TONIGHTS AGENDA Open n house se 5:00 to 5:30 Presen enta tatio - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TONIGHT’S AGENDA

Open n house se 5:00 to 5:30 Presen enta tatio tion 5:30 to 6:00 Workshop shop 6:00 to 7:30 Questio stions ns and Answer ers 7:30 to 8:00

1

Resolution Copper Project and Land Exchange EIS

ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOPS

Neil Bosworth – Forest Supervisor Tom Torres – Deputy Forest Supervisor Mary Rasmussen – Project Manager

2

Tonight’s Presentation

    

Project Decision Framework Project Status and Scoping Results Alternatives Development Process Criteria for Screening Alternatives Purpose of Tonight’s Workshop

3



Proj roject ect Purpo rpose se and d Ne Need d

The Tonto National Forest is preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Resolution Copper Project and Land Exchange:

 To consider approval of a proposed plan of operations submitted

by Resolution Copper, which would govern surface disturbance on Forest Service lands from mining operations that are reasonably incident to extraction, transportation, and processing of copper and molybdenum.

 To exchange lands between Resolution Copper and the United

States as directed by Section 3003 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 2015 (NDAA).

4



Na National nal Envir ironm nmental ntal Policy icy Ac Act t (NE NEPA) A)

As part of NEPA process, the Forest Service is required to:

 Involv

• lve

e the e pu public blic to identify issues and concerns surrounding the proposed action (sco copin ping) g)

 Develop

elop technically nically feasib sible le altern ernat ativ ives es to address the identified issues and concerns

 Analy

lyze ze and d co compare mpare for

• res

esee eeable able impa pacts cts under der each altern ernat ativ ive e to make an equitable and informed decision

5

6

For

• rest Servic

ice NE NEPA A Proces rocess s for for EIS

Scopin ing Alterna nati tives es Development elopment Draft t EIS Final EIS/D /Draft Decision ision Obje jecti ction n Period Final Recor

• rd of Deci

cision sion

COMPLETED

Winter er 2017 – Summer er 2017

Summer 2017 – Summer 2019 Fall 2019 – Spring 2020 Spring 2020 – Summer 2020

Fall 2020

Publ blic ic Scopi ping ng

 March 2016 – July 2016

Five public meetings, 120-day comment period 133,653 letter submittals received

 

 99% Form Letters

1,237 Unique Letters 6,948 individual comments identified

 

 Scoping Report published and available for download

March 10th at www.ResolutionMineEIS.us

SCOP OPING ING Alter ernativ atives Draf aft t EIS Final al EIS/D /Draft t Dec ecision ision Object jectio ion Perio iod Final al Dec ecis isio ion

7



Publ blic ic Concern rn Topi pics cs

Socioeconomic effects (both beneficial and adverse) Subsidence at Oak Flat Threats to public health and safety Impacts to surface and groundwater Impacts to tribal cultural resources Impacts to scenery resources and open spaces Impacts to biological resources, wildlife habitat Loss of recreational access and opportunities Location tion of Tailings ilings St Storage rage Facility ility

       

SCOP OPING ING Alter ernativ atives Draf aft t EIS Final al EIS/Dr /Draft t Dec ecision ision Object jectio ion Perio iod Final al Dec ecis isio ion

8

Spe pecif ific ic Publ blic ic Concerns rns

Tailin ings gs Storage ge Facil ilit ity y Locat ation: ion:

• Investigate alternate tailings storage facility locations, including:
• Arizona State Trust Land parcel in Superstition Vistas

BLM and State land at the base of the mountains just West of Gonzales

• Pass and South of US Highway 60
• Transport mine tailings by rail to safer alternate tailings storage facility

location.

