vvEPA

  DOI
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle WA 98101
EPA 910/9-83-111


February 1984
Water
EPA-10-AK-Wulik-NPDES-84
United States
Department of
Interior
Post Office Box
100120
Anchorage AK 99510
            Environmental
            Impact Statement

            Red Dog Mine Project
            Northwest Alaska
                             Draft

-------
TO:  All Interested Government Agencies, Public Officials, Public and
     Private Groups and Citizens
Pursuant to Section 102(2) (c) of the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 and implementing Federal Regulations, the U.S.  Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI)  are
forwarding for your review and comment this Draft Environmental  Impact
Statement (DEIS) on the proposed Red Dog Mine Project.  The Red  Dog
mineral prospect (lead, zinc, silver and barite) is  located in the
De Long mountains of Northwest Alaska on lands owned by the NANA Regional
Corporation.  Through an agreement with NANA, Cominco Alaska proposes to
develop an open-pit mine with adjacent ore milling facilities, and to
construct a transportation system that would include a regional
transportation route and saltwater port on the Chukchi Sea for shipping
ore concentrates to foreign and domestic markets.

Cominco Alaska has applied to EPA for a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit to discharge pollutants from the mine
site to navigable waters pursuant to the provisions  of the Clean Water
Act (Public Law 95-217).  The proposed mine and mill facility has  been
determined to be a New Source under Section 306 of the Clean Water Act
and, according to Section 511(c)(l) of the Clean Water Act, is subject to
the provisions of the National Environmental Policy  Act.  The draft New
Source NPDES permit has been released for concurrent public review with
this EIS (Appendix 4) .

As a cooperating agency for the EIS, the Alaska District Corps of
Engineers (Corps) under the authority of Section 10  of the River and
Harbors Act of 1899 and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, will evaluate
Cominco Alaska's proposed activities in certain waters of the United
States in the vicinity of the mine site.  Appendix 5 of the EIS  contains
a complete description of the proposed activities requiring Department of
the Army (DA) authorization.

Cominco Alaska has also filed a consolidated Alaska  National Interest
Lands  Conservation Act (ANILCA) Title XI application with the DOI, EPA,
and the Corps for Federal permits required for the development of  the
proposed transportation system.  The following permits are covered by the
consolidated Title XI application and this DEIS:

-------
    °A DOI National  Park Service (NPS)  Right-of-Way Permit  to construct a
     transportation  route through  Cape  Krusenstern National  Monument

    °An EPA NPDES permit for a sanitary waste  discharge  from the  port
     facility

    °DA permits for  proposed activities in certain waters of the  United
     States that would be affected by the transportation system,

The consolidated Title XI application for these permits  is  included as
Appendix 6 of the DEIS.

Substantive comments are invited on the DEIS,  Draft NPDES permit,
Title XI application and all related permit decisions and will  be
considered in the preparation of the final EIS and the various  permit
Records of Decision.

Public hearings on the DEIS, the draft  New Source NPDES  permit, the
Title XI application and DA authorization are  scheduled  for the following
locations and times:

WASHINGTON, D.C.              ANCHORAGE                      KOTZEBUE

April 24, 1984               May 2, 1984                   May  3,  1984
Room 7000 B                  Nat.  Park  Srv. Office         NANA Museum
Main Interior Bldg.           Room  110                      7:30 PM
18th & C St. N.W.            2525  Gambel St.
1:00 PM                      7:30  PM

EPA and DOI will announce the availability of  this document in  the
Federal Register on  Friday, March  16, 1984, initiating a 60-day review
and comment period.   Comments should be submitted by May 14, 1984, to:

                        William M. Riley
                        EIS Project Officer
                        Environmental Evaluation Branch  M/S 443
                        Environmental Protection Agency
                        1200 Sixth Avenue
                        Seattle, WA  98101

                        Telephone:  (206) 442-1760

-------
                                    DRAFT

                     ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

                            RED DOG MINE PROJECT
                                  Prepared by

            U.S.  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY  (Region  10)
                                      and
                     U.S. DEPARTMENT OF  THE  INTERIOR

                          0  National Park Service
                          0  Bureau of Land  Management
                          0  Fish  and  Wildlife Service
                              Cooperating Agency

                         U.S.  Department of the  Army
                              Corps  of Engineers
                         With  Technical Assistance From

                              Ott Water Engineers
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIALS:
Ernesta B. Barnes
Regional  Administrator
Environmental  Protection Agency
Region 10
Date:     February Ik, 1981!
Paul  D. Gates
Regional  Environmental Officer
Department of the Interior
Alaska
Date:   February  1*t, 198^

-------
                               COVER SHEET
           DRAFT  ENVIRONMENTAL  IMPACT STATEMENT  (DEIS)

                         RED DOG MINE PROJECT

                         NORTHWESTERN ALASKA
Co-Lead Agency:

Responsible Official:
Co-Lead Agency:
Responsible Official:
Cooperating Agency:
U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency

Ernesta B.  Barnes
Regional Administrator
Environmental Protection  Agency
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA  98101

U.S.  Department of  the Interior
0 National  Park  Service
0 Bureau  of  Land Management
0 Fish & Wildlife Service

Paul D. Gates
Regional Environmental  Officer
Department of the Interior
Box  100120
Anchorage, AK  99510

U.S.  Army  Corps of Engineers
Abstract of DEIS

The  actions to be  considered  are the approvals of permits for the proposed
Red  Dog Mine Project in  northwestern Alaska.  The mine  area  facilities would
be  located  on private land owned  by the  NANA  Regional  Corporation.   A
transportation corridor would  be constructed from the mine to a port site on
the Chukchi Sea.  Three action  alternatives  and a No Action  Alternative  are
discussed.    Rationale  is given  why  various  options  were  eliminated from
consideration.   The  preferred  alternative would traverse Cape Krusenstern
National  Monument.  Impacts of  the  proposed  project are described as they
relate to vegetation and  wetlands,  wildlife, water quality, fishery  resources,
physical  and  chemical  oceanography,  air  quality, visual  resources, cultural
resources,  subsistence, socioeconomics, recreation,  technical complexity,  cost
and Cape Krusenstern  National  Monument.

-------
Public  DEIS Review and Comment Process

This  DEIS  is  offered  for review  and  comment  to  members  of the  public,
special  interest groups  and  agencies.   Public  meetings/hearings will be held
in   Kotzebue,   Anchorage  and  Washington  D.C.  to  discuss  the  document.
Announcements of these meetings/hearings  will be made  by local newspapers
and  other  appropriate media.   Comments  received  on  the  DEIS  will  be
addressed  in the final  EIS.
Location  of Technical and  Reference  Reports and Appendices

Copies of the major reports relating  to  the Red  Dog EIS will be available  at
the following locations:
     EPA Region X Headquarters
     1200 Sixth  Avenue
     Seattle, WA  98101
     EPA
     3200 Hospital Drive
     Suite 101
     Juneau, AK  99801

     Department of the Interior
     1689 'C' Street
     Anchorage, AK  99501
              Ott Water  Engineers,  Inc.
              4790 Business  Park Blvd.
              Building D,  Suite  1
              Anchorage, AK  99503

              Maniilaq Association Offices
              Shore  Street
              Kotzebue,  AK   99752
              Noel Wein  Public Library
              1215 Cowles
              Fairbanks, AK  99701
                        Z.  J.  Loussac Library
                        524 West  6th  Avenue
                        Anchorage, AK  99501
Deadlines for Comments:

Address all Comments To:
May
        1984
William M.  Riley
EIS Project Officer
Environmental Evaluation  Branch
  (M/S 443)
Environmental. Protection  Agency
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA  98101
Telephone:   (206) 442-1760

-------
                                SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION

Cominco  Alaska,  Inc.  proposes  to  develop  the Red  Dog mineral prospect
131 km  (82 mi)  north  of Kotzebue  in  northwestern  Alaska.   The proposed
mine site is located on  Red Dog Creek,  just west of Deadlock Mountain  in the
De  Long Mountains of  the western Brooks Range.   The project would  consist
of an open  pit  lead/zinc mine and concentrator located  75  km  (47 mi)  inland,
with interconnecting  transportation facilities and shipping  facilities located  at
the coast.   The  mine,  mill, tailings pond,  housing  and water supply facilities
would all  be located  on private  lands owned  by the NANA Regional Corpora-
tion  as part of a 8,975 ha (22,176 ac) parcel  in the Red Dog Valley.

The  NANA  Regional   Corporation  obtained selection  rights to  the Red  Dog
mineral  prospect with  passage of the  Alaska  National  Interest Lands  Con-
servation  Act (ANILCA)  in 1980.  After the  establishment of its right  to the
Red  Dog deposit, NANA  selected  Cominco  Alaska, Inc. as a partner to aid  in
the development  of the project.

