface disturbing activities. 

Cumulative Effects: Alterations of stream morphology and hydrology are 

believed to have extirpated Ute ladies’-tresses from most of its historical range 

(USFWS 2002). Disturbance and reclamation of streams by surface coal 

mining may alter stream morphology and hydrology. The large quantities of 

water produced with CBNG development and discharged on the surface may 

also alter stream morphology and hydrology. 

E-4.2 Endangered Species 

E-4.2.1 Black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes)

Biology and Habitat Requirements: The black-footed ferret is a federally-listed 

endangered species. The black-footed ferret historically occurred throughout 

Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Kansas, North and South 

Dakota, Montana, Wyoming, Nebraska, and Colorado. The last known wild 

population of black-footed ferrets was discovered in Meeteetse, Wyoming in 

1981. This population became decimated by canine distemper so the 

remaining individuals were captured and raised in protective captive breeding 

facilities in an effort to prevent the species’ extinction (Clark and Stromberg 

1987). In the early 1990s, captive-bred black-footed ferrets were released in 

the Shirley Basin in the first reintroduction of the species in North America. 

Recent survey efforts in the Shirley Basin have confirmed a self-sustaining 

black-footed ferret population at this former re-introduction site. The Forest 

Service has established a Black-Footed Ferret Habitat Management Area in the 

Thunder Basin National Grassland, located southeast of Wright, Wyoming, 

where they plan to reintroduce ferrets (USDA-FS 2002). 

The black-footed ferret, a nocturnally active mammal, depends almost entirely 

upon the prairie dog for its survival. Prairie dogs are the main food source of 

black-footed ferrets, and few ferrets have been collected away from prairie dog 

colonies. Ferrets may be present within colonies of white-tailed or black-tailed 

prairie dogs. The USFWS has determined that, at a minimum, potential 

habitat for the black-footed ferret must include a single white-tailed prairie dog 

colony of greater than 200 acres, or a complex of smaller colonies within a 4.3 

mile (seven kilometer) radius circle totaling 200 acres (USFWS 1989). 

Minimum colony size of black-tailed prairie dogs for ferrets is 80 acres (USFWS 

1989). 
Appendix E 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application E-19

The decline in ferret populations has been attributed to the reduction in the 

extensive prairie dog colonies that historically existed in the western United 

States. The three major impacts that have influenced black-tailed prairie dog 

populations are the initial conversion of prairie grasslands to cropland in the 

eastern portion of its range from approximately the 1880s through 1920s; 

large-scale control efforts conducted from approximately 1918 through 1972, 

when an Executive Order was issued banning the use of compound 1080; and 

the introduction of sylvatic plague into North American ecosystems in 1908 

(USFWS 2000). In Wyoming, this species historically occurred east of the 

Rocky Mountain foothills and may have occupied millions of acres (USFWS 

2000). The Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife estimated that there were 

approximately 49,000 remaining acres of black-tailed prairie dog colonies in 

Wyoming in 1961. USFWS recently estimated that about 125,000 acres of 

black-tailed prairie dog occupied habitat exists in Wyoming (USFWS 2000). 

Existing Environment: The Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is within the historical 

range of the black-footed ferret, although no black-footed ferrets are presently 

known to occur in northeastern Wyoming. During the 1980s, WGFD, in 

cooperation with other agencies, conducted searches for black-footed ferrets in 

Wyoming in the places they were most likely to be found, but these searches 

were not successful (Martin Grenier, personal communication, 10/14/2003). 

In a February 2, 2004 letter to interested parties, the USFWS declared that 

black-footed ferret surveys are no longer necessary in black-tailed prairie dog 

colonies within Wyoming. 

TWC has mapped the current acreage of prairie dog colonies in the vicinity of 

the Eagle Butte Mine by walking the perimeters of colonies and delineating 

them on topographic maps. No black-tailed prairie dog colonies are currently 

present on the BLM study area for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (the tract as 

applied for and the additional area evaluated under Alternative 1). One small 

town (approximately one acre in size) is located a little less than one and onehalf miles north of the northern edge of the tract as applied for and BLM’s 

preferred tract configuration for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (Figure E-3). 

No evidence of ferrets has been recorded during general or specific ferret 

surveys conducted from 1976 through 2005 by wildlife consultants for the 

Eagle Butte Mine and other mines in this area. 

Effects of the Proposed Project: Mining the federal coal included in the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, if a lease is issued under the Proposed Action 

or Alternative 1, would have no effect on black-footed ferrets. No blacktailed prairie dog colonies are currently present on or within about one and 

one-half miles of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for or BLM’s 

preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1. The black-footed ferret is 

almost entirely dependent on the prairie dog for survival. The reductions in 

black-tailed prairie dog populations due to poisoning prior to 1972 and due to 

recent plague outbreaks have reduced the potential for black-footed ferret 

survival in northeastern Wyoming. Searches of the best remaining black-footed 
Appendix E 

E-20 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

ferret habitat in Wyoming conducted in the 1980s were not successful in 

finding any ferrets. General wildlife surveys and specific ferret surveys have 

been conducted for many years at the Eagle Butte Mine, and at other mines in 

this area. No black-footed ferrets have ever been observed during these 

surveys. 

Cumulative Effects: Mineral development within black-tailed prairie dog 

colonies is a leading cause of ferret habitat loss in the PRB. Surface coal 

mining tends to have more intense impacts on fairly localized areas, while oil 

and gas development tends to be less intensive but spread over larger areas. 

Oil and gas development and mining activities have requirements for 

reclamation of disturbed areas as resources are depleted. In reclaimed areas, 

vegetation cover may differ from undisturbed areas. In the case of surface coal 

mines, re-established vegetation would be dominated by species mandated in 

the reclamation seed mixtures (to be approved by WDEQ). The majority of the 

approved plant species are native to the area; however, reclaimed areas may 

not serve ecosystem functions presently served by undisturbed vegetation 

communities and habitats, particularly in the short-term, when species 

composition, shrub cover, and other environmental factors are likely to be 

different. Shifts in habitat composition or distribution following reclamation 

could increase or decrease potential habitat for prairie dogs and associated 

habitat for black-footed ferrets. However, black-tailed prairie dogs have been 

recorded invading and establishing towns on reclaimed coal mined lands in 

northeastern Wyoming (IR 2005). 

Potential ferret habitat is also affected by other impacts to prairie dog 

populations. Plague can infect and eliminate entire prairie dog colonies. 

Poisoning and recreational prairie dog shooting may locally reduce prairie dog 

populations, but seldom completely eliminate colonies. 

E-5.0 SUMMARY OF DETERMINATIONS 

Table E-1 summarizes the determinations for federally listed T&E species in 

the area of the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract that may result from implementing 

the Proposed Action or Alternative 1. 

Table E-1. Effects Evaluation of Federal T&E Species in the Area of the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract. 

Status Species Common Name Potential Effects 

Threatened: Bald eagle May affect1

 Ute ladies’-tresses May affect1

Endangered: Black-footed ferret No effect1

1 Not likely to adversely affect individuals or populations. 
Appendix E 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application E-21

E-6.0 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND MITIGATION 

The issuance of a Federal coal lease grants the lessee the exclusive rights to 

mine the coal, subject to the terms and conditions of the lease. Lease 

ownership is necessary for mining federal coal, but lease ownership does not 

authorize mining operations. Surface coal mining operations are regulated in 

accordance with the requirements of the Surface Mining Control and 

Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA) and Wyoming State regulations. SMCRA 

gives the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) primary 

responsibility to administer programs that regulate surface coal mining 

operations and the surface effects of underground coal mining operations. 

