1

Foidel Creek Mine

Federal Coal Lease COC54608 Modification

Mining Plan Modification

Finding of No Significant Impact

Routt County, Colorado

May 2017

United States Department of the Interior

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

Program Support Division 

1999 Broadway, Suite 3320 Denver, CO 80202 

PH: 303-293-5000 FAX: 303-293-5032
2

Introduction

On March 17, 2015, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE) 

Western Region determined that Permit Revision (PR) 10, a mining plan modification to Federal

Coal Lease COC54608 to include Wolf Creek Reserve development and mining at Peabody’s, 

Twentymile Coal Company, LLC’s (TC), Foidel Creek Mine, would require a federal mining plan 

decision document (MPDD). Under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as 

amended, OSMRE has completed an environmental review of the Bureau of Land 

Management’s (BLM) environmental assessment (EA) completed in December, 2015, that 

analyzed the environmental effects of the modification to Federal Coal Lease COC54608. The 

BLM gave the EA the following tracking number DOI-BLM-CO-N010-2014-0044-EA. OSMRE is 

adopting the EA for use in the preparation of the MPDD for PR-10. TC currently operates the 

Foidel Creek Mine which is an underground longwall coal mine located about 20 miles 

southwest of Steamboat Springs in Routt County, Colorado. TC has been mining at the Foidel 

Creek Mine by underground methods since 1983. The Foidel Creek Mine is made up of 6 

federal coal leases, private coal leases, and state coal leases and produces approximately 6

million tons of coal per year.

The mining plan modification to Federal Coal Lease COC54608 proposes to add 310 acres of 

federal coal, within the Wolf Creek seam, under privately owned surface at the TC Foidel Creek 

Mine. The Wolf Creek seam is located below the Wadge seam. It is estimated that the federal 

coal reserves included in the lease modification would total approximately 340,000 recoverable 

tons of high volatile, group B, bituminous coal and would extend the life of the mine by 

approximately one to two years. There would be no new or additional surface disturbance; 

BLM’s unsuitability criteria apply only to surface coal mining, and therefore are not applicable for 

this proposed lease modification.

Federal Coal Lease COC54608 was originally issued in February 1996, for 2,600 acres of coal 

within the Wadge seam. Recovery of the Wadge seam within Federal Coal Lease COC54608

occurred from June 1996 to September 2001. In August 2002, mining of the Wadge seam coal 

within COC54608 was completed; therefore, TC relinquished 2,280 acres of lease COC54608. 

TC retained 320 surface acres of lease COC54608 for access to their continued mining 

operations. TC completed mining operations in the Wadge seam on other authorized federal, 

State, and private leases within the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) 

permit boundary, issued by the state of Colorado Division of Reclamation and Mining Safety 

(CDRMS) in June 2016. 

On January 8, 2015, TC submitted PR-10 to CDRMS to add approximately 40.7 million tons of 

coal within the Wolf Creek seam to their SMCRA permit C-1982-056. Then on July 8, 2015, TC 

submitted PR-11 which amended PR-10. PR-11 requested access to 40.4 million tons of fee 

and state coal from the 40.7 million tons of fee, state, and federal coal originally requested in 

PR-10. PR-10 now contains approximately 340,000 tons of federal coal within the Wolf Creek 

seam. CDRMS approved PR-11 on March 30, 2016. There is no federal action for PR-11 

because the coal is private beneath private land, therefore, a MPDD was not required for PR11. The PR-11 mining plan, as currently approved, would result in the loss of some State and 

private coal due to the need to truncate longwall panels in order to bypass the federal coal in 

COC54608. In the event that the mining plan modification is not approved, TC would re-visit the 
3 

PR-11 mine plan, modify the mining plan to optimize development and maximize recovery of the 

remaining mineable and recoverable reserves of the private and state coal, and submit the 

revised mining plan as a new Permit Revision for review by CDRMS. TC anticipates that a 

modified development plan (truncated panels at the permit boundary and gate roads along the 

permit boundary) and possibly retreat mining would be utilized to maximize conservation and 

recovery of the coal resource, so that any loss of the associated State and private coal would be 

negligible.