The  agreement between NANA and Cominco for  development of the Red  Dog
mine  represents  a melding  of environmental,  social,  cultural  and economic
interests.  The  intent  of the  agreement is to allow  development in a  manner
that provides for:   a long-term  economic base for the NANA region; jobs for
NANA  shareholders and  other Alaskans;  a  source  of lead/zinc  concentrates
and  an economic return for   Cominco;  and  minimal  impacts  on  the  region's
social, historical, cultural and subsistence  lifestyles.

The  EIS  process began in  January 1983 with the U.S.  Environmental Protec-
tion  Agency (EPA) as lead federal agency.  A unique feature of  the Red  Dog
project is that the preferred  alternative would involve  a transportation coi—
ridor through  Cape  Krusenstern National Monument.   This   would  require
consideration of  the  specific  requirements mandated  by Title  XI of ANILCA
for acquiring a  right-of-way  across  the  Monument.  On  November  7, 1983
Cominco  made  a  formal  Title XI application  to the National  Park Service
(NPS).   Cominco's application was the first  ever  filed.   At that  point, the
U.S.  Department of the  Interior  (DOI) became co-lead  agency  with EPA for
the  EIS  process.  Title XI  applications  were also  filed  with  EPA and the
U.S. Army Corps of  Engineers (Corps).

In June  1983  NANA  began  separate  discussions  with  the NPS for  a land
exchange.   This exchange, if  successfully negotiated  and implemented,  would
alter the northwest boundary  of  the  Monument to  exclude lands surrounding
the  preferred  transportation  corridor, thereby making   a Title  XI   permit
                                    MI

-------
unnecessary.   If the  preferred  alternative was developed  with a  land  ex-
change, the environmental impacts would  be similar.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION

It  is  important  that the  reader understand  the relationship among the terms
"component",  "option" and "alternative".   The  project  has several  compo-
nents,  each  one a necessary  part of an entire viable mining project (e.g.,
the mine,  mill  site,  tailings pond,  transportation  system,  port  site, etc.).
For  each component there  may  be  one  or  more options  (e.g.,   a  northern
and  a southern transportation  corridor  option).  An alternative is a combin-
ation  of options (one for  each  component) that  constitutes  an entire  function-
ing project.

Development  of the Red   Dog   mine  project  would  involve  an open  pit lead/
zinc mine.  While the  deposit  has not yet  been  fully defined by  geologists,
at  least  77 million  Mg  (85  million tons) of ore exist.   The ore is estimated to
contain approximately  5.0  percent  lead, 17.1  percent zinc, 75  g/Mg  (2.4
oz/ton) silver and measurable  levels of  barite.  The project has  a potential
life of at  least 40 years under  expected  production  rates,  with the  possibility
of  extension  if additional  ore is found.

The ore would  be crushed, and metallic sulfides  would be  concentrated using
a  selective flotation process in a mill  near  the  mine site.   No reduction of
sulfides  to base metals would   take place at the  project site.  The  upgraded
concentrates  would be sent outside  Alaska for processing  to refined  metals.
Initially,  about  434,450  Mg/yr  (479,000 tons/yr)  of combined  concentrates
would  be transported  to  the coast for shipment to world markets.   After five
years,  expanded  production  of about  683,878  Mg/yr (754,000  tons/yr)  of
combined  concentrates  would be shipped.

A  237 ha (585  ac) tailings  pond would  be  created  on the South Fork of Red
Dog Creek.   The  tailings pond  dam would  be in the form of an  impervious
earth-filled  structure   with  a  spillway designed to  maintain structural integ-
rity in the  event of an overflow.  The  pond would contain thickened  tailings
slurry from  the mill  process,  in addition  to surface and  subsurface waters
with  known  toxic  concentrations of  metals.   Chemical treatment  and metals
removal  of tailings  pond  water  would occur  prior to  discharge  to Red Dog
Creek.   A seepage  contingency dam  would be  constructed downstream of the
main  tailings  pond  dam  to  collect any seepage and  return  it to  the  tailings
pond.

An approximately 25 ha  (63 ac) water storage reservoir would be located  on
Sons Creek at the south  end of Red  Dog Valley.   This reservoir  would serve
as  the water supply  for all  aspects  of the  milling  process, as  well as for
domestic use.

A  gravel  road  to the  coast would be 9 m (30 ft) wide and  composed of gran-
ular  fill about  2.0 m  (6.5 ft) thick to prevent degradation of permafrost.
The  proposed  northern   transportation   corridor would be  about  117.0  km
(73.1  mi) long  and would  require the construction  of six major bridges, six
                                      IV

-------
minor  bridges  and  about 300  culverts.   The  proposed  southern  corridor
would  be about 89.9 km (56.2 mi) long and would  require one major bridge,
four minor bridges and  about  182  culverts.

Though operations at the mine  and mill would  continue year-round,  activity
at the port site would  be  limited  to  the receipt of  supplies and fuel  during
the  summer  sealift,  and the  shipment  of  concentrates  from late  June  until
early October.  Climatic constraints on  shipping  activities thus require that
adequate  storage  facilities  for concentrates, fuel  and  other  supplies  exist at
the  port  site.  Only emergency and  temporary ship loading crews would  be
housed there.

Two methods  to transfer concentrates from the port  site storage facility to
ocean  going  vessels  are included in  the alternatives:  a  short  causeway/
lightering  transfer system  and  a short  causeway/offshore  island  transfer
system.   Both systems  would  use a 122 m (400 ft)  causeway/dock structure
as  an interface between  the  shore and the concentrate  loading  vessels  or
offshore  island.   The lightering  system would  use  two 4,535 Mg (5,000 ton)
lighters   and  two support  tugs  to   transfer  concentrates from   the  dock
directly  to the  side  of a  moored  ocean-going  ship.   The offshore island
system  would  use an   approximately  226,750  Mg  (250,000  ton) surplus  oil
tanker which  would be  ballasted to the bottom  about 1,097 m (3,600 ft)  from
shore.  This  approximately  305  m  (1,000  ft) tanker  "island" would  serve as
an offshore dock for loading/unloading  smaller,  ocean going ships.

Cominco's  most  probable development  schedule  shows the winter of  1985-86 as
the beginning of construction.   The construction period would  last a minimum
of 24 months with mining beginning  in  1988.   The  actual beginning  of  con-
struction  would depend  on world  economic conditions, ability to complete de-
tailed engineering  design,  and the progress of the  environmental  permitting
process.
EXISTING  ENVIRONMENT

The  Red Dog project area encompassing  the  mine, mill, housing  and tailings
pond  sites, and  the  transportation corridor and port site options, fall within
the  northwestern  corner  of the  NANA  Regional  Corporation's  boundaries.
Nearly  all  of  the study  area  is  undeveloped  and  is  within  the  so-called
unorganized  borough.   That is, it  is outside any incorporated  city  or  boi—
ough  governmental  jurisdiction.  Only  the mine  area  facilities  in  Red  Dog
Valley and a  thin  strip immediately to the south  would  fall within the North
Slope Borough.

The  project  area is  characterized  by moderately sloping hills,  broad stream
valleys  and coastal  lowland  lagoon  systems.  The  entire area is  underlain by
permafrost.   Gentle,  poorly  defined  surface  undulations are caused  by  pat-
terned  ground,  old  drainage channels,  thaw lakes,  and other  depositional,
erosional or  permafrost related  features.   The seasonal  thaw or  active layer
varies throughout  the  area.  It generally ranges from 50 to 100  cm (20 to  39
in) deep   in  vegetated areas  and  may  range  up to 3  m  (10  ft)  deep on
exposed, rocky  hillsides.
                                     v

-------
Vegetation types at the mine  site,  along the transportation  corridors and at
the  alternate port  sites range  from xerophytic  (dry-adapted),  upland  mat
and  cushion  tundra to wet, lowland  sedge-grass marsh.  Vegetation consists
primarily  of  cotton-grass  tussock  tundra,  low  shrublands and herbaceous
meadows,  in  order  of  relative  abundance.

Waterfowl  and shorebird  use of  the project  area  is  centered  along  the  coast
during the spring  and fall  migrations,  although  coastal and inland breeding
occurs.   Portions  of  the  project area  provide  good habitat  for  cliff  nesting
raptors including  the  endangered  peregrine falcon,  golden  eagle,  gyrfalcon
and  the rough-legged  hawk.

Five large terrestrial mammal species  are found  in the project area:   caribou,
muskoxen, moose,   Dall sheep and  brown bear.   The  Arctic  caribou  herd,
numbering approximately   190,000  animals   and  the  largest  herd  in  North
America/  encompasses  the  project  area within  its  range.   Caribou use  the
Asikpak,  Kivalina,   Wulik and  Omikviorok River drainages,  and  probably  the
Singoalik  River  drainage,  for  winter   range.    A  small  herd   of  muskoxen
appears to be established  on  winter  range  in the Rabbit Creek  Valley  south
of the Mulgrave  Hills.  A  larger herd  is established to the  northwest in  the
Cape Thompson  area.   Moose  are  found in  the region closely associated with
riparian  tall  shrub communities  along major  rivers  and streams,  particularly
during  the winter.   Dall   sheep  habitat  in  the project vicinity  is  limited to
the  Wulik  Peaks and  the  mountains  bordering  the  headwaters  of  the  Wulik
River  and Ikalukrok Creek.   Brown  bears  are found throughout the project
area.  Other important terrestrial  mammals  include the wolf, wolverine  and
red  fox.