Pursuant to Section 503 of SMCRA, the WDEQ developed, and in November 

1980 the Secretary of the Interior approved, a permanent program authorizing 

WDEQ to regulate surface coal mining operations and surface effects of 

underground mining on nonfederal lands within the State of Wyoming. In 

January 1987, pursuant to Section 523(c) of SMCRA, WDEQ entered into a 

cooperative agreement with the Secretary of the Interior authorizing WDEQ to 

regulate surface coal mining operations and surface effects of underground 

mining on federal lands within the state. In order to get approval of this 

cooperative agreement, the state had to demonstrate that the state laws and 

regulations are no less stringent than, meet the minimum requirements of, and 

include all applicable provisions of SMCRA. 

If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased, it would be a maintenance lease for 

the existing Eagle Butte Mine, which currently has both an approved Mineral 

Leasing Act of 1920 (MLA) mining plan and an approved Wyoming State mining 

and reclamation permit. In the case of maintenance leases, such as the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract, the existing MLA mining plan and State mining and 

reclamation plan must be amended to include newly leased areas before those 

areas can be mined. In order to amend the existing MLA mining plan and state 

mining and reclamation permit, the company would be required to submit a 

detailed permit application package to WDEQ before starting surface coal 

mining operations on any newly acquired lease. WDEQ/LQD would review the 

permit application package to insure the permit application complies with the 

permitting requirements and the coal mining operation will meet the 

performance standards of the approved Wyoming program. If the permit 

application package does comply, WDEQ would issue the applicant an 

amended permit that would allow the permittee to extend coal mining 

operations onto the newly acquired lease. 

Protection of fish, wildlife, and related environmental values is required under 

SMCRA regulations at 30 CFR 816.97, which state: 

“No surface mining activity shall be conducted which is likely to jeopardize 

the continued existence of endangered or threatened species listed by the 

Secretary of which is likely to result in the destruction or adverse 
Appendix E 

E-22 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

modification of designated critical habitats of such species in violation of the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended.” 

In addition to requiring the operator to minimize disturbances and adverse 

impacts on fish, wildlife, and related environmental values, the regulations at 

30 CFR 816.97 disallow any surface mining activity which is likely to 

jeopardize the continued existence of endangered or threatened species and 

require that the operator use the best technology currently available to 

minimize electrocution hazards to raptors; locate and operate haul and access 

roads to avoid or minimize impacts on important fish and wildlife species; and 

design fences, conveyors, and other potential barriers to permit passage of 

large mammals. Section 7 consultation would be required prior to approval of 

the mining and reclamation plan modification. Additional measures to ensure 

compliance with the ESA and SMCRA can be developed when the detailed 

mining plan, which identifies the actual location of the disturbance areas, how 

and when they would be disturbed, and how they would be reclaimed, is 

developed and reviewed for approval. At the leasing stage, a detailed mining 

and reclamation plan is not available for evaluation or development of 

appropriate mitigation measures specific to an actual proposal to mine. 

The following is a partial list of measures related to federally-listed species that 

are required as part of the mining and reclamation permits: 

• avoiding bald eagle disturbance; 

• restoring bald eagle foraging areas disturbed by mining; 

• using raptor safe power lines; and 

• surveying for Ute ladies’-tresses if habitat is present. 

E-7.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 

Existing habitat-disturbing activities in the PRB include surface coal mining; 

conventional oil and gas and CBNG development; uranium mining; sand and 

gravel, and scoria mining; ranching; agriculture; road, railroad, and power 

plant construction and operation; recreational activities; and rural and urban 

housing development. Mining, construction and agricultural activities, and 

urban development tend to have more intense impacts on fairly localized areas, 

while ranching, recreational activities, and oil and gas development tend to be 

less intensive but spread over larger areas. Oil and gas development and 

mining activities have requirements for reclamation of disturbed areas as 

resources are depleted. The net area of energy disturbance in the Wyoming 

PRB has been increasing. In the short term, this means a reduction in the 

available habitat for T&E plant and wildlife species. In the long term, habitat is 

being and will continue to be restored as reclamation proceeds. 

BLM is in the process of completing a regional technical study of current and 

proposed or potential development activity in the PRB to help the agency 

evaluate the impacts of coal development in the PRB. The Powder River Basin 
Appendix E 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application E-23

Coal Review consists of three tasks: Task 1 updates the BLM’s 1996 status 

check for coal development in the PRB, Task 2 develops a forecast of 

reasonably foreseeable development in the PRB through the year 2020, and 

Task 3 predicts cumulative impacts that would be expected to occur as a result 

of the projected development. The information about existing development in 

the following paragraphs is taken from the Powder River Basin Coal Review

Task 2 report (BLM 2005) and BLM lease records. The completed PRB Coal 

Review reports can be accessed at the BLM Wyoming website at 

http://www.blm.gov/wy/st/en/programs/energy/Coal_Resources/PRB_Coal/

prbdocs.html. 

The project area for Tasks 1 and 2 of the PRB Coal Review encompasses over 

eight million acres and includes all of Campbell, Sheridan, and Johnson 

Counties and the northern portion of Converse County in northeastern 

Wyoming. 

Oil and gas exploration and production have been ongoing in the PRB for more 

than 100 years. Conventional (non CBNG) oil and gas fields are, for the most 

part, concentrated in the central and southern parts of the structural basin. 

Development of the CBNG resources from the coal beds is a more recent 

occurrence, with CBNG production in the Wyoming PRB starting in the late 

1980s. As of 2003, an estimated 187,761 acres had been disturbed in the coal 

review project area as a result of oil and gas development activities, but 

approximately 115,045 acres of that disturbance has been reclaimed. This 

includes conventional oil and gas and CBNG wells and associated facilities and 

major transportation pipelines. 

BLM estimates that the existing federal coal leases in the Wyoming PRB 

include approximately 121,185 acres. The currently pending federal coal LBA 

tracts (including the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract) include approximately 

35,352 additional acres. The majority of the coal in the areas permitted for 

surface coal mining is federal, but some state and private leases are included 

within some of the existing mine permit areas. All of the current and proposed 

federal coal leases are concentrated near the outcrop of the Wyodak coal bed, 

which is located in eastern Campbell County and the extreme northeastern 

edge of Converse County. As of 2003, the baseline year for the PRB Coal 

Review, the surface coal mining operations along the Wyodak outcrop had 

disturbed approximately 68,794 acres. Approximately 24,097 of those acres of 

disturbance are occupied by “permanent” mine facilities, such as roads, 

buildings, coal handling facilities, etc., which are not available for reclamation 

until after coal mining operations end. Of the remaining 44,697 acres of 

disturbance available for reclamation, approximately 21,238 acres had been 

reclaimed. 

The Powder River Basin Coal Review identified an estimated 4,891 additional 

acres of coal-related development disturbance (i.e., coal-fired power plants, 

railroads, and coal technology projects) as of 2003. 
Appendix E 

E-24 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

The estimated total development-related disturbance in the Wyoming PRB in 

2003 was 264,704 acres. In addition to the coal and oil and gas development 

discussed above, this total includes other types of development disturbance, 

such as reservoirs and industrial fabrication firms, as well as public and 

private infrastructure, such as highways and roads, government buildings, and 

residential and commercial real estate development. It should be noted that 

some of these disturbances overlap one another. In such cases, the 

disturbance acreage is counted separately under each category, but is not 

counted twice in determining the total area of disturbance. 