Statement of Environmental Significance

OSMRE has adopted BLM’s EA (DOI-BLM-CO-N010-2014-0044-EA). OSMRE determined that 

the proposed mining plan modification to add 310 acres of federal coal under privately owned 

surface land at the TC Foidel Creek Mine to the approved mining plan would not constitute a 

major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment within the 

meaning of the NEPA. OSMRE was a cooperator in the preparation of the BLM’s EA. Pursuant 

to 30 CFR Part 746, OSMRE is recommending selection and approval of the Proposed Action 

Alternative. The undersigned person has determined that approval of a federal mining plan 

modification authorizing the continuation of mining operations for approximately one to two 

years would not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment under 

section 102(2)(C) of the NEPA, 42 USC 4332(2)(C).

Reasons for a Finding of No Significant Impact

The purpose of the action is established by the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 (MLA) and SMCRA, 

which requires the evaluation of TC’s Permit Application Package (PAP) submitted by TC to the 

CDRMS. Before TC may conduct underground mining and reclamation operations within the 

Federal Coal Lease COC54608 modification, federal approval of the mining plan modification 

must be granted. According to 30 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 746, OSMRE is the 

agency responsible for making a recommendation to the Assistant Secretary for Land and 

Minerals Management (ASLM) to approve, disapprove, or approve with conditions the proposed 

mining plan modification. The ASLM will decide whether the mining plan modification is 

approved, disapproved, or approved with conditions. The need for the action is to provide the 

opportunity for TC to exercise its valid existing rights granted under Federal Coal Lease 

COC54608 to extract coal from TC’s leased federal coal under the MLA. The Proposed Action 

to approve the mining of the coal within Federal Coal Lease COC54608 and contribute to 

continued operations for approximately one to two additional years.

As the federal agency responsible with the decision-making authority regarding a 

recommendation for the proposed mining plan modification under the MLA, OSMRE reviewed 

BLM’s EA for adoption. BLM initially signed its Decision Record for the lease modification on

December 31, 2015. That decision was appealed to the Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA)

and the IBLA remanded it to BLM on procedural grounds. See WildEarth Guardians, IBLA 2016-

80. After the IBLA remanded the lease modification decision, the BLM examined the EA and 

determined the analysis was adequate. As evidence of this examination, BLM prepared a 

determination of NEPA adequacy and an errata to the EA correcting a percentage calculation
4 

for greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs). BLM also issued a new finding of no significant impact 

and, on December 21, 2016, BLM issued a new Decision Record also signed by the Deputy 

State Director (DSD). WildEarth Guardians immediately appealed BLM’s decision to the IBLA

(Interior Board of Land Appeals No. 2016-0080). This administrative appeal does not challenge 

the adequacy of BLM’s EA. Additionally, WildEarth Guardians did not request and the IBLA did 

not issue a stay of the decision. Therefore, the BLM’s decision is effective and the EA is final. 

For these reasons, 40 CFR 1506.3(d) does not apply. Accordingly, OSMRE will proceed with 

the adoption. 

As part of the adoption process, OSMRE reviewed the EA for consistency with OSMRE's NEPA 

Implementing Procedures and prepared a determination of NEPA adequacy. BLM's 

environmental analyses are consistent with the resource categories and general level-of-detail 

that OSMRE evaluates in its EAs and specific topics are summarized in the following 

paragraphs. OSMRE notes that potential noise impacts were not analyzed in the EA or

identified in Table 1 of the EA. OSMRE reviewed the PAP for PR-10, which requests the 

inclusion of Federal Coal Lease COC54608 modification into SMCRA permit C-1982-056, 

allowing TC access to 340,000 tons of federal coal within the Wolf Creek seam. OSMRE found

that there will be no substantial noise impacts resulting from the Proposed Action. The PAP

states that the current maximum production rate is approved at 12 million tons per year, 

however due to market projections the maximum production rate the mine is likely to reach is 6 

million tons per year. Additionally, the average production rate of 9 million tons per year is 

anticipated to be reduced to 2.5 to 3.5 million tons per year based on market estimates. 