Water  quality in  the major  rivers of the project area, the Kivalina,  Wulik  and
Omikviorok,  is typical of  unpolluted fresh water in the  Arctic.   These rivers
are  clear  water streams with  low  levels of color, suspended solids, turbidity
and  nutrients.   Ikalukrok  Creek  has  similar  water quality  characteristics,
except below its confluence with the lower quality waters of Red Dog Creek.
The  waters  of  Red   Dog  Creek  are  atypical  of  most  undeveloped  Arctic
streams because  of the toxic  concentrations of cadmium,  lead,  zinc and iron
that  enter the  main  stem  of  the  creek as  it flows  through the highly min-
eralized  Red  Dog  ore body.  Waters  not affected  by  the ore  body in  the
upper portion of the  main  stem, the  North  Fork, and most of the South Fork
exhibit high  water  quality.

Important  fishery   resources  in  the Kivalina,   Wulik  and  Omikviorok  River
drainage  systems  include  Arctic  char, Arctic  grayling  and various salmon
species.

Important  marine  fish  found in  the  area  include  starry  flounder,  Arctic
flounder  and saffron   cod.  Marine mammals present include  ringed,  spotted
and bearded seals, harbor porpoise, beluga,  and  the  endangered  Gray  and
bowhead whales.

Wind and wave  conditions  along  the  coast have a significant effect on  sedi-
ment  transport.    Long-term  net   transport  is  generally  in  a  southeasterly
direction.   The  Chukchi Sea  typically  has relatively warm,  low salinity  water
                                      VI

-------
present  near  shore.   Sea  ice generally begins to form on the coast in early
October,  but periodic high winds and  waves may delay formation of a solid
cover until  January.  The ice cover  usually disappears  by early  July.

The earliest  known  prehistoric  cultural remains  in  the  vicinity of the Red
Dog project area are  located  on a  series of beach  ridges at Cape Krusen-
stern, and  form  the core  of  the Cape Krusenstern National Monument.   A
major portion of the  project area is within the Cape Krusenstern Archeolog-
ical  District.   The   known  major archeological sites  for which the  Monument
was created  are  located on  beach  ridges.   Inland, archeological  sites  are
more  scattered  and  indicate  a  less  intensive  settlement pattern  involving
limited  use.  Beach  ridge  sites would not  be  subject  to   impact.   Known
inland sites  within  the  Monument or within the Cape Krusenstern Archeolog-
ical  District would  be avoided by project design.  The  easily visible concen-
tration of houses and  occupied beach  ridge  sites in the  Monument  are often
used  as  a  diachronic  model  of  human life in  northwestern Alaska.   Sites
within the  Red  Dog  project  area are  typical  of the  region  and  consist  of
surface  scatters,  or  shallowly  buried  deposits of lithic  materials that were
used  in making  stone artifacts.

Subsistence is vital  to  the  economic well  being and  nutrition of most  of  the
region's  residents.   Approximately 55 percent of all  households obtain half or
more  of  their food   supply  by  subsistence hunting,  fishing  and gathering.
In  a  region where imported foodstuffs are  costly and cash income depressed,
the economic importance of the subsistence food supply  is evident.
SCOPING

The  EIS scoping  process  identified the following 12 issues  of concern for  the
project:

     0  Maintaining  the  quality and quantity of  water

     0  Maintaining  the quality  and  quantity  of  fishery  habitat,  and  mini-
        mizing disruption  of fish movements

     0  Maintaining  the quality  and  quantity  of  wildlife  habitat,  and  mini-
        mizing impacts on  wildlife

     0  Minimizing impacts on  coastal  geologic  processes

     0  Minimizing impacts on  marine  life

     0  Protecting subsistence  resources  and their  use

     0  Protecting cultural resources

     0  Minimizing the   social,  cultural and  economic impacts on  residents  of
        the region

     0  Designing project  components from  a regional use perspective

     0  Impacts on Cape Krusenstern National  Monument

     0  Technical  feasibility

     0  Economic feasibility
                                     VII

-------
OPTIONS SCREENING PROCESS

To  address those 12  issues, the  scoping  process also  identified  a  total of  30
options and  seven suboptions for  the 11  project components (see first column
of Table  1 for  list  of components).  To determine reasonable  options,  a two-
step options  screening  process  was  conducted.    In the first  step  all options
were  reviewed  to  eliminate  from  further  consideration  those  which  were
clearly  unreasonable  or infeasible  primarily for environmental  or technical
reasons.   This  resulted in  11  options  and  one  suboption  being eliminated.

In the  second  step, the remaining options were  individually evaluated  in de-
tail from  the  perspective   of  each  resource or  technical  descipline  (e.g.,
water  quality,   wildlife,  subsistence,  technical  feasibility).   For each disci-
pline,   a  specific set  of "options  screening criteria" was used to identify
potential  impacts  for each  option.   Then,  each  option  was  compared to  all
other options for  each of the 11 components to identify the  best  option (i.e.,
the one with the  least potential  impacts) for  each  component.

Following the options screening process,  the best options for eight of  the  11
components  were relatively  easy  to  identify.   However,   three components
(transportation  corridor location,  port site location and marine transfer facil-
ity)  had  two options each  which  adequately addressed one  or more  of the
12 issues.  These options  were therefore  retained and,  with  the other eight
options, were used  to form  the  alternatives (Table 1).
IDENTIFICATION OF ALTERNATIVES

The identification  of alternatives  process was  relatively straightforward  as
there  were  only three  combinations  (and  hence  alternatives) necessary  to
address  the issues  raised by  the three  components with more  than one option
remaining.   The  three  action  alternatives and  the  no  action  alternative for
the Red  Dog project are described  below.

Alternative 1

This alternative would  site the tailings  pond in the South  Fork  of  Red Dog
Creek  with the  mill  in close  proximity to  the  west.  A  worker  camp  would
be  located  close to the mill.   Power would  be  supplied by  diesel  generators
also sited  near  the mill.   Water  would come from an  impoundment on  Bons
Creek  to the south  of the tailings pond and airstrip.  All these facilities,  as
well as the mine, would be  located  on private land owned  by NAN A.

Transporation  would be by year-round  road along the southern corridor to a
port site  at VABIVI 28  on  private  NANA  land within the  boundaries of  Cape
Krusenstern  National Monument.   The  transfer facility would be  the  short
causeway/offshore island.

Alternative 2

This  alternative  is  the same as Alternative 1  for all  components  except the
transportation   corridor  and  port  site   locations.    It  includes the  northern
transportation  corridor  to a port site  at Tugak  Lagoon.
                                     VIM

-------
                                  Table 1
                 OPTIONS  USED TO FORM ALTERNATIVES
      Component
Mine Location
Tailings  Pond Location
Mill Site  Location
Worker Housing
     Type
     Location
Water Supply
Power Generation
Transportation
     Corridor Location

     System
Port Site
     Location

     Transfer Facility
          Option(s)
Fixed
South Fork  Red Dog  Creek
South Fork  Red Dog  Creek

Campsite
South Fork  Red Dog  Creek
Sons Creek
Diesel

Northern
Southern
Road

Tugak  Lagoon
VABM 28
Short Causeway/Lightering
Short Causeway/Offshore
  Island
   Suboption
Asikpak  Route
Kruz  Route
Year-round
Alternative 3
This alternative is the same as Alternative  1 except that the transfer  facility
would be the short causeway/lightering option instead of the short  causeway/
offshore  island option.
No Action Alternative
The  No Action Alternative  is defined  as  meaning no development of the  Red
Dog  Project  would  occur.    The  No  Action  Alternative would  result  from
denial  of at  least one,  or perhaps  more,  of  the federal  or state permits
necessary  for  project  development.   Or,   it  could  mean  that  the  project
sponsor chose not to undertake the project.
                                    IX

-------
COMPARISON  OF ALTERNATIVES

The  impacts of each  of  the three  action  alternatives  were compared by  an
evaluation  against the  12  issue  criteria  identified during  the  scoping  process
(Chapter  III).  The quantified  impacts  of  each alternative  (Table 2)  were
then compared for identification  of the preferred alternative.
IDENTIFICATION  OF PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

Alternative  1,  comprised  of  the southern  corridor,  VABM  28  port site  and
the offshore island facility,  has been identified by  the co-lead  agencies as
the preferred alternative.