Cumulative effects would also occur to T&E plant and wildlife resources as a 

result of indirect impacts. One factor is the potential import and spread of 

noxious weeds around roads and facilities. Noxious weeds have the ability to 

displace native vegetation and hinder reclamation efforts. Control of noxious 

weeds is addressed in surface coal mining and reclamation plans. If weed 

mitigation and preventative procedures are applied to all construction and 

reclamation practices, the impact of noxious weeds on T&E plants and wildlife 

would be minimized. 

In reclaimed areas, vegetation cover often differs from undisturbed areas. In 

the case of surface coal mines, re-established vegetation would be dominated 

by species mandated in the reclamation seed mixtures (to be approved by 

WDEQ). The majority of the species in the approved reclamation seed mixtures 

are native to the area; however, reclaimed areas may not serve ecosystem 

functions presently served by undisturbed vegetation communities and 

habitats. In the short-term in particular, species composition, shrub cover, 

and other environmental factors are likely to differ from pre-disturbance 

vegetation communities and habitats. Establishment of noxious weeds and 

alteration of vegetation in reclaimed areas has the potential to alter T&E plant 

and wildlife habitat composition and distribution. 

Potential adverse effects to listed and proposed species that have occurred and 

would continue to occur as a result of existing and potential future activities in 

the PRB would include direct loss of habitat, indirect loss of habitat due to 

human and equipment disturbance, habitat fragmentation, displacement of 

bald eagle prey species and the resultant change in bald eagle foraging, and 

mortality caused by equipment activities, motor vehicle collisions, power line 

collisions, and power line electrocution. The existing mines have developed 

mitigation procedures, as required by SMCRA (at 30 CFR 816.97) and Wyoming 

State regulations, to protect T&E species. These procedural requirements 

would be extended to include mining operations on the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract, if it is leased as proposed and after required detailed plans to mine the 

coal and reclaim the mined-out areas are developed and approved. 
Appendix E 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application E-25 

E-8.0 CREDENTIALS OF SURVEY PERSONNEL 

Thunderbird Wildlife Consulting of Gillette, Wyoming

Gwyn McKee

Ms. McKee obtained a Master of Science degree in Wildlife Ecology from the 

University of Missouri-Columbia. She has accumulated more than 18 years of 

professional experience, with the last eleven in Wyoming. Ms. McKee has skills 

that include planning and conducting surveys for a variety of terrestrial and 

aquatic species, summarizing data, and preparing technical reports for private, 

state, and federal agencies. Ms. McKee is considered qualified by all state and 

federal agencies to conduct T&E and other wildlife surveys within the region. 

Those qualifications include surveys for mountain plovers and their habitat, 

and certification by the USFWS to conduct black-footed ferret surveys. 

Kort M. Clayton

Mr. Clayton earned a Masters of Science degree in Biology from the University 

of Saskatchewan. He has been professionally involved with wildlife issues in 

the Northern Great Plains for over 12 years. Since 1998, Mr. Clayton has 

focused on wildlife inventories, clearances, impact analysis, mitigation, and 

applied research related to energy developments in the PRB of Wyoming and 

Montana. Those experiences include surveys for most vertebrate taxa in the 

region, sage-grouse research, raptor mitigation projects, and clearance surveys 

for several federally listed species. 

Habitat Management, Inc. of Gillette, Wyoming 

Wayne Erickson

Mr. Erickson received his B.S. in Forest Biology and Botany from Colorado 

State University and has accumulated over 30 years of field experience in 

vegetation and rare plant surveys. 

Mr. Erickson’s T&E plant survey experience includes: 

• T&E plant species survey, Ancho Mine, York Canyon Complex, Colfax 

County, NM (1995); 

• T&E plant species survey, Gauchapin-Brackett Mine, York Canyon 

Complex, Colfax County, NM (1996); 

• T&E plant species survey, Buckskin Mine, Campbell County, WY (1999); 

• T&E plant species survey, Eagle Butte Mine, Campbell County, WY 

(2003); 

• T&E plant species survey, Eagle Butte Mine, Campbell County, WY 

(2004); 

• T&E plant species survey, Bar W Ranch, Carrizozo, Lincoln County, NM 

(2004); and 

• T&E plant species survey, ERM/Enogex Pipeline (90 miles in Western 

Colorado and Eastern Utah), 2005. 
Appendix E 

E-26 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

Mr. Erickson’s familiarity with Spiranthes diluvialis includes: 

• Observation of flowering populations in Jefferson County, Colorado, 

1998-present; 

• Conducting Spiranthes diluvialis survey, Home Depot Development, 

Northglenn, CO (1998); 

• Conducting Spiranthes diluvialis survey, Buckskin Mine, Hay Creek 

Amendment, Campbell County, WY (1999 & 2004); 

• Conducting Spiranthes diluvialis survey, Eagle Butte Mine, Eagle Butte 

West Amendment, Campbell County, WY (2004-2005); 

• Conducting Spiranthes diluvialis survey, School Creek Mine, School 

Creek Amendment, Campbell County, WY (2005); and 

• Conducting Spiranthes diluvialis survey, ERM/Enogex Pipeline (90 miles 

in Western Colorado and Eastern Utah), 2005. 

Richard Bonine

Mr. Bonine received his B.S. in Agronomy with concentration in range and 

plant science from Kansas State University and has accumulated over 14 years 

of field experience in vegetation surveys. 

Mr. Bonine’s familiarity with Spiranthes diluvialis includes: 

• Study of several taxonomic texts to gain understanding of the identifying 

characteristics and habitat of the species. 

• Research of known locations of the species in Wyoming. 

• Conducting Spiranthes diluvialis survey, Eagle Butte Mine, Eagle Butte 

West Amendment, Campbell County, WY (2004-2005). 
Appendix E 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application E-27 

E-9.0 REFERENCES AND LITERATURE CITED 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 2001, Approved Resource Management 

Plan (RMP) for Public Lands Administered by the Bureau of Land 

Management, Buffalo Field Office, Buffalo, Wyoming. 

, 2004, Final Environmental Impact Statement for the West Hay Creek 

Coal Lease Application, June 2004, Casper Field Office, Casper, 

Wyoming. 

, 2005, Task 2 Report for the Powder River Basin Coal Review, Past, 

Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Development Activities. Prepared 

for BLM Casper Field Office, Casper, Wyoming, by ENSR Corporation, 

Fort Collins, Colorado, October 2005. 

Buehler, D.A., T.J. Mersmann, J.D. Fraser, and J.K.D. Seegar, 1991, Nonbreeding bald eagle communal and solitary roosting behavior and roost 

habitat on the northern Chesapeake Bay. Journal of Wildlife 

Management 55(2): 273-281. 

Clark, T.W., and M.R. Stromberg, 1987, Mammals in Wyoming. University of 

Kansas, Museum of Natural History. 

Ehrlich, P.R., D.S. Dobkin, and D. Wheye, 1988, The Birder’s Handbook: A 

Field Guide to the Natural History of North American Birds. Simon and 

Schuster, New York. 

Fertig, W., and G. Beauvais, 1999, Wyoming Plant and Animal Species of 

Special Concern. Unpublished report. Wyoming Natural Diversity 

Database, Laramie, Wyoming. 

Fertig, W., R. Black and P. Wolken, 2005, Rangewide status review of Ute 

ladies’-tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis). Report prepared for the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service and Central Utah Water Conservancy District, 

September 30, 2005. 

Foundation Coal West, Inc. (FCW), 2005, Eagle Butte Mine Permit, WDEQ/LQD 

Surface Mine Permit 428-T5, approved November 1, 2005. On file with 

WDEQ in Sheridan and Cheyenne, Wyoming. 

Grenier, Martin, Wyoming Game and Fish Department, personal 

communication with Nancy Doelger, BLM Casper Field Office, October 

14, 2003. 