Therefore, noise generated from operations at the surface facilities is not anticipated to 

increase, and could potentially decrease. Also, noise generated from existing portals, existing 

main entries, and existing ventilation structures are not anticipated to change from current 

operations. As noted in the EA (page 50), there are no proposed changes to the surface 

facilities. Additionally, any potential noise impacts to employees attributed to mining operations 

would be regulated by the Mine Safety and Health Administration. 

The Proposed Action would modify the mining plan to authorize mining of a probable maximum 

of approximately 340,000 tons of federal coal. No additional surface disturbance is planned. The 

Proposed Action would extend mining at Foidel Creek for one to two years. 

The EA’s analysis and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) conclusions regarding the 

federal coal, which is under OSMRE jurisdiction, did not change due to PR-11. Subsequent to 

publication of the BLM December 31, 2015 Decision Record and FONSI and issuance of the 

Lease Modification, the CDRMS approved PR-10 on June 15, 2016.

The No Action Alternative would not approve the mining plan modification. The 340,000 tons of 

federal coal would be bypassed and the life of mine would not be extended for an additional one 

to two years. Production would end with depletion of the existing recoverable reserves. 

Reclamation operations would commence and continue until TC’s obligations for reclamation 

under SMCRA and the federal lease terms were met.
5 

The EA considers a reasonable range of alternatives and in conjunction with the previously 

completed NEPA reviews, discloses the potential environmental effects. These reviews provide 

sufficient evidence and support for a FONSI. 

The undersigned has determined that the public involvement requirements of NEPA have been 

met through the NEPA process and publication of the BLM EA. The BLM EA is publicly 

available on their website at: 

https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front-office/eplanning/projectSummary.do?methodName=render 

DefaultProjectSummary&projectId=41852 

OSMRE published the unsigned FONSI to the public for a 15-day review period from February 

13th, 2017 to February 27th, 2017. OSMRE mailed letters to 33 stakeholders including 

individuals, state, and federal agencies. OSMRE mailed letters to 114 tribal contacts including 

Tribal Historic Preservation Officers based on the Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic 

Preservation directory of tribes with historic ties to Colorado. Public notices were published in 

two local newspapers, the Steamboat Pilot & Today and the Craig Daily Press. OSMRE 

received a total of 7,443 comment submissions. The majority of the comment submissions were 

part of a form letter campaign from WildEarth Guardians. Of the 7,443 comment submissions, 

OSMRE determined that 263 comments included unique text for comment processing. Of the 

263 unique comments, 5 comment submissions were determined to be substantive. Those 

comments and OSMRE’s responses are included in Appendix A. 

Additional form letters from the WildEarth Guardians’ campaign were received after the close of 

the comment period and were not included as part of the total count.

Additionally, OSMRE posted the unsigned FONSI to the Western Region’s website, soliciting 

public comments on the unsigned FONSI until February 27, 2017. 

This finding is based on determining the significance as defined by the context and intensity 

found in 40 CFR 1508.27 of effects from the Proposed Action.

a) Context. This means that the significance of an action must be analyzed in several

contexts such as society as a whole (human and national), the affected region, the

affected interests, and the locality. Significance varies with the setting of the

Proposed Action. For instance, in the case of a site-specific action, significance

would usually depend upon the effects in the locale rather than in the world as a

whole. Both short- and long-term effects are relevant.