• Use existing and future mine pits for disposal

Use private land for disposal Use brownfield site for disposal

• 9

10

Spe pecif ific ic Publ blic ic Concerns rns

Tailings ngs Storage age Faci cili lity Desig ign: n:

• Construct the tailings storage facility using the safer downstream

construction design, rather than upstream construction design

• Consider filter/dry stack tailings
• Evaluate “filtered” and “paste” tailings storage facility designs.
• Include underdrains to desaturate tailings at the storage facility

impoundment

• Line the tailings storage facility and potentially acid-generating material

storage impoundments

• Investigate alternative, long-lasting liner materials
• Use alternative methods of toxin removal and recovery of additional rare

metals and minerals from the tailings



What do do we we do do wi with the Scopi ping ng Comments ts in the EIS pro proces ess? s?

Establish the range of issues sues to be addressed in depth in the EIS analyses Identify suggestions for analysis, mitigation, or modification of the proposed action Develop altern rnativ atives es that address issues identified during scoping

 

SCOP OPING ING Alter ernativ atives Draf aft t EIS Final al EIS/Dr /Draft t Dec ecision ision Object jectio ion Perio iod Final al Dec ecis isio ion

11

What are re EIS Alternat rnativ ives?

A mix of strategi egies es that:

 Resolve or address key issues identified

during scoping Meet the purpose of and need for the action Consistent with the basic policy objectives for management of the area

 

ALTER TERNA NATIV IVES ES Draf aft t EIS Final al EIS/D /Draft t Dec ecision ision Objec jectio ion Proc

• ces

ess Final al Dec ecis isio ion Scop

• ping

ing

12

Alternat rnativ ives s for for this EIS incl clude ude:

ALTER TERNA NATIV IVES ES Draf aft t EIS Final al EIS/D /Draft t Dec ecision ision Objec jectio ion Proc

• ces

ess Final al Dec ecis isio ion Scop

• ping

ing

13

 Propo

• posed

ed Act Actio ion n – submitted mining plan of

• perations and land exchange

No No-Actio ction n Alter ernat nativ ive e – status quo, no mining proposal or land exchange: used to determine baseline conditions to compare effects Other er Reaso sonabl able e Alternati ernatives es – currently under development by the Forest Service with stakeholder input

 



Prop ropose sed d Ac Action tion Alternativ rnative

Four major components of the proposed mine:

 East Plant

t Site e (includes ore body and underground workings) West Plant nt Site e (ore processing facilities) MARRCO RRCO Corri rrido dor (ore conveyance facilities) Taili lings ngs St Storage rage Facility cility (area for permanent disposal of mine-produced tailings)

  

ALTER TERNA NATIV IVES ES Draf aft t EIS Final al EIS/D /Draft t Dec ecision ision Objec jectio ion Proc

• ces

ess Final al Dec ecis isio ion Scop

• ping

ing

14

15

Devel velopi ping ng Pre relimi iminar nary Alternativ rnatives

 Criteria for screening and evaluating

alternatives include:

 Meets the Purpose and Need

Technically feasible (engineering) Economically viable (costs)

   Environmental/Social factors (public input)

ALTER TERNA NATIV IVES ES Draf aft t EIS Final al EIS/D S/Dra raft t Deci ecision ion Object jectio ion Proc

• cess

ess Final al Dec ecis isio ion Scop

• ping

ing

16



Pre relimi iminar nary y Alternativ rnatives: s: Aspe pects cts of m mining ing pro propo posal l unde der r conside ideration ration

Mining techniques Types of Tailings (slurry vs. dry stack) Tailings facility design/dam types Transportation options (alternate haul roads, use of rail) Relocation of filter or processing facilities Taili lings ngs St Storage rage Facility cility locations tions

    

ALTER TERNA NATIV IVES ES Draf aft t EIS Final al EIS Object jectio ion Proc

• cess

ess Reco ecord of Decision ision Scop

• ping

ing

17

What is the Purpose of Tonight’s Workshop?

 Public input from Scoping meetings and recurring

themes led to the creation of 6 evaluation criteria

1)

Cultural Resources

2)

Proximity to Existing Communities

3)

Recreation

4)

Scenery

5)

Streams and Springs

6)

Wildlife Habitat

18

Purpose of Tonight’s Workshop (con

• nt)

 Obtain your input about your social and environmental

values related to the tailings storage facility location Your participation during the interactive portion will help the Forest Service evaluate and compare alternative tailings facility locations



19



Interactiv ractive po portion n of works rkshop

How will this work?