Hansen, A.J., M.V. Stalmaster, and J.R. Newman, 1981, Habitat 

characteristics, function, and destruction of bald eagle communal roosts 

in western Washington. In R.L. Knight, G.T. Allen, M.V. Stalmaster, and 
Appendix E 

E-28 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

C.W. Servheen, eds. Proceedings of the Washington bald eagle 

symposium. The Nature Conservancy, Seattle, Washington, 254 pp. 

Intermountain Resources (IR), 2005, WWC Engineering’s personal 

communication with Jim Orpet, December 13, 2005. 

Keister, G.P., 1981, Characteristics of winter roosts and populations of bald 

eagles in Klamath Basin. M.S. Thesis. Oregon State University, Corvallis, 

82 pp. 

Luce, B., A. Cerovski, B. Oakleaf, J. Priday, and L. Van Fleet, 1999, Atlas of 

Birds, Mammals, Reptiles, and Amphibians in Wyoming. Wyoming 

Game and Fish Department, Wildlife Division, Cheyenne, Wyoming. 

McGarigal, K., R.G. Anthony, and F.B. Isaacs, 1991, Interactions of humans 

and bald eagles on the Columbia River estuary. Wildlife Monograph 

115:1-47. 

Steenhof, K., 1976, The ecology of wintering bald eagles in southeastern South 

Dakota. M.S. Thesis. University of Missouri, Columbia, 148 pp. 

Steenhof, K., S.S. Berlinger, and L.H. Fredrickson, 1980, Habitat use by 

wintering bald eagles in South Dakota. Journal of Wildlife Management 

44(4): 798-805. 

University of Wyoming, 2001, Data search for species listed with the Wyoming 

Natural Diversity Database. Letter and computer printouts from A.J. 

Fedder to G. McKee (TWC), dated April 16, 2001. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture-Forest Service (USDA-FS), 2002, Supplemental 

Information Report disclosing changes to black-tailed prairie dog habitat 

within proposed management area 3.63 of the Thunder Basin National 

Grassland Plan resulting from the 2001 Sylvatic plague outbreak. 

January 14, 2002. 

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 1981, A survey of wintering bald eagles and their 

habitat in the Lower Missouri Region. Denver, Colorado, 96 pp. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 1978, Management of wintering bald 

eagles. FWS/OBS-78/79. Washington, D.C., 59 pp. 

, 1986, Recovery plan for the Pacific bald eagle. Portland, Oregon, 160 

pp. 

, 1989, Black Footed Ferret Survey Guidelines for Compliance with the 

Endangered Species Act. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver, 

Colorado and Albuquerque, New Mexico. 
Appendix E 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application E-29

, 1995, Ute ladies’-tresses draft recovery plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Denver, Colorado, 46 pp. 

, 2000, 12-month finding for a petition to list the black-tailed prairie dog 

as threatened. Federal Register 65(24): 5476-5488. 

, 2002, Biological and Conference Opinion for the Powder River Basin Oil 

and Gas Project, Campbell, Converse, Johnson, and Sheridan Counties, 

Wyoming, Cheyenne, Wyoming, 51 pp. 

, 2004, Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; 90-day finding 

on a petition to delist the Ute ladies’-tresses orchid and initiation of a 5-

year review. Federal Register 69(196): 60605-60607. 

, 2005a, Letter from Brian Kelly, USFWS, Field Supervisor, USFWS 

Wyoming Field Office, Cheyenne, Wyoming, to Bill Boger, Eagle Butte 

Mine, Gillette, Wyoming, dated April 7, 2005. 

, 2005b, Memorandum from Brian Kelly, Field Supervisor, USFWS 

Wyoming Field Office, Cheyenne, Wyoming, to Nancy Doelger, BLM, 

Casper Field Office, Casper, Wyoming, dated July 26, 2005. 
APPENDIX F 

BLM SENSITIVE SPECIES EVALUATION FOR THE 

EAGLE BUTTE WEST COAL LEASE APPLICATION EIS 
Appendix F 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application F-1 

BLM SENSITIVE SPECIES EVALUATION

INTRODUCTION

BLM Wyoming has prepared a list of sensitive species to focus species 

management efforts towards maintaining habitats under a multiple use 

mandate. The authority for this policy and guidance comes from the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA), as amended; Title II of the Sikes Act, as 

amended; the Federal Land Policy Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA) (43 U.S.C. 

1716); and the Department Manual 235.1.1A (BLM 2001). 

The goals of the sensitive species policy are to: 

• Maintain vulnerable species and habitat components in functional BLM 

ecosystems. 

• Ensure sensitive species are considered in land management decisions. 

• Prevent a need for species listing under the ESA. 

• Prioritize needed conservation work with an emphasis on habitat. 

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Under the Proposed Action, BLM will hold a lease for the federal coal lands in 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract as applied for or Alternative 1 (see Figure 2-1 

and the land descriptions in Section 2.1 of this EIS). It is assumed that the 

applicant for the tract, FCW, would be the successful bidder and that the tract 

would be mined as a maintenance lease for the existing Eagle Butte Mine. The 

surface estate on the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract includes all privately owned 

lands. 

SPECIES OCCURRENCE AND HABITAT DESCRIPTIONS

Sensitive species were listed for the BLM Buffalo Field Office within its range. 

Some sensitive species could or do occur within the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract. Specialized habitat requirements (i.e., caves, cliffs, calcareous rock 

outcrops) make occupation for other sensitive species unlikely. Table F-1 lists 

BLM sensitive species, summarizes their habitat requirements, and indicates if 

they have been observed on or around the tract. Additional information on 

occurrences of these species on the tract can be found in Section 3.10 of this 

EIS or in the supplemental information document for this EIS, which is 

available on request. 
Appendix F 

 F-2 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease ApplicationTable F-1. BLM Sensitive Species for the Buffalo Field Office and Habitat Requirements and Observations on Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract. 

Common Name (scientific name) Habitat Observed on Eagle Butte West LBA Tract Amphibians Northern leopard frog (Rana pipiens) Beaver ponds, permanent water in plains and foothills Yes, incidental siting during wildlife surveys Spotted frog (Ranus pretiosa) Ponds, sloughs, small streams ----1 BirdsBaird’s sparrow (Ammodramus bairdii) Grasslands, weedy fields No Brewer’s sparrow (Spizella breweri) Basin-prairie shrub Common Breeder Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) Grasslands, basin-prairie shrub Recent Common Breeder Ferruginous hawk (Buteo regalis) Basin-prairie shrub, grasslands, rock outcrops Historic Breeder Greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) Basin-prairie shrub, mountain-foothill shrub Common Breeder Loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) Basin-prairie shrub, mountain-foothill shrub Yes, uncommon Long-billed curlew (Numenius americanus) Grasslands, plains, foothills, wet meadows No, rare spring migrant Mountain Plover (Charadrius montanus) Shortgrass/midgrass grasslands, basin-prairie shrubs No Northern goshawk (Accipiter gentilis) Conifer and deciduous forests ----1 Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) Cliffs No, incidental siting during wildlife surveys at Eagle Butte Mine Sage sparrow (Amphispiza billneata) Basin-prairie shrub, mountain-foothill shrub No Sage thrasher (Oreoscoptes montanus) Basin-prairie shrub, mountain-foothill shrub No, rarely observed at the Eagle Butte Mine during wildlife surveys Trumpeter swan (Cygnus buccinator) Lakes, ponds, rivers ----1 White-faced ibis (Plegadis chihi) Marshes, wet meadows ----1 Yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) Open woodlands, streamside willow and alder groves No 
Appendix F 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application F-3 Table F-1. BLM Sensitive Species for the Buffalo Field Office and Habitat Requirements and Observations on Eagle Butte 

West LBA Tract (Continued).