The preferred alternative  would require  a road  through Cape  Krusenstern
National  Monument,  and,   therefore,  an  ANILCA Title XI  permit would  be
needed.   This  would  require a  finding  that the  transportation system  would
be  compatible  with  the purposes  for which  the Monument  was  established,
and that  there was no economically feasible and  prudent alternative route for
the system.   The Title XI application  was filed  by Cominco with the NPS,
Corps  and   EPA,  each  of which   has  land  management and/or permitting
responsibility for the project.   This application is undergoing  review by the
NPS,  Corps  and  EPA.  A  copy  of the Title XI application and  agency review
comments are included  in this  document  as  Appendix 6.


ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

The mine  area  facilities  (mine, tailings  pond,  mill  site,  worker  housing,
water supply,  airstrip  and all associated access  roads)  would directly disturb
a total of about  541 ha (1,336  ac)  of vegetation in Red Dog Valley.   Devel-
opment  and  operation  of  these  facilities might have  an indirect  impact  upon
caribou by  displacing  some animals  from marginal  winter range.  This impact
would  not be  significant  on more  than a local  basis  and  no  other wildlife
species would be  significantly impacted.

Ninety-five   percent of the metal  loads in the  main  stem of Red Dog  Creek
above  the South  Fork come from an area  bounded by  the exposed ore zone.
Since this area would be developed,  with runoff diverted to  the tailings pond
where water treatment would  occur  prior  to discharge, water  quality  in the
naturally contaminated main  stem of Red  Dog  Creek could   improve.   There
would  be no significant impacts on  fishery  resources  from   mine area  facili-
ties.

Four  archeological  sites  are located in the immediate  area  of  the mine site.
Two of  these  could not be avoided  during ore removal,  and  therefore they
would  be evaluated for eligibility to the National  Register of Historic Places.
If  eligible,   mitigation  actions would  be included in the Advisory Council on
Historic  Preservation (ACHP) commenting  procedures  covered  by a Memoran-
dum of  Agreement concluded among  the  State  Historic  Preservation Officer
(SHPO),  the  ACHP,   and  the  federal   agencies  permitting  the  project.
Wherever feasible,  road  alignments  and other facilities would  be designed  to

-------
                                                Table 2
                  EVALUATION CRITERIA  MATRIX SHOWING RELATIVE TOTAL  IMPACT
                      VALUES ASSIGNED  TO THE THREE  ACTION ALTERNATIVES
Evaluation Criteria
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Minimize Risk of Water
Quality Degradation
Minimize Impacts to Fish
and Fish Habitat
Minimize Impacts to Wildlife
and Wildlife Habitat
Minimize Impacts to Coastal
Geologic Processes
Minimize Impacts to Marine
Life and Marine Habitat
Minimize Impacts to
Traditional Subsistence
Harvest Activities
ALTERNATIVE 1
ALTERNATIVE 2
ALTERNATIVE 3
Southern Corridor Northern Corridor Southern Corridor
VABM 28 Port Site Tugak Lagoon P. S. VABM 28 Port Site
Offshore Island Fac. Offshore Island Fac. Lightering Facility
Low Risk
Low Impact
Low Impact
Low Impact
Low Impact
Low Impact
High
High
High
Low
Low
High
Risk
Impact
Impact
Impact
Impact
Impact
Moderate
Moderate
Risk
Impact
Low Impact
Low Impact
Moderate
Moderate
Impact
Impact
 7.  Minimize  Impacts  to
    Cultural  Resources
 8.  Minimize  Social,  Cultural and
    Economic Impacts upon
    Residents of the  Region
 9.  Maximize the Potential for
    Other Regional Uses
10.  Minimize  Impacts  on  Cape
    Krusenstern  National
    Monument
11.  Minimize  Technical Complexity
12.  Minimize  Costs
Low  Impact
Low  Impact
 Low Impact
   These impacts would  be similar for  all  three alternatives.
High Potential

High Impact
High Potential

Low  Impact
Moderate Complexity      High Complexity
Low  Cost                 High Cost
Moderate  Potential

Moderate  Impact

Moderate  Complexity
Moderate Cost

-------
avoid direct impact to these sites.  If sites could not be reasonably avoided,
recovery operations would  be conducted to preserve the site data.   The mine
site  vicinity possesses little value for  subsistence or recreational fishing and
hunting, and  no significant impacts would be anticipated.

Construction  of the  southern  transportation  corridor from  the  mine area
through  Cape  Krusenstern  National Monument to the coast  at  VABM 28 would
directly  disturb  a  total of about 197 ha (487 ac) of  vegetation.   Several nest
sites  of  birds  of prey, including three of the  endangered  peregrine  falcon,
have  been  reported along  the southern corridor.  The peregrine nests would
not be  significantly impacted because  the  road  alignment has  been altered  to
provide  a  buffer of at  least 3.2  km (2 mi) around  the nests.  The corridor
passes  through presently  used  caribou  winter  range.  Indirect habitat loss
for caribou would  likely  be significant only on  a local basis, but  could,  as
other developments occurred in  the  region,  be  significant on a greater than
local basis  if changes  to  historical  caribou migrations occurred.

Impacts  on hydrology  and  water quality would be  insignificant  as  proper
methods  of road construction and drainage control  would  be followed.   The
road  would cross  11  streams which  are known   to contain  fish,  but  no sig-
nificant  impacts to fish movements or  spawning  and/or rearing  habitat would
be expected.

Construction of the southern corridor  could impact 12  archeological  sites,  six
within Cape Krusenstern  National  Monument.  All reasonable  measures would
be  taken to avoid these  sites by  realigning the  road.  Recovery  operations
would  be  conducted  under  terms  of the Memorandum of Agreement  to pre-
serve the site  data and material  that could not be preserved in place.

Construction of the port  site would  directly disturb about 20 ha  (50 ac)  of
vegetation.   No terrestrial  wildlife species would be  significantly impacted  on
greater  than a  local basis.   Port Lagoon would  be breached to shelter barges
during   construction  and  operation,  but  impacts to  fish  and  invertebrate
species  would  be  insignificant.   Construction   of the  transfer facility would
also  have  minimal   impact on  anadromous and   marine fish,  as  well as  on
marine birds and mammals.

Impacts  from  the  alteration of  sediment transport patterns by  the port site
causeway would  be insignificant on more  than  a  local  basis.   Port site con-
struction could increase  sediment loading  for a short period, but  long-term
impacts  on marine water  quality  would  be  insignificant.   Potential  impacts
from  spills of fuel,   concentrates  or  mill  reagents  would  be  expected  to  be
insignificant on greater than a local basis.

The remains of the historical reindeer herding  facility at  the VABM  28 port
site could  be directly or  indirectly impacted  by the port facilities.   Recovery
and recording operations would  be developed  if the site could not  be  avoided
by redesigning the facility.

Marine  mammal  hunting is  generally confined to  the  winter  and spring months
when the  port  would  be  ice-bound,  so ship traffic  from the  port  should  not
significantly  disrupt  susbistence  harvest activities.   Port construction and
noise from year-round activities aboard  the  offshore  transfer  facility  would
likely displace some marine mammals from  the immediate area.

                                     xii

-------
Although  the majority  of  the area is  on private and  state land, the de facto
wilderness nature  of the  project  area  would be  permanently altered with  the
loss  of wilderness  characteristics  such  as  solitude  and  the  opportunity  for
primative  types of recreational experiences.
                                     XIII

-------
                       TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                            Page
COVER (Photo:  The WuI ik River  flowing  from  the  De  Long
               Mountains to the Chukchi  Sea.)
COVER SHEET
SUMMARY                                                      i i i
INTRODUCTION
I.   PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION
INTRODUCTION   	   1-1
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS    ....   1-1
PROJECT LOCATION, HISTORY AND STATUS    	   1-2
COMINCO AND NANA OBJECTIVES	   1-6
SCOPING ISSUES   	   1-6
FEDERAL, STATE AND MUNICIPAL PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS  .  .   1-8
COOPERATING AGENCY    	   1-10


I I .   THE PROPOSED PROJECT
INTRODUCTION   	   I I-1
PROJECT COMPONENTS AND OPTIONS    	   I I-1
     Mi ne	   11-2
     Ta i I i ngs Pond    	   11-6
     Mill   	   11-6
     Wastewater Treatment Plant	   I 1-12
     Worker Housing	   I 1-12

                              x i v

-------
                       TABLE OF  CONTENTS
                           (Conti nued)

 I I .  THE PROPOSED PROJECT  (Continued)                       Page

     Water Supply	   I 1-12
     Power Generation	   I 1-13
     Transportation Corridor	   I 1-13
     Road Transportation System	   I |-16
     Port Site   	   I |_ig
     Transfer Fac i I  i ty   	   I 1-30
     Fuel Storage	   I 1-32
DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE   	   I 1-33
III.  ALTERNATIVES  INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION

INTRODUCTION   	   I I 1-1
OPTIONS INITIALLY CONSIDERED	   I I I-1
     Ta i I i ngs Pond	   I I I -3
     Worker Housing Type	   I I I-3
     Water Supply	   I I I-3
     Power Generation	   I I I -3
     Transportation Corridor Location	   I I I-3
     Transportation System	   I I I-7
     Port Site Locations   	   I I I-8
     Transfer Facility   	   I I I-8
OPTIONS SCREENING PROCESS	   I I I-8
     Initial  Options Evaluation	   I I I-8
     Remaining Options Evaluation	   I I I-9
     Transportation Corridor Identification	   II 1-35
IDENTIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 	   111-39
     Alternative 1   	   II 1-39
     Alternative 2   	   II 1-39
                               xv

-------
                       TABLE OF CONTENTS
                          (Cont i nued)
III.  ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION (Cont.)    Page
     Alternative 3
     No Action Alternative
COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES   ..............   111-41
IDENTIFICATION OF PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE  ........   111-50


IV.  AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
INTRODUCTION   	   IV-1
HISTORY    	   IV-1
LAND STATUS    	   IV-2
AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT   	   IV-4
     Geology, Physiography and Soils    	   IV-4
        Geology	   IV-4
        Seismology   	   IV-5
        Physiography   	   IV-5
        Floodplains	   IV-7
        Soi Is	   IV-8
        Permafrost   	   IV-8
        Mineral Resources  	   IV-8
     Vegetation and Wetlands 	   IV-8
        Vegetation Type Descriptions  	   IV-9
        Wetlands   	   IV-10
        Threatened or Endangered Species    	   IV-11
     Terrestrial  Wildlife  	   IV-11
        Birds	   IV-11
        Mammals	   IV-12
        Threatened or Endangered Species    	   IV-17
     Groundwater Resources   	   IV-17
                               XV I

-------
                       TABLE  OF  CONTENTS
                          (Cont i nued)

IV.   AFFECTED  ENVIRONMENT  (Continued)                       Page

     Freshwater  Resources   	   IV-19
        Hydrology	   IV-19
        Water  Quality	   IV-22
        Biology	   IV-30
     Marine  Biology  	   IV-37
        Marine Invertebrates    	   IV-38
        Marine Fish	   IV-^0
        Marine Birds and Mammals   	   IV-^2
        Threatened  or  Endangered Species    	   IV-^3
     Physical  and Chemical  Oceanography  	   IV-^
        Currents/Circulation    	   IV-^t^
        Wind and Wave  Cl imate	   IV-^
        Coastal  Geologic Processes  	   IV-^6
        Marine Water Qua I i ty    	   IV-^6
        Ice  Conditions	   IV-47
     Meteorology and Air Qua I i ty	   IV-^7
        Meteorology	   IV-^7
        Ai r  Qua I i ty	   I V-*t9
     Visual  Resources   	  .....   IV-50
     Sound	   IV-51
     Cultural  Resources  	  ....   IV-51
     Subsistence   	   IV-5^
     Socioeconomics  	   IV-62
        Population    	   IV-62
        Economy	   IV-65
        Community Facilities  and Services  	   IV-69
        Local  and Regional  Governance	   1V-70
     Recreation	   IV-70
        Boating	   IV-71
        Hunting/Fishing  	   IV-71
        Cape Krusenstern  National Monument 	   IV-72
                               xv i i

-------
                       TABLE OF CONTENTS
                          (Cont i nued)

V.   ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES                             Page

INTRODUCTION   .....................  V-l
COMPONENTS COMMON TO ALL ALTERNATIVES  .........  V-l
     Vegetation and Wetlands   .............  V-2
     Terrestrial  Wi Idl i f e  ...............  V-3
     Groundwater Resources   ..............  V-U
     Freshwater Resources  ...............  V-5
        Hydrology and Water Qua I i ty  ..........  V-5
        Biology  ....................  V-13
           Invertebrates   ...............  V-13
           Fish  ....................  V-ltf
     Air Quality   ...................  V-17
     Visual Resources  .................  V-21
     Sound   ......................  V-23
     Cultural  Resources  ................  V-25
     Subsistence   ...................  V-25
     Soc i oeconomi cs   ..................  V-27
        Regional  Employment and Income   ........  V-27
        Population Growth and Migration  ........  V-32
        Demand for Community Infrastructure  ......  V-3*+
        Social, Political and Cultural  Stability
           and Autonomy  ................  V-3^
     Recreation  ....................  V-36
COMPONENTS SPECIFIC TO SOME ALTERNATIVES   .......  V-36
     Vegetation and Wetlands ..............  V-36
     Terrestrial  Wildlife  ...............  V-ifO
     Groundwater Resources   ..............  V-^5
     Freshwater Resources  ...............  V-46
        Hydrology and Water Qua I i ty  ..........  V-46
        Biology  ....................  V-49
           Invertebrates   ...............  V-49
                             xv i i i

-------
                       TABLE OF CONTENTS
                          (Cont i nued)

V.   ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES (Continued)                Page
        Fish   	V-50
     Marine Biology  	  V-52
        Marine Invertebrates and Fish	V-52
        Marine Birds and Mammals    	  V-55
     Physical and Chemical Oceanography   	  V-57
        Coastal Geologic Processes   	  V-57
        Marine Water Quality    	  V-59
     Air Qua I i ty   	V-66
     Visual Resources  	  V-67
     Sound   	V-68
     Cultural Resources  	  V-71
     Subsistence   	V-72
     Recreation	V-7^
     Regional Use	  V-75
     Technical  Feasibility   	  V-76
     Cost	V-77
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE  	  V-77
MITIGATION   	V-78
MONITORING   	V-81
RECLAMATION PLAN   	V-83
OTHER PROJECT IMPACTS	V-86
     Regional Impacts  	  V-86
     Increased General  Public Access    	  V-89
     Cape Krusenstern National  Monument Impacts  ....  V-91
     Cumulative Impacts	V-9*t
UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS  	  V-95
SHORT-TERM USES VERSUS LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY  	  V-95
IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES   V-96
SECTION 810,  SUMMARY EVALUATION AND FINDINGS   	  V-97

                              x i X

-------
                        TABLE OF CONTENTS
                           (Cont i nued)


VI.    SUMMARY OF  PERMIT AND REGULATORY PROGRAMS            Page

INTRODUCTION    	   Vl-l

FEDERAL APPROVALS   	   Vl-l

STATE APPROVALS	VI-8

LOCAL APPROVALS	VI-11



VII.   CONSULTATION  AND COORDINATION   	   Vll-l



VIM.  LIST OF PREPARERS   	Vlll-l



IX.    EIS DISTRIBUTION LIST   	   IX-1
X.     PUBLIC RESPONSE  TO  DEIS    	X-l
XI.    REFERENCES CITED   	  Xl-l
XII.   GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL  TERMS,  ACRONYMS AND
       ABBREVIATIONS AND  MEASUREMENT EQUIVALENTS ....  Xll-l
XIII.   INDEX    	XI I I -1
                               XX

-------
                         TABLE  OF CONTENTS
                            (Cent i nued)
XIV.
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1.

APPENDIX 2,


APPENDIX 3

APPENDIX ^.

APPENDIX 5


APPENDIX 6

APPENDIX 7
      RECLAMATION PLAN

      SPILL PREVENTION, CONTROL AND
      COUNTERMEASURE  (SPCC)  PLAN

      ENDANGERED SPECIES  BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

      NPDES DRAFT PERMIT

      DEPARTMENT OF ARMY  PUBLIC NOTICE AND
      SECTION 404(b)(l) EVALUATION
      ANILCA TITLE XI  RIGHT-OF-WAY APPLICATION

      PROTECTION OF CULTURAL RESOURCES
                               XX I

-------
                         LIST OF TABLES
Table                                                      Page
 I 1-1   Concentrate Production Schedule	  11-2

 I 1-2   Red Dog Concentrator Reagents	  I 1-10

 11-3   Preliminary Borrow Site Specifications,
          Southern Corridor	  I 1-25

 11-4   Preliminary Borrow Site Specifications If All
          Borrow Material Was Taken From Outside Cape
          Krusenstern National  Monument  	  11-26
I I I-1   Component Options And Suboptions Identified
          During The Scoping Process	  I I I-2

I I I-2   Distances For Transportation Corridor Options
          And Suboptions	  II I -6

I I I-3   Major Reasons For Elimination Of Individual
          Options And Suboptions During Initial Options
          Review	  Ill -10

111-4   Options And Suboptions Eliminated Or Retained
          For Further Analysis During Initial Options
          Review	  II I -12

I I I-5   Individual  Discipline Options Screening
          Cri teria	  Ill-13

I I I-6   Summary Of Options Screening Criteria Analyses
          Showing Relative Levels Of Potential  Impact   .  111-17