The Proposed Action would meet demand for coal and continue mine operations through at 

least 2033 by: 

• Securing a federal mining plan modification approval authorizing mining of leased

federal coal; and,

• Continuing to mine, process, and ship (via rail and truck) coal to customers in need of

coal.
6 

Approval of the Proposed Action is a site-specific action that would not cause any additional 

acres of disturbance. Under the No Action Alternative, production would end with depletion of 

the existing recoverable reserves as early as 2029 and reclamation would commence. The 

effects of the action have been analyzed at the local and regional scale. 

b) Intensity. This refers to the severity of impact. Responsible officials must bear in

mind that more than one agency may make decisions about partial aspects of a

major action. The following should be considered in evaluating intensity.

OSMRE has considered the 10 Significance Criteria in the federal regulations at 40 CFR 

1508.27 in evaluating the severity of impacts.

1. Impacts that may be both beneficial and adverse.

Beneficial and adverse impacts from the Proposed Action are described in the adopted EA. 

There are no ground disturbing activities associated with the Proposed Action. Controlled 

subsidence (i.e. the land surface lowered as a result of mining) would occur over the longwall 

panels. The maximum predicted subsidence above the longwall panels under the Proposed 

Action is 64 inches for overburden thickness of 1,000 feet. OSMRE has determined that effects 

from subsidence would not impact wildlife habitat, cultural resources, surface water, and 

groundwater.

Additional particulate matter, gaseous emissions, and hazardous air pollutants would be emitted 

for the additional mine life, but at the same levels emitted from the current mining operation and 

within Clean Air Act permitted limits (EA Section 3.1.1). Additionally, the Proposed Action would 

result in operations continuing only for approximately an additional one to two years and are 

considered negligible and short term. 

The direct and indirect effects to special status animal species, solid minerals, cultural 

resources, paleontological resources, hazardous or solid wastes, social and economic 

conditions, ground and surface hydrology have been determined by OSMRE to be negligible or 

result in no impact (EA Sections 3.1.2 – 3.1.9). 

Stipulations included in the lease reduce potential short-term and long-term impacts to 

topography, air quality, water resources, vegetation, fish and wildlife, threatened and 

endangered species, cultural resources, visual resources, and soils. Additionally, the air permit 

includes measures to reduce impacts on air quality.

The Proposed Action would result in minor beneficial economic impacts. The extension of 

mining operations would extend the annual payroll, local expenditures, and taxes and royalty 

payments for approximately one to two years. 

None of the environmental effects from the Proposed Action discussed in the EA have been 

determined by OSMRE to be significant. 

2. The degree to which the Proposed Action affects public health or safety.
7 

Effects from the Proposed Action that could affect health and safety are traffic, air quality, water 

quality, and noise. Impacts on Transportation and Access were not analyzed because the 

Proposed Action would occur on private land and would not result in impacts to public roadways 

or access points. Air and water impacts of the Proposed Action are discussed in the EA in 

Sections 3.1.1, 3.1.8, and 3.1.9, respectively. OSMRE has determined that impacts on air 

quality are negligible (see 1 above); impacts on water would be minor to negligible and short 

term; and underground mining would not produce noise effects and therefore is not analyzed in 

the EA. 

3. Unique characteristics of the geographic area such as proximity to historic or cultural

resources, park lands, prime farm lands, wetlands, wilderness, wild and scenic

rivers, or ecologically critical areas.

There are no parklands, prime farmlands, wild and scenic rivers, wetlands, or ecologically 

critical areas within the project area (Table 1 in the EA). Inventories of historic or cultural 

resources have been completed, which identified three sites within or adjacent to the lease 

modification boundary. Subsidence that could be caused by underground mining of the Wolf 

Creek seam is not anticipated to affect cultural resources. OSMRE has completed consultation 

with the Colorado State Historical Preservation Office. 

4. The degree to which the impacts on the quality of the human environment are likely

to be highly controversial.