Common Name (scientific name) Habitat Observed on Eagle Butte West LBA Tract FishYellowstone cutthroat trout (Oncoryhynchus clarki) Cold water streams and lakes ----1 MammalsBlack-tailed prairie dog (Cynomys ludovicianus) Shortgrass/midgrass grasslands No prairie dog towns on tract Fringed myotis (Myotis thysanodes) Conifer forests, woodland chaparral, caves and mines ----1 Long-eared myotis (Myotis evotis) Conifer and deciduous forest, caves and mines ----1 Spotted bat (Euderma maculatum) Cliffs over perennial water, basin-prairie shrub ----1 Swift fox (Vulpes velox) Grasslands No Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) Forests, basin-prairie shrub, caves and mines ----1 PlantsPorter’s sagebrush (Artemisia porteri)

Sparsely vegetated badlands of ashy or tufaceous mudstone and clay slopes; 5,300 to 6,500 ft 

----1 

William’s wafer parsnip (Cymopterus williamsii)

Open ridgetops and upper slopes with exposed limestone outcrops or rockslides; 6,000 to 8,300 ft 

----1

1 Habitat generally lacking or very limited
Appendix F 

F-4 Final EIS, Eagle Butte Mine Coal Lease Application

REFERENCES AND LITERATURE CITED

Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 2001, BLM Wyoming Sensitive Species 

Policy and List April 9, 2001, available on the Internet as of June 2005: 

<http://www.blm.gov/nph/efoia/wy/2001im/Wy2001-040atch1.pdf>. 
APPENDIX G 

CBNG WELLS CAPABLE OF PRODUCTION 

ON OR IN SECTIONS ADJACENT TO THE 

EAGLE BUTTE WEST LBA TRACT
Appendix G 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application G-1 

 

Eagle Butte Coal LBA Area 

Productive Coalbed Natural Gas Wells 

Adjacent Twelve-Section Area 

Secs. 16-33, T. 51 N., R. 72 W. 

 

API 

Number 

(Short) Company Well Name/No. Location 

WOGCC 

Status 

Cumulative 

Production 

Gas 

(MCF) 

Cumulative

Production

Water 

(BBL) 

530177 Continental Industries LC Rawhide No. 5-17 SW1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.17 PG 7703 144 

530208 Continental Industries LC Rawhide No. 4-17 NW1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.17 PG 4513 613504 

538918 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Echo No. 13-17-A SW1⁄4 SW1⁄4 Sec.17 PG 126351 183949 

541497 Continental Industries LC Rawhide No. 2-17 NW1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.17 PS 6161 56861 

529930 Continental Industries LC Rawhide Butte No. 15-18 SW1⁄4 SE1⁄4 Sec.18 PG 172450 1020952 

530007 Continental Industries LC BTP 5172 No. 10-18 NW1⁄4 SE1⁄4 Sec.18 PS 237811 223284 

530008 Continental Industries LC BTP 5172 No. 11-18 NE1⁄4 SW1⁄4 Sec.18 PG 113711 645935 

530009 Continental Industries LC BTP 5172 No. 12-18 NW1⁄4 SW1⁄4 Sec.18 PS 497641 587896 

530048 Continental Industries LC Wagensen-Rawhide No. 1-18 NE1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.18 PG 20656 44781 

530298 Continental Industries LC Rawhide Fee No. 11-18B NE1⁄4 SW1⁄4 Sec.18 PS 90251 1268850 

530410 Continental Industries LC Rawhide No. 14-18 SE1⁄4 SW1⁄4 Sec.18 PG 374378 282291 

530416 Continental Industries LC Rawhide No. 13-18 SW1⁄4 SW1⁄4 Sec.18 PG 168977 251561 

530528 Continental Industries LC Rawhide No. 2-18 NW1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.18 PG 33084 28843 

530529 Continental Industries LC Rawhide No. 3-18 NE1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.18 PG 80708 44970 

530530 Continental Industries LC Rawhide No. 4-18 NW1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.18 PG 194341 79424 

530531 Continental Industries LC Rawhide No. 5-18 SW1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.18 PG 145650 155725 

530532 Continental Industries LC Rawhide No. 6-18 SE1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.18 PG 23992 65496 

530533 Continental Industries LC Rawhide No. 7-18 SW1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.18 PG 6601 10821 

533916 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Echo No. 16-19-A SE1⁄4 SE1⁄4 Sec.19 PG 79793 1885481 

535631 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Echo No. 02-19-A NW1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.19 PG 12632 1405848 

535632 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Echo No. 01-19-A NE1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.19 PG 22543 153686 

535640 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Echo No. 15-19-A SW1⁄4 SE1⁄4 Sec.19 PG 118981 1301703 

537065 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Echo No. 10-19-A NW1⁄4 SE1⁄4 Sec.19 PG 19509 573942 

537066 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Echo No. 07-19-A SW1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.19 PG 9181 1046142 

537987 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Echo No. 11-19-A NE1⁄4 SW1⁄4 Sec.19 PG 26222 243093 

537989 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Echo No. 9-19-A NE1⁄4 SE1⁄4 Sec.19 PG 16717 882690 

545272 Devon Energy Production Co. 20 Mile Federal No. 12A-1912 SW1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.19 PG 31539 27871 

545273 Devon Energy Production Co. 20 Mile Federal No. 14A-1912 SW1⁄4 SW1⁄4 Sec.19 PG 50226 63730 

545274 Devon Energy Production Co. 20 Mile Federal No. 21C-1912 NE1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.19 PG 23571 119069 

529514 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Echo No. 7-20 SW1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.20 PG 128104 298880 

529515 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Echo No. 3-20 NE1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.20 PG 261009 64770 

529559 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. 

Rawhide Vandekoppell No. 4-

20 NW1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.20 PG 186591 1016005 

529615 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Echo Deq No. 2002 SW1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.20 PG 374992 428890 

531604 Continental Industries LC Wings No. 14-20 SE1⁄4 SW1⁄4 Sec.20 PG 8566 128808 
Appendix G 

G-2 Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application

537064 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Echo No. 6-20-A SE1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.20 PG 63313 233185 

537988 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Echo No. 12-20-A NW1⁄4 SW1⁄4 Sec.20 PG 2593 1065028 

538919 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Echo No. 13-20-A SW1⁄4 SW1⁄4 Sec.20 PG 5862 0 

546628 Continental Industries LC Wings No. 11-20 NE1⁄4 SW1⁄4 Sec.20 PG 16092 98743 

531606 Continental Industries LC Wings No. 3-29 NE1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.29 PG 3472 159293 

540370 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Airport No. 29-34 SW1⁄4 SE1⁄4 Sec.29 PS 1320 0 

546620 Continental Industries LC Wings No. 14-29 SE1⁄4 SW1⁄4 Sec.29 PG 248 137555 

546621 Continental Industries LC Wings No. 13-29 SW1⁄4 SW1⁄4 Sec.29 PG 25556 94693 

546622 Continental Industries LC Wings No. 10-29 NW1⁄4 SE1⁄4 Sec.29 PG 94 210651 

546623 Continental Industries LC Wings No. 7-29 SW1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.29 PG 453 452585 

546624 Continental Industries LC Wings No. 4-29 NW1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.29 PG 0 57246 

546659 Continental Industries LC Wings No. 6-29 SE1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.29 PG 120 32226 

529741 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Walls No. 3 SE1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.30 PG 321315 3114856 

529789 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Walls No. B-1-B SE1⁄4 SE1⁄4 Sec.30 PG 329010 968077 