I I I-7   Grouped Relative Levels Of Potential Impact
          For Individual Disciplines 	  111-31

I I I-8   Overall  Relative Levels Of Potential Impact  .   .  111-34

I I I-9   Options Used To Form Alternatives	  111-36

111-10  Evaluation Criteria Matrix Showing Re I at i ve
          Total  Impact Values Assigned To The Three
          Action Alternatives	  II 1-42
 IV-1   Mean Annual Flow Data For Some Streams In The
          Red Dog Mine Project Area	   IV-21

 IV-2   Typical  Mean Monthly Flow Proportions For Red
          Dog Project Study Area Streams	   IV-22

 IV-3   Ten- And 100-Year Recurrence Flood Flows For
          Stream Locations In Red Dog Va I ley	   IV-23

 IV-4   Seasonal Flows And Concentrations And Loads Of
          Zinc  In Project Area Streams	   IV-26

 IV-5   Seasonal Flows And Concentrations And Loads Of
          Lead  In Project Area Streams	   IV-27

                              xx i i

-------
                         LIST OF TABLES

                           (Cont i nued)
Tab Ie                                                      Page

 IV-6   Seasonal Flows And Concentrations And Loads Of
          Cadmium In Project Area Streams  	  IV-28

 IV-7   Results Of Aerial Survey Counts For
          Overwintering Arctic Char In The WuIik And
          Kivalina Rivers, 1968 to 1982	  IV-33
 IV-8   Summary Of Number Of Fish Counted In ADF&G
          Arctic Char Spawning Surveys, 1981 to 1983 .   .  IV-J1*
 IV-9   Numbers And Percent Occurrence Of Marine Fish
          Species Collected During Summer 1982 By
          Various Gear Types	  IV-^l
 IV-10  Percent Occurrence Of High Winds And Associated
          Storm Waves (Not Including SweI I) At The Port
          Sites	  IV-i*5
 IV-11  NANA Region Household Dependency On Subsistence
          Harvest,  Percent Distribution  	  IV-55
 IV-12  Subsistence Resources Harvested For Kivalina
          And Noatak, 1972	  IV-59
 IV-13  Population Trends, 1960 To 1982, Study Area
          Communities	  IV-63
 IV-1^  Distribution of Population, By Age And Sex,
          Kobuk Census Division, 1980	  IV-6*t
 IV-15  Baseline Population Forecast, NANA Region,
          1982 To 2010    	  IV-65
 IV-16  Distribution Of Employment, Kobuk Census
          Division, 1970  & 1980	  IV-67
 IV-17  Sources of Personal Income, By Sector, Kobuk
          Census Division, 1970 & 1980	  IV-68

 IV-18  Personal Income,  By Source, Kobuk Census
          Division, 1970  & 1980	  IV-69


  V-l   Ta i  I ings Pond Water Balance	V-6
  V-2   Treated Water Quality Projections  	  V-7

  V-3   Tailings Pond Water Quality Projections
          (Assuming Complete Mixing)  	  V-10
                              xx i i i

-------
                         LIST OF TABLES

                           (Cont i nued)
Tab I e                                                      Page
  V-4   National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS),
          Estimated Prevention Of Significant
          Deterioration  Increments, And Worst Case
          Projected Concentrations   ..........  V-18
  V-5   EPA Significant  Emissions Rates   ........  V-19
  V-6   Estimated Sources And Amounts Of  Emissions From
          Project Components ..............  V-20
  V-7   Estimated Sound  Levels Generated  By Mine Area
          Equipment And  Faci 1 ities ...........  V-2^
  V-8   Average Annual Employment By Occupational
          Group  ....................  V-28

  V-9   Estimated Total Resident Employment  Impacts,
          NANA Region  .................  V-30

  V-10  Projected Annual  Personal Income ........  V-31

  V-ll  Projected Population Impact, NANA Region ....  V-32

  V-12  Estimated Population-Base Case And Impact Case,
          NANA Region  .................  V-33

  V-13  Approximate Area Of Vegetation Types Intersected
          By Roads In The Transportation Corridors  . .   .  V-37

  V-l^  Estimated Number And Type Of Stream Crossings
          Required For Southern And Northern
          Transportation Corridors   ..........  V-^8

  V-15  Transfer And Shipping Frequency  ........  V-64

  V-16  Estimated Road System And Port Facility Capital
          And Annual  Operating Costs ($000) For Each
          Alternative  .................  V-78
 Vl-l   Major Federal, State And Local  Permits, Con-
          tracts Or Other Approvals Required For
          Project Development  	  VI-2


VI1-1   Matrix Of Comments Received From Scoping
          Meetings And Written Responses   	  VII-3
                               xx i v

-------
                        LIST OF FIGURES
Figure                                                     Page
  1-1   Northwestern Alaska  	   1-3
  1-2   Red Dog Project Development Schedule 	   1-5

 I I -1   Red Dog Va I ley Map	   11-3
 I 1-2   Mine Pit Layout	   I 1-5
 11-3   South Fork Tailings Pond	   11-7
 I I-it   Mill Site Facilities	   11-9
 I 1-5   Water Storage Reservoir	   I 1-14
 I 1-6   Red Dog Project Area	   I 1-15
 11-7   Typical Bridge & Culvert Crossings .......   11-17
 11-8   Potential Borrow Sites Along Southern Corridor .   11-18
 11-9   Location of Potential  Borrow Sites I, 2 & 3  .  .   11-20
 11-10  Location of Potential  Borrow Sites k, 5 & 6  .  .   11-21
 11-11  Location of Potential  Borrow Sites 7 & 8   ...   11-22
 11-12  Location of Potential  Borrow Site 9	11-23
 11-13  Location of Potential  Borrow Sites 10, 11, 12,
          13 & 14	   II -24
 I 1-14  Conceptual Diagram Of A Short Causeway/Lightering
          Transfer Fac i I i ty	   I 1-27
 11-15  Conceptual Diagram Of A Short Causeway/Offshore
           Island Transfer Facility  	   M-28
 11-16  Coastal Concentrate Storage Facility  	   11-29
 11-17  Ballasted Tanker Transfer & Storage  Facility .  .   11-31
 11-18  Conceptual Diagram of Construction Barge  in
          Coastal Lagoon   	   I 1-34

I I I-1   Red Dog VaI Iey Map Show!ng Ta i I i ngs  Pond Opt i ons  I I  I-4
I I 1-2   Red Dog Project Area Showing Transportation
          Route Options	   I I  1-5
I I 1-3   Red Dog Project Alternatives	   111-40

 IV-1   Land Status  In Project Area	   IV-3
 IV-2   Poor So i Is  in  Project Area	   IV-6
                               xxv

-------
                        LIST OF FIGURES
                           (Conti nued)
F i gure                                                     Page
 IV-3   Spring And Fall  Waterfowl  Staging Areas  ....   IV-13
 IV-4   Raptor Nest Sites In Project Area	   IV-14
 IV-5   Caribou Winter Range 	   IV-16
 IV-6   Dal I  Sheep Range	   IV-18
 IV-7   Ikalukrok Creek Drainage Area Showing Existing
          Water Quality	   IV-24
 IV-8   Benthic Invertebrate & Fish Sampling Stations
          in  Ikalukrok & Red Dog Drainages	   IV-31
 IV-9   Fish  Occurrence in Project Area	   IV-35
 IV-10  Marine Benthic Infauna Sampling Stations ....   IV-39
 IV-11  Visual  Quality Objective Zones In Project Area .   IV-52
 IV-12  Subsistence Use By Northwestern Alaska Native
          Vi I lages	   I V-56
 IV-13  Annual  Subsistence Activity Cycles,  Upper And
          Lower Kobuk River Vi I lages	   IV-57
 IV-14  Annual  Subsistence Activity Cycles,  Noatak And
          Kivalina Villages  	   IV-58
 IV-15  Subsistence Use Areas,  Kivalina Village  ....   IV-60
 IV-16  Subsistence Use Areas,  Noatak Village  	   IV-61
                               xxv i

-------
                              INTRODUCTION
This  introduction  explains  the  requirement  for  an   Environmental   Impact
Statement (EIS), the purpose  of  an  EIS,  and describes the process by which
it  is developed.  It also explains how the  EIS document is  organized and how
to  effectively  comment on the EIS.
WHY PREPARE AN  EIS?

The  National  Environmental  Policy Act  (NEPA)  of  1969  requires the prepara-
tion  of an  EIS  whenever  a  proposed major  federal action  could  significantly
affect  the quality  of  the human environment.   In the case of the Red Dog
project,  the  issuance of  several major  federal  permits  required before  the
project could  proceed  constitutes  a  set  of major  federal  actions.   These
permits include the National  Pollutant Discharge Elimination  System (NPDES)
Permit from the  Environmental  Protection Agency (EPA), and the Department
of Army  Permit from  the  U.S. Army  Corps  of  Engineers (Corps).   The
NPDES  Permit would  authorize  a  wastewater discharge from the mining and
milling operations.   The Department of Army Permit would  authorize dredging
and filling operations  within waters of the  United States.