As a factor for determining within the meaning of 40 CFR 1508.27(b)(4)—whether or not to 

prepare a detailed environmental impact statement—“controversy” is not equated with “the 

existence of opposition to a use.” Northwest Environmental Defense Center v. Bonneville Power 

Administration, 117 F.3d 1520, 1536 (9th Cir. 1997). The term ‘highly controversial’ refers to 

instances in which “a substantial dispute exists as to the size, nature, or effect of the major 

federal action rather than the mere existence of opposition to a use.” Hells Canyon Preservation 

Council v. Jacoby, 9 F.Supp.2d 1216, 1242 (D. Or. 1998). 

The EA has analyzed the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of greenhouse gas emissions 

and the potential for the alternatives to contribute to climate change. OSMRE has determined 

that these impacts are negligible since the proposed action would have an extremely short 

duration (approximately one to two years). No other anticipated effects have been identified that 

are scientifically controversial. Mining and reclamation approved under federal mining plans and 

mining plan modifications has been conducted in the area for several decades. 

5. The degree to which the possible effects on the human environment are highly

uncertain or involve unique or unknown risks.

OSMRE has determined that there are no effects on the human environment that are highly 

uncertain or involve unique or unknown risks. OSMRE has experience implementing similar 

actions in similar areas. 
8 

6. The degree to which the action may establish a precedent for future actions with

significant effects or represents a decision in principal about future consideration.

This decision is not precedent setting. The issues considered in the EA were developed by the 

BLM within the context of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions. Significant 

cumulative impacts are not anticipated. 

7. Whether the action is related to other actions with individually insignificant but

cumulatively significant impacts – which include connected actions regardless of land

ownership.

The EA evaluated the possible issues in context of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

actions, including the Foidel Creek Mine operation, the transport of coal from the mine, the 

combustion of that coal, and ranching, recreation and other mines in the cumulative effects 

analysis area. The indirect GHGs from coal combustion mined annually from the Foidel Creek

Mine were disclosed in the EA (Section 4.3.1). OSMRE determined that there were no 

significant cumulative effects identified. 

8. The degree to which the action may adversely affect districts, sites, highways,

structures, or other objects listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of

Historic Places or may cause loss or destruction of significant scientific, cultural, or

historical resources.

Inventories of historic or cultural resources have been completed, which identified three sites 

within or adjacent to the lease modification boundary. Subsidence that could be caused by 

underground mining of the Wolf Creek Seam is not anticipated to affect cultural resources. 

OSMRE has completed consultation with the Colorado State Historical Preservation Office.

9. The degree to which an action may adversely affect a threatened or endangered

species or its habitat that has been determined to be critical under the Endangered

Species Act of 1973.

Formal Section 7 consultation was completed February 29, 2016 with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (FWS) for the Proposed Action. The BLM prepared a Biological Assessment, in which 

OSMRE was a cooperator, and is included as Attachment A in the EA. The BLM determined 

that the Proposed Action “may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect” the yellow-billed 

cuckoo and the lineage greenback cutthroat trout. In addition, the Proposed Action is not likely 

to destroy or adversely modify proposed critical habitat for the Yellow-billed Cuckoo. In the 

Biological Opinion (BO) (TAILS 06E24100-2016-F-0107), the FWS concurred with these 

determinations. 

A “may affect, likely to adversely affect” determination was found for the four Colorado River 

Fish. However, in the FWS’s BO, it is the Service’s conclusion that the Proposed Action is not 

likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the four endangered fish. In addition, the 

Proposed Action is not likely to destroy or adversely modify any of the critical habitats 

designated for the four endangered fish.
9 

10. Whether the action threatens a violation of a federal, state, local, or tribal law, 

regulation, or policy imposed for the protection of the environment, where nonfederal requirements are consistent with federal requirements. 

The Proposed Action would not violate any known federal, state, local, or tribal law or 

requirement imposed for the protection of the environment. The Proposed Action is consistent 

with applicable plans, policies, and programs.