529838 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Walls No. DC-10 SW1⁄4 SE1⁄4 Sec.30 PG 486024 1918261 

529839 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Walls No. 747 NE1⁄4 SE1⁄4 Sec.30 PG 55808 2482596 

529857 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Red Baron No. 1 NE1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.30 PG 412706 4187674 

530592 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Walls No. 30-32 SW1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.30 PG 9054 2675667 

541850 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Walls No. 30-12-A SW1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.30 PS 353686 622977 

541899 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Walls No. 30-22-A SE1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.30 PS 157561 124828 

541906 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Walls No. 30-14-A SW1⁄4 SW1⁄4 Sec.30 PS 465444 676503 

541918 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Walls No. 30-11-A NW1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.30 PS 240863 541888 

541919 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Walls No. 30-31-A NW1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.30 PS 33940 1450553 

541921 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Walls No. 30-21-A NE1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.30 PS 3869 64114 

542002 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Walls No. 30-23-A NE1⁄4 SW1⁄4 Sec.30 PS 74829 139983 

540567 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Barbour No. 31-44 SE1⁄4 SE1⁄4 Sec.31 PS 270584 1079080 

540568 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Barbour No. 31-34 SW1⁄4 SE1⁄4 Sec.31 PS 114950 763101 

540569 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Barbour No. 31-33 NW1⁄4 SE1⁄4 Sec.31 PS 231669 790487 

541681 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Walls No. 31-22-A SE1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.31 PS 40536 139191 

541683 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Walls No. 31-12-A SW1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.31 PS 262952 233142 

542063 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Walls No. 31-11-A NW1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.31 PS 356159 290179 

542064 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Walls No. 31-41-A NE1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.31 PS 2334 161783 

542065 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Walls No. 31-42-A SE1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.31 PS 25252 185220 

542318 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Walls No. 31-31A NW1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.31 PS 1135 116822 

543434 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Walls No. 31-32-A SW1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.31 PG 15086 214027 

546625 Continental Industries LC Wings No. 13-31 SW1⁄4 SW1⁄4 Sec.31 PG 144203 17863 

546626 Continental Industries LC Wings No. 12-31 NW1⁄4 SW1⁄4 Sec.31 PG 78504 2027 

546919 Continental Industries LC Wings No. 9-31 NE1⁄4 SE1⁄4 Sec.31 PG 5427 311287 

529939 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Federal No. 727 NW1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.32 PG 594764 923851 

540366 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Airport No. 32-42 SE1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.32 PG 129341 672238 

540367 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Airport No. 32-21 NE1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.32 PG 70313 1080816 

540369 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Airport No. 32-31 NW1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.32 PG 6408 97844 
Appendix G 

Final EIS, Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application G-3 

540371 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Airport No. 32-33 NW1⁄4 SE1⁄4 Sec.32 PG 32761 1342525 

540372 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Airport No. 32-32 SW1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.32 PG 11942 1177969 

540999 Rocky Mountain Gas Inc. Airport No. 32-41-A NE1⁄4 NE1⁄4 Sec.32 PG 167073 754036 

546916 Continental Industries LC Wings No. 12-32 NW1⁄4 SW1⁄4 Sec.32 PG 53855 74393 

550614 Continental Industries LC Wings No. 5-32R SW1⁄4 NW1⁄4 Sec.32 PG 22727 91158 

Status Code: PG = Producing Gas Well, PS = Pumping Submersible. 

Well data from WOGCC, May, 2005 

 D. McGarry Oct., 2005
APPENDIX H

AIRPORT ISSUES












APPENDIX I

COMMENT LETTERS ON THE DRAFT EIS 

AND RESPONSES























Responses to Comment Letter 1

B. Sachau

Comment Response 1: Air emissions, including nitrogen dioxide emissions, 

are regulated and monitored. As discussed in Section 3.4.3.3 of the Final and 

Final EIS documents, the Eagle Butte Mine mining permit includes conditions 

regarding procedures that the mine must follow when conducting blasting 

operations. These procedures are designed to control or limit both emissions of 

nitrogen dioxide and public exposure to nitrogen dioxide. 

As discussed in Section 3.11, the coal is owned by the federal government but 

the surface of the land included in the tract under the BLM’s preferred tract 

delineation is owned by the applicant for the coal lease, not by the state or the 

federal government. 

Comment Response 2: The statements in the EIA regarding impacts to 

wildlife as a result of surface coal mining are based on monitoring that has 

been and continues to be required and has been conducted for more than 20 

years in this area. 

The relocation of raptor nests that will be impacted by surface coal mining is a 

requirement of the raptor monitoring and mitigation plan for each mine. 

Approval by the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the Wyoming Department of 

Environmental Quality is required before mining can occur within buffer zones 

of active raptor nests. Territorial occupancy and nest productivity are 

monitored annually. Raptor nest relocations have been successfully conducted 

by the Eagle Butte Mine and by other mines in the area. 

The Wyoming Game and Fish Department reviewed monitoring data on big 

game species in and around the mine sites in the Powder River Basin in 1999 

and concluded that the monitoring indicated a lack of impacts to big game on 

existing mine sites. No severe mine-caused mortalities had occurred and no 

long-lasting impact to big game had been noted on existing mine sites. 

Comment Response 3: Lands that are disturbed to recover coal must be 

reclaimed following mining in accordance with the requirements of state and 

federal law. The mines are required to post substantial bonds to cover the cost 

of reclamation; the final reclamation bond is not released until a minimum of 

10 years has elapsed after the reclaimed area is seeded with a final seed 

mixture. Reestablished vegetation would be dominated by species mandated in 

the reclamation seed mixtures, which would be approved by the Wyoming 

Department of Environmental Quality. The majority of the approved species 

are native to the LBA tract. After reclamation the reclaimed lands support the 

same uses as they did before mining. 

Recently, one of the coal mines and the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation signed 

an agreement to create a Conservation Easement for wildlife on lands that were 

mined for coal and reclaimed in the Powder River Basin. Wyoming Game and 
Fish Department has designated about 1,000 of the reclaimed land as crucial 

winter elk habitat. 

Response to Comment Letter 3

Wyoming Game and Fish Department

Thank you for providing information to improve the accuracy of the document. 

We have made the changes you recommended. 

Response to Comment Letter 4

Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality

We have incorporated the information that you provided into the Air Quality 

section of the EIS. 

Response to Comment Letter 5

Gayle and Ginny Nannemann

Comment Response 1: Figure 3-8 has been corrected to show multiple 

dwellings in Section 8, T. 50 N., R. 72 W. 

Comment Response 2: SMCRA and Wyoming state law require surface coal 

mine operators to provide the owner of a water right whose water source is 

interrupted, discontinued, or diminished by mining with water of equivalent 

quantity and quality. 

Comment Response 3: The mines are required to conduct long-term air 

quality modeling to show that their proposed operations will comply with the 

National and Wyoming Ambient Air Quality Standards, and they are required to 

monitor to demonstrate that their actual air emissions do not exceed the 

standards. In the case of the Eagle Butte Mine, the mine permit includes 

specific blasting control measures that the mine must use to control blasting 

emissions. 

Comment Response 4: Blasting by surface coal mines is conducted in 

accordance with Chapter 6 of the Wyoming Department of Environmental 

Quality Rules and Regulations. These regulations establish vibration 

standards that have been developed to protect buildings and other structures 

such as pipelines and bridges. The Eagle Butte Mine’s blasting program is 

designed to comply with these regulations and has not exceeded the vibration 

standards designed to protect these structures. Home owners can request preblast surveys, which can be used to verify damage that occurs after blasting 

begins. 