Additionally,  Cominco  has  applied to the Department of the Interior  (DOI) for
permission to construct a mining  access road through  the northwest corner
of Cape  Krusenstern  National Monument.  This  road  would  provide a means
of transporting  lead and zinc concentrates  to a  regional saltwater  port on  the
Chukchi Sea.   The process  for authorizing construction  of this  transporta-
tion  system,  which  includes  the port  and  the road,  is governed by Title XI
of the  Alaska National  Interest Lands  Conservation  Act  (ANILCA) of  1980.
The  Title  XI  process requires  compliance  with  NEPA, as  well as  approvals
from the President and  Congress.

This EIS  is therefore being  written to fulfill the  permitting  requirements  of
EPA  and  the Corps as  well  as  the  EIS requirements of Title XI.  EPA and
DOI  share the lead  responsibility for  preparing  this document.  The Corps is
a  cooperating  agency.   The  NEPA  regulations which  outline the  purpose,
requirements  and procedures for this EIS process may be found  in the Code
of Federal Regulations at 40 CFR Parts 1500  to 1508.

While the federal  permitting  actions  require  the  preparation  of an EIS,  NEPA
regulations  also  require that the EIS address, to  the fullest extent possible,
state   and  local  planning  requirements.   This  EIS  therefore  provides an
information  base which  allows  state  and local  agencies to begin addressing
state right-of-way  permit  conditions,  tideland lease stipulations and  a  number

-------
of other  necessary  permits  (including  state  certification of  the EPA  and
Corps  permits).   However,  in  several cases, the  information  necessary to
fully  address certain state and  local  permits  has not  yet been  developed.
These  permits,  which generally require detailed engineering information,  will
be  sought  after  the location, size, etc.,  of  the major  project  components
have been  determined by the EIS process.
HOW DOES THE EIS PROCESS WORK?

The  primary  purpose  of the  EIS  process  is  to ensure  that environmental
information  is available to public officials and citizens  before  permit  decisions
are made and  before actions are  taken.   The  process must encourage  and
facilitate  public  involvement  in  the  decisions   affecting  the  quality  of  the
human environment.  "Scoping"  is the first step of the EIS process.

The  purpose of this scoping  process  is to provide  the  opportunity  for mem-
bers  of  the  public,  interest groups  and agencies  to  assist  in defining  the
significant environmental  issues  related to the  proposed  project.   For  the
Red  Dog  project,  examples  of these issues  include  water quality, fisheries,
subsistence  and  impacts  on Cape Krusenstern  National  Monument.   Once
these specific issues are  identified, they  are  described in a document called
the  Responsiveness  Summary that  is  distributed to  all  interested  agencies
and  parties.   These issues  form the primary basis for determining the range
of alternatives  considered in  the EIS.

Following scoping,  the  lead  agency or agencies must  ensure that sufficient
environmental information is available  to  adequately address  the significant
issues raised during  the scoping  process.   Alternative means  of achieving
the proposed project's objectives are developed  and  the  environmental  impacts
are studied and  compared.   Finally, the EIS document  is prepared  and  dis-
tributed  to the  public  in  draft form  (DEIS)  for a minimum  of  45  days for
formal review.   During  this  period,  public  hearings or meetings  are  held to
discuss  the  DEIS  and to receive  comments.  Written  comments  may  also be
submitted, and they  are  encouraged.

Following public review  of  the  DEIS,  comments  are evaluated and  the DEIS
changed   accordingly.   All   written  comments   received  during   the  review
period are actually reproduced in the  final  EIS  (FEIS),  and  the  points raised
are  individually  addressed  in that  document.   The  FEIS  is then  distributed
for another  public review period  of  at least 30 days  before any  decisions
about the  project  can be implemented.  This is to allow for additional public
comments on the FEIS.

Once a permit decision  has  been  made, a formal  public record of decision  is
prepared by each  permitting federal agency.  The  Record of  Decision (ROD)
states what  major permit decision  was made, identifies all  alternatives con-
sidered  including  those considered  environmentally  preferable, and  may  dis-
cuss  preferences  among  alternatives  based on  factors  such  as economic,
technical,  national policy and agency  mission  considerations.   The  ROD  also
states what  mitigation,  monitoring,  and  other  means  to avoid  or  minimize
environmental harm were adopted,  and if not,  why they were  not.
                                   -  2  -

-------
EIS DOCUMENT STRUCTURE

The  format  for an EIS  is prescribed by  the  NEPA regulations.  Each  section
has  a  specific  purpose and  often  is  required  to  include  certain  kinds of
information.   Following  is a  brief description  of  the  major  sections of an EIS.

     0   Summary  -  An  adequate  and  accurate  summarization  of  the  EIS
        stressing  major  conclusions,  areas  of controversy, and  the  issues to
        be resolved.

     0   Purpose of and  Need for Action   -  This  chapter  (I)   specifies  the
        underlying purpose  of the action for which  the  EIS  is being written,
        and why the action  is needed.

     0   The Proposed Project  -  This chapter  (II)  describes the  individual
        components  of the  project (e.g.,  mine,  mill,  power  source,  trans-
        portation  system) and  the  specific  options being considered for each
        component.   It tells  how the  project will be  developed.

     0   Alternatives  Including the Proposed Action  -  This  chapter  (III) is
        the  heart  of  the EIS.   It  describes  all the initial options  that  were
        considered for  the  project,  why many of them  were eliminated,  and
        how  the final options  and alternatives  were selected.   Then,  based
        on the information and analyses  presented in the chapters that follow
        on Affected  Environment (IV) and  Environmental  Consequences  (V),
        this  chapter  presents  the  environmental  impacts  of  the  proposed
        project  alternatives  in  comparative form,  thus  sharply  defining  the
        issues  and providing  a clear basis for choice  by the decision-makers
        and the public.    It  also identifies and describes the preferred alter-
        native.

     0   Affected Environment  - This chapter (IV)  succinctly  describes  the
        existing  environment  of  the  area   which  would  be  affected   by
        development  of  the  project.  It explains what  the environment is  like
        now, before  project  development begins.

     0   Environmental Consequences  -  This chapter (V) forms  the  scientific
        and analytic  basis for  the  comparison of  alternatives  in Chapter  III.
        It  details  the  potential  environmental  impacts  which  could  be  ex-
        pected for each  alternative considering the mitigation,  monitoring  and
        reclamation  procedures  which  would  be  used.   In  addition,  it  de-
        scribes unavoidable  impacts;  discusses any  irreversible or irretriev-
        able  commitments of  resources;  and  describes  the relationship  be-
        tween short-term and  long-term productivity.

     0   Summary of Permit and  Regulatory Programs  -   This   chapter  (VI)
        briefly describes the major federal, state and local permits,  contracts
        and other  approvals required for project  development,  and discusses
        how the  EIS incorporates  the relevant information to  assist agencies
        in their permitting decisions.
                                  - 3 -

-------
     0   Consultation and Coordination  -  This  chapter  (VII)  describes  the
        process for soliciting  input from  agencies  and the public,  and  how
        the  process was coordinated with the agencies'  permitting processes.

     0   Public  Response to  the  DEIS -  In the  FEIS this chapter (X) will in-
        clude  a response to comments  received  during  the  DEIS review, both
        at  public  hearings  and  as written comments.   Response  will  indicate
        how the final  document was changed  or why  no changes were  made.

     0   Appendices  -  This  section   incorporates  important  supplementary
        material prepared  in connection with  the  EIS  which  is  more appro-
        priately presented separately from the body of the  document.

Note that  several  words  in the  text  are followed  by  an "*".  These are
technical  terms which  are defined  in the  Glossary   (Chapter XII).    The
Glossary also  contains  acronyms,  abbreviations and measurement equivalents.
HOW TO COMMENT ON THE  DEIS

Comments on  the  DEIS may  be made verbally at the  public meetings or hear-
ings, and/or  in writing.   Written comments  are encouraged,  and will ensure
a  specific,  individual response  in the  FEIS.   They  need not be  typed,  but
must be legible.