 Hand-held keypads will be distributed and you will have a

chance to input your views to a series of questions The Forest Service realizes that in many instances, all the

• ptions will be equally important. We still would ask you select

1 element By participating, you are not eliminating the other options … but identifying what you believe to be the most crucial element when considering alternate locations.

 

20

Keypad pad Pol

• lli

ling g Worksh

• rkshop
• p

St Step p 1 – Demog

• graphic

raphic Questi tions

• ns

St Step p 2 – Cri riteria eria Defi finitio nitions ns (s (see ha hand ndou

• ut pa

page 2) St Step p 3 – Criter eria ia Rating ng St Step p 4 – Cri riteria eria Pai Paired red Com

• mpa

paris risons

• ns

21

Cult ltural ral Res esou

• urces

ces

Avoi

• ids

s kn known hi histor

• ric

c prop

• per

erti ties es and traditi itional

• nal use areas.

as.

 Archaeological sites

Historic properties (ranches, homesteads, mines) Regional “sense of place” Sites important to Native Americans Traditional resource collection areas (plants, rock, fuel wood, etc.)

    Rec ecreatio ation Scen ener ery Stream eams s and d Sprin ings Wildl ldlif ife e Habi bitat tat Cultural l Reso sources Proximity imity to Exist isting ing Communities ities

22

Proxi ximity ity to

• Exi

xist stin ing g Commu munities nities

Avoi

• ids

s imp mpac acting ting exi xisti ting ng co communi nitie ties s and residence dences

 Dust

Loss of natural character of the landscape Noise Property values Public health and safety Water quality

     Rec ecreatio ation Scen ener ery Stream eams s and d Sprin ings Wildl ldlif ife e Habi bitat tat Proximity imity to Exist isting ing Comm mmuniti ities es Cultura ral l Resources

23

Rec ecreat reation ion

Prot

• tect

cts s area a recr crea eati tion

• n op
• ppor
• rtu

tunitie nities

 Backcountry camping/wilderness

Boyce Thompson Arboretum Hiking/Climbing/Equestrian Hunting Non-motorized trails (Arizona Trail, LOST Trail, etc.) Off-highway vehicle [OHV] routes Scenic driving / touring

      Rec ecreatio ation Scen ener ery Stream eams s and d Sprin ings Wildl ldlif ife e Habi bitat tat Cultural l Reso sources Proximi imity ty to Exist isting ing Comm mmuniti ities es

24

Sc Scen ener ery

Protects the area’s scenic qualities

 Clear skies (minimal dust or haze)

Dark skies for nighttime viewing Minimize contrast to blend with existing landscape character Potential for concurrent reclamation to reduce impacts to scenery Views from existing residential areas Views from recreational sites Views from area highways

      Scen ener ery Stream eams s and d Sprin ings Wildl ldlif ife e Habi bitat tat Cultural l Reso sources Proximi imity ty to Exist isting ing Communities ities Rec ecreatio ation

25

St Stre ream ams s an and Sp Spri ring ngs

Prot

• tect

cts s perenni ennial al and inter ermi mitt ttent ent streams ams and area a spring ngs

 Degradation of water quality

Loss of riparian vegetation Loss of species that depend on water Loss of unique areas on the National Forest Loss of water for irrigation or livestock

    Scen ener ery Stream eams s and d Sprin ings Wildl ldlif ife e Habi bitat tat Cultural l Reso sources Proximity imity to Exist isting ing Communities ities Rec ecreatio ation

26

Wil ildli life e Ha Habit itat at

Prot

• tects

cts wildli life fe ha habi bitat at

 Aquatic species and fish

Availability and quality of wildlife habitat Game species Migratory birds Washes and riparian areas Wildlife corridors and movement

     Scen ener ery Wildl ldlif ife e Habi bitat tat Cultural l Reso sources Proximity imity to Exist isting ing Comm mmuniti ities es Rec ecreatio ation Stream eams s and d Sprin ings

27

Qu Ques estions? tions?

28