Response to Comment Letter 6

Powder River Basin Resource Council

Comment Response 1: Alternative 1 of the EIS identifies a study area, 

consisting of the tract as applied for and adjacent unleased federal coal. The 
BLM generally considers providing for more efficient coal recovery, increasing 

competitive interest in the tract, reducing the potential that federal coal will be 

bypassed, and comments received in the Final EIS in identifying a preferred 

tract delineation, which is identified in the final EIS. The regulations at 43 

CFR 3425.1-9 state: “The authorized officer may add or delete lands from an 

area covered by an application for any reason he/she determines to be in the 

public interest.” As a result, under Alternative 1, BLM could select a preferred 

tract delineation that would either enlarge or reduce the size of the tract as 

applied for. 

BLM’s preferred tract configuration under Alternative 1, which is discussed in 

Section 2.2 and shown in Figure 2-2 of the final EIS, is to add approximately 

30 acres to the northeast corner of the tract as applied for. BLM did not 

reduce the size of the tract because the tract as applied for is configured to 

allow recovery of the federal coal while maintaining the required setback 

distances for conducting blasting operations established by WDEQ/LQD for 

safety purposes. BLM contacted the WDEQ/LQD to ask if these setback 

distances would be maintained if the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased and 

mined. The WDEQ/LQD has indicated that, if the tract is leased, permit 

conditions designed to control or limit public exposure to NO2 and flyrock from 

blasting operations would be no less stringent than the permit conditions for 

the existing Eagle Butte Mine. There may be coal included in the tract that is 

considered mineable under the current permit conditions, but would not be 

considered mineable and would not be recoverable under more stringent permit 

conditions. 

Comment Response 2: Additional information regarding the airport’s 

concerns, expressed during the scoping process, is included in Appendix H of 

the final EIS. The FAA is included on the mailing list and was provided with a 

copy of the Final EIS and will be provided with a copy of the Final EIS. 

Comment Response 3: The Final EIS did incorrectly make the statement that 

there have been no reported events of public exposure to NO2 from blasting 

activities at the Eagle Butte Mine. The Final EIS did, however, identify that 

residents in the area had brought concerns about blasting practices at the 

Eagle Butte Mine to the Environmental Quality Council and that control 

measures to limit public exposure to NO2 from blasting had been instituted at 

the mines following those complaints. The statement about reported events 

has been corrected in the final EIS. 

According to WDEQ/LQD, since these control measures were implemented, 

they have received one report of an orange-tinged blasting cloud at the mine, 

but no visible NO2 fumes were reported to have left the mine permit area 

during that incident. 

Comment Response 4: The final EIS (Sections 3.4.2.2.1, 3.4.3.2.1, and 

3.14.2.1) identifies that the distance between the area that would be mined in 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (as applied for or under BLM’s preferred tract 

configuration) and the occupied dwellings and the airport would be similar to, 
and not less than, the distance between the federal coal that has previously 

been recovered from the existing Eagle Butte Mine leases and the dwellings and 

airport. It also identifies that the distance between the coal that would be 

mined in the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract (as applied for or under BLM’s 

preferred tract configuration) would be closer to Rawhide Elementary School 

than the federal coal included in any of the existing Eagle Butte Mine leases. 

As discussed above, the WDEQ/LQD has indicated that, if the tract is leased, 

permit conditions designed to control or limit public exposure to NO2 and 

flyrock from blasting operations would be no less stringent than the permit 

conditions for the existing Eagle Butte Mine. 

Section 3.4.3.2.1 identifies potential conditions that could lead to increased 

NO2 emissions and Section 3.4.3.3 identifies the measures that are used to 

reduce NO2 emissions during blasting. 

Comment Response 5: The Final and final EISs identify that BLM received 

comments from local residents indicating that blowing dust from operations at 

the Eagle Butte Mine has affected air quality around their residences and that 

they have concerns about dust impacts in the future (Section 3.4.2.2.1). 

Additional information about potential threats to health from particulate 

matter is included in the final EIS. 

The Final and final EIS identify measures that are required and are in place to 

control particulate emissions at the Eagle Butte Mine (Section 3.4.2.3). If the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased, measures specific to mining operations 

on the tract will be determined during the permitting process, however, the 

measures listed in Section 3.4.2.3 are representative of the types of control 

measures that are required at the Powder River Basin mines. There have been 

no monitored exceedances of the 24-hour or annual PM10 Wyoming Ambient Air 

Quality Standards at the Eagle Butte Mine. PM10 monitors located at the active 

mines in the Wyoming Powder River Basin are now required by WDEQ/AQD to 

sample air quality for a 24-hour period every three days. 

Projected cumulative impacts to air quality from all sources, including coal 

mining coal plants, conventional and CBNG development, and other sources, 

as well as projected impacts to Class I airsheds, are discussed in Chapter 4, 

Section 4.2.3. The measures that Wyoming Department of Environmental 

Quality, Air Quality Division has implemented or is proposing to implement to 

prevent exceedances of the National and Wyoming Ambient Air Quality 

Standards by surface coal mines is discussed in Chapter 3, Section 3.4.2.3. 

Comment Response 6: Additional information about mercury and CO2

emissions, which are addressed in Section 3.18, has been added to the final 

EIS. The information that the applicant (Foundation Coal West) provided to 

BLM during preparation of this EIS indicates that they plan to produce the coal 

included in the LBA tract at currently permitted levels using existing 

production and transportation facilities if the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is 

leased and mined as proposed. As a result, leasing the Eagle Butte West LBA 
Tract under the Proposed Action or Alternative 1 should not be expected to 

result in increased or new emissions of mercury or CO2 from coal-fired power 

plants; however, as stated in Section 3.18, mining operations would be 

extended if the tract is leased. 

Approximately 51.1 percent of electric power in the United States is provided 

by coal, and the Wyoming Powder River Basin produced about 37.6 percent of 

the coal used for power generation in 2005. Given this reliance on coal as a 

source of electric power, if a carbon tax is enacted, it is likely that it will have to 

be phased in to avoid disruptions in the power supply. Coal could also be 

needed to power new types of coal-fired power plants designed to reduce 

emissions in the future. As a result, if a carbon tax is enacted, it is not likely 

that it would affect demand for the coal included in the Eagle Butte West LBA 

Tract. 

Comment Response 7: The Final EIS describes the projected drawdown in 

the coal and overburden aquifers (Section 3.5.1.2.1), acknowledges that private 

water supply wells in this area have been impacted by past surface coal mining 

as well as CBNG development (Section 3.5.3.2.1), identifies the non-mine 

groundwater and surface water rights that would potentially affected if the 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased and mined (Section 3.5.3 of the Final and 

Final EIS and the Supplementary Information Document), and identifies that 

there is a regulatory requirement for surface coal mine operators to provide the 

owner of a water right whose water source is interrupted, discontinued, or 

diminished by mining with water of equivalent quantity and quality (Section 

3.5.3.3). 

Water use in Gillette and the surrounding area is discussed in Sections 

3.17.5.1 and 4.2.12.7. If the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased, Foundation 

Coal West does not project any increases in employment or production rates in 

order to recover the coal in the tract. Therefore, there would be no projected 

additional demands on Gillette’s water supply capacity or projected increased 

use of water by the mine under the Proposed Action or Alternative 1, but the 

existing levels of employment and water use would be extended for a longer 

period of time. 

Comment Response 8: Elk are addressed in Section 3.10.2 of the EIS. 

Although isolated elk sightings have been reported in the area of the proposed 

Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department 

classifies this area as being outside of the normal elk use range, and big game 

surveys conducted in this area support this classification. 

Comment Response 9: The occurrence of sage grouse and the status of the 

sage grouse leks in this area is described in the Final and final EIS in Section 

3.10.5 and Figure 3-14 of the Final and final EIS shows the locations and 

status of the leks in this area. There are no active leks on the LBA tract itself 

but there are three active leks within three miles of the tract. Sagebrush is a 

component of both the Sagebrush/Grassland and Agricultural Pasture 2 

vegetation communities, which occupy about 40 percent of the vegetation 
analysis area. The only documented presence of sage-grouse broods from 1993 

to 2002, when specific brood surveys were conducted, occurred three miles 

northeast of the LBA tract as applied for or BLM’s preferred tract configuration 

under Alternative 1. 

Response to Comment 7

Environmental Protection Agency

Comment Response 1: While the air quality modeling conducted for the 

Powder River Coal Review does indicated a potential for cumulative impacts to 

exceeds the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for PM10, it does not 

project exceedances of any increments under the PSD regulations. As is noted 

in the Final and final EIS, the modeling analysis did not separate PSD 

increment-consuming sources from those that do not consume increment. The 

PSD-increment comparison is provided for information purposes only and 

cannot be directly related to a regulatory interpretation of PSD increment 

consumption. 

The impacts of mining the coal are considered in the Eagle Butte West Coal 

Lease Application EIS because it is a logical consequence of issuing a 

maintenance lease to an existing mine, however, BLM’s issuance of a lease for 

the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract does not authorize mining operations on that 

lease. If a lease is issued for Eagle Butte West LBA Tract, the lessee would be 

required to file a permit application package with the Wyoming Department of 

Environmental Quality-Land Quality Division (WDEQ/LQD) and the Office of 

Surface Mining (OSM) for a surface mining permit and approval of the Mineral 

Leasing Act mining plan prior to mining the tract. A new coal mine or a 

modification to an existing mine must also be permitted by the WDEQ Air 

Quality Division (AQD) under Chapter 6, Section 2 of the Wyoming Air Quality 

Standards and Regulations (WAQSR) and must demonstrate that the proposed 

mining operations will comply with all applicable aspects of WAQSR. The 

mitigation measures that would be required to control air emissions would be 

developed at that time, based on an analysis of a detailed site-specific mining 

and reclamation plan. 

According to the WDEQ/AQD, the circumstances associated with the 

monitored exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 standard in the Powder River 

Basin prior to 2007 provided adequate reason to believe that high wind events 

and blowing dust have caused exceedances of the ambient air quality 

standards that otherwise would not have occurred. In response to the 

measured exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 ambient air quality standards and 

in anticipation of conditions that would potentially lead to future exceedances, 

the WDEQ/AQD has collaborated with the Wyoming Mining Association to 

develop a Natural Events Action Plan for the coal mines of the Powder River 

Basin, based on EPA Natural Event Policy guidance. A report describing the 

plan has been submitted to EPA. Additional information regarding the plan 

and the proposed measures that would be implemented as a part of the plan, 

as well as the dust control measures that are considered to be Best Available 
Control Measures is described in the Air Quality section (specifically Sections 

3.4.2.1.1 and 3.4.2.3) of the Final EIS. 

Comment Response 2: Mitigation measures for air quality impacts and the 

strategy proposed by WDEQ/AQD to address mining-related air quality 

impacts are identified in Sections 3.4.2.3 and 3.4.3.3 of the EIS. As indicated 

in the response to your comment letter in the Final Environmental Impact 

Statement for the Maysdorf Coal Lease Application, BLM is considering 

scheduling a federal and state agency briefing on the status of the PRB Coal 

Review. The main topics of that briefing would be an update on the status of 

the Powder River Basin Coal Review water and air quality modeling analyses 

and the database for tracking development activities. This might provide an 

opportunity to set up a meeting as suggested in your comment letter. Please 

advise us if you schedule such a meeting to discuss additional source and 

fugitive dust control in the PRB. 

Comment Response 3: The EIS identifies control measures that are in place 

to minimize public exposure to particulates and NO2. The specific mitigation 

and monitoring measures that will be required for operations on the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract will be determined during the permitting process, which 

is when mining operations on the tract will be authorized. BLM contacted the 

Land Quality Division (LQD) of the WDEQ regarding conditions that would be 

included in the mining permit if the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract is leased and 

mined. WDEQ/LQD indicated that, if the tract is leased, permit conditions 

designed to control or limit public exposure to NO2 and flyrock from blasting 

operations would be no less stringent than the permit conditions for the 

existing Eagle Butte Mine. 

Detailed Comments by the Region 8 Environmental Protection Agency

Air Quality 

Sections 3.4.1.1.1 and 4.2.3 have been revised to include the requirement to 

implement “Best Available Work Practice” mitigation measures that is part of 

the 1994 Memorandum of Agreement. 

As discussed above, WDEQ/AQD believes that exceedances of the 24-hour 

PM10 standard that have been measured in the Powder River Basin are related 

to high wind events. In response, the WDEQ/AQD has collaborated with the 

Wyoming Mining Association to develop a Natural Events Action Plan for the 

coal mines of the Powder River Basin, based in EPA Natural Event Policy 

guidance, which includes measures to prevent future exceedances. 

Information about the Natural Events Action Plan and associated measures is 

included in the Final Environmental Impact Statement. 

The Natural Events Action Plan currently proposed by WDEQ/AQD only 

includes measures for control of coal mine sources since it is the ambient 

monitoring systems around the large surface coal mines that have recorded the 

exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS. If it is demonstrated that there are 
non-coal sources contributing to elevated measurements in an area of concern, 

WDEQ/AQD indicated that they may address these additional sources 

separately from the proposed Natural Events Action Plan or as a future update 

of the plan. 

The statement about the National Ambient Air Quality Standards has been 

revised in the final EIS. 

Proximity to Residences and Elementary School

As discussed above, the specific control measures for blasting operations on 

the Eagle Butte Mine would be developed during the permitting process, when 

mining operations are authorized. The Eagle Butte Mine has never conducted 

cast blasting operations and, according to the applicant, they do not plan to 

conduct cast blasting in the future. 

According to WDEQ/LQD, since the current blasting restrictions were 

implemented, they have received one report of an orange-tinged blasting cloud 

at the mine, but no visible NO2 fumes were reported to have left the mine 

permit area during that incident. As indicated above, BLM contacted 

WDEQ/LQD to ask if blasting restrictions would be maintained if the Eagle 

Butte West LBA Tract is leased and mined. WDEQ/LQD indicated that, if the 

tract is leased, permit conditions designed to control or limit public exposure to 

NO2 and flyrock from blasting operations would be no less stringent than the 

permit conditions for the existing Eagle Butte Mine. 

Wetlands

Restoration of jurisdictional wetlands is required and consultation with the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers would be completed during the permitting 

process. There are special required permitting procedures to assure that after 

mining there will be no net loss of wetlands. 

Noxious Weeds 

There are few occurrences of noxious weeds in the mine areas, because 

WDEQ/LQD rules and regulations require surface coal mine operators to 

control and minimize the introduction of noxious weeds, in accordance with 

federal and state requirements. The mining and reclamation plan for the 

existing Eagle Butte Mine includes steps to control invasion from such species 

and the mining and reclamation plan for the Eagle Butte West LBA Tract would 

also include steps to control invasion from such species. 

A list of the plants that the State of Wyoming has designated as noxious weeds 

is included in Section 4.2.7.3. Campbell County does not have a declared 

county list of weeds. 
Response to Comment 8

Bill Boger, Foundation Coal West 

The information provided in your comment letter has been considered in the 

preparation of the final EIS.