Comments  may  address  any  aspect  of the  DEIS,  but  it is important  that
comments be as specific as possible.     Broad  or  vague  statements  about
inadequacy  of  the  DEIS   will   have  little  impact  unless  accompanied  by
specifics.   Criticism  of  the  adequacy of  data or methodology  should be
accompanied   by  citations of  additional  data sources  or of an  alternative
methodology  and  why it is  better.    When  criticisms  are made concerning
environmental  impacts, mitigation  measures that might alleviate  such  impacts
should  be suggested.  Too  often  valid  concerns about an EIS are not clearly
stated,   and   are  misunderstood  or  ignored  because they  are  obscured by
generalizations.
                                   - 4 -

-------
                 Chapter
Purpose of and Need for
                Action

-------
                    PURPOSE OF  AND  NEED  FOR ACTION
INTRODUCTION

Under the terms of the National  Environmental  Policy Act of 1969  (NEPA), all
federal  agencies must build into  their decision-making  processes ways both to
consider the environmental  effects of proposed  actions  and to minimize  the
adverse  impacts of those actions.  The Environmental  Impact Statement  (EIS)
required  by Section  102(2)(c)  of NEPA  is the  action-forcing  mechanism  to
accomplish those tasks.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS

The  U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency (EPA) has been  considering  the
issuance of  a  New Source  National  Pollutant Discharge  Elimination System
(NPDES) Permit  for wastewater discharge from the proposed  Red Dog Mining
Project  in  northwest Alaska.   Also,  the U.S.  National Park Service  (NPS)
has been  considering the  issuance of a  right-of-way  permit  for a  road  cor-
ridor  across  Cape  Krusenstern National Monument for  the  same project.   The
issuance of either of these permits would be a type of federal  action which is
subject  to  NEPA.   Pursuant  to NEPA, and implementing regulations  issued by
the Council on Environmental  Quality (CEQ),  EPA and the U.S. Department
of the Interior (DOI),  this  Draft  EIS  (DEIS) has  been prepared to evaluate
the potential  impacts of the proposed actions  on  the environment.

EPA's NPDES regulations  [40  CFR 122.29(c)(2)]  require that the EIS include
a recommendation on whether  the  NPDES Permit  should be issued,  denied or
issued with  conditions, and  further,  require that such  action shall occur
only after  a complete evaluation of the  projected impacts and  recommendations
contained  in  the  Final  EIS  (FEIS).

Pursuant to  Title XI*  of the Alaska National  Interest Lands Conservation  Act
of 1980  (ANILCA),  the NPS is required  to evaluate the proposed transporta-
tion  system  across  Cape  Krusenstern  National  Monument,  and  to  determine
whether  it is  compatible  with the  purposes for  which  the Monument was
established  and  whether  there  is  any  economically  feasible  and prudent
alternative route  for the system.

In addition,  the  U.S.  Department  of the Army  Corps  of Engineers (Corps),
Alaska District,  has exerted jurisdiction over this  action  under  Section  10 of
the River  and  Harbor Act of 1899  which  provides  for control  over structures
* Defined in  Glossary.

                                   I - 1

-------
or work in  or affecting navigable waters of the U.S.;  and under Section 404
of the  Clean  Water  Act of 1972  which provides  for  regulation  of the dis-
charge  of dredged  or  fill  material  into  U.S.  waters,  including  wetlands.
Action  by the Corps could  be issuance of  the  permits,  or issuance of the
permits  with  stipulations.   The  Corps intends  to adopt this document to
fulfill its NEPA obligations  if its concerns are satisfied  in the FEIS.

The  60-day review  and  comment period for this DEIS begins  when  the Notice
appears  in  the  Federal Register  announcing the  availability  of this  DEIS.
PROJECT LOCATION, HISTORY AND STATUS

Cominco  Alaska, Inc. proposes  to  develop the Red Dog  mineral  prospect on
Red  Dog  Creek, just west of Deadlock Mountain in the De  Long Mountains of
the  Western  Brooks  Range  (Fig.   1-1).   The site is located  approximately
131 km  (82 mi)  north of  Kotzebue,  55 km  (34  mi) north of  Noatak,  89  km (55
mi)  east-northeast  of the  Chukchi  Sea  at  Kivalina,  and  161  km  (100 mi)
southeast  of  Cape  Lisburne.   It  is  168  km  (105 mi)  north  of the Arctic
Circle.

The  project would  consist of an open  pit lead/zinc mine,  mill, diesel power
generators, tailings  pond*, housing and water supply facilities.  All of these
facilities  would   be  located on  private  lands  owned   by  the NANA Regional
Corporation which  are part of a selection  of  at least  8,975  ha  (22,176 ac) in
the  Red  Dog  Valley.  The mine  area  facilities would  be  connected  by a  road
corridor to a port and shipping facilities  located at the coast.  The proposed
mine  contains approximately  77  million  Mg  (85 million tons) of  ore  and the
expected  mine life is at  least 40 years.

Passage  of the  Alaska Native Claims  Settlement Act  (ANCSA)  in  1971 called
for the evaluation  of the resource potential of lands  considered  for  possible
inclusion  in  various  national  conservation  systems.   One of the  areas of
study  was  the  De  Long  Mountains.   In September 1975  the U.S.  Bureau of
Mines issued  a  press release outlining the findings of its work in  that area.
This  press release  spurred  considerable  interest  from the mining industry.
In the  years to follow,  two  major exploration efforts,  one by Cominco and
the  other  by GCO  Minerals Company,  resulted in  the staking of some 18,000
claims in  the area to the west and  southwest  of the  Red  Dog  prospect.   The
NANA Regional  Corporation  obtained selection  rights to the  Red Dog  area
with the passage of ANILCA  in 1980.

After the  establishment  of its  right  to  the Red Dog  deposit, NANA sought  a
partner  to aid  in  development of  the  project.  After discussing  the  project
with  a  number  of mining companies, NANA selected  Cominco as  its partner.
In the  spring of 1982,   a  letter  of  agreement was  signed which  outlined the
relationship  between Cominco and  NANA.   That agreement called for Cominco
to  lease  the property   from  NANA  and  to act as operator of  the  project.
Cominco would  be  responsible for  permit acquisition, design,  construction,
financing  and operation  of the  mine.   NANA  would receive 50  percent of the
net  profits of the project over time.
*  Defined  in Glossary.

                                    I - 2

-------
CAPE LISBURNE
                                                             BROOKS     RANGE
                          MOUNTAINS
                                                         NOATAK NATIONAL PRESERVE
           V.— ALASKA MARITIME   ,
CAPE    ~A  /\ NATIONAL
TU^MDC^M )\\     I w, LD L|FE REFUGE
                                       DEADLOCK MTN
                                   a./ EL 2995'
                                                    i  ^-CAPE KRUSENSTERN
                                                    U^^ ARCHEOLOGICAL DISTRICT
                 CAPE KRUSENSTERN
                 NATIONAL
                 MONUMENT
           so kilymeters
                              FIGURE  1-1  NORTHWESTERN ALASKA

-------
In August 1982 GCO  Minerals made application to the U.S.  Bureau  of  Land
Management (BLM)  and the  Alaska  Department of  Natural  Resources (DNR)
for a  transportation right-of-way from their Lik mineral prospect (only  19  km
[12 mi]  northwest of Red  Dog Valley) to the Chukchi Sea.  In January 1983,
Cominco  formally  made application  to EPA for an  NPDES Permit.  EPA then
made  a  determination  under  NEPA   that  its  issuance of that  permit  would
constitute  a  significant  action  affecting  the  human  environment.   This
determination  formally  began the EIS  process, with  EPA  as  the lead federal
agency.   Ott  Water Engineers, Inc.  of Anchorage was then  selected by  EPA,
in consultation  with Cominco, as the third  party contractor to prepare the
EIS for  EPA.   Faced  with  two similar right-of-way applications, federal  and
state  agencies  decided  that  only  one  transportation   corridor  would  be
approved,  and  that only  one EIS  would be written for  both applications to
select  that route.   After  further   discussions   among  the  applicants  and
agencies, GCO  Minerals  requested  that its application be held  in  abeyance.

During  February  and  March  of  1983 an  EIS  scoping process  identified the
major issues  associated with  the  Red  Dog  project.   In late spring Cominco's
baseline  data  collection  program, which was initiated  in  the spring of 1981,
was extended  through the summer of 1983.

As  the  EIS process progressed,  the  possibility emerged that a transportation
corridor  through  Cape  Krusenstern  National  Monument might be selected as
the  preferred alternative.   Cominco  then began  to  explore  with NPS the
ANILCA  Title XI  process  for securing a right-of-way across the  Monument.
On November  7, 1983 Cominco made a formal Title XI application to the NPS.
Cominco's application  is the  first ever filed.   At that point,  DO! became co-
lead agency with EPA for  the EIS process  in accordance with the Memorandum
of Agreement  among EPA and the cooperating agencies.  Title XI applications
were  also filed with EPA and the Corps.

In  June  1983 NANA  began  separate  discussions with  the  NPS for a land
exchange.   This exchange,  if successfully negotiated and implemented,  would
alter  the northwest boundary of the Monument to exclude lands surrounding
the preferred transportation corridor,  thereby making a  Title XI  permit un-
necessary.   The  NPS would receive  NANA  lands  for  inclusion  within the
Monument, as well  as other  lands and  interests outside the Monument.   Land
exchange discussions  are  expected to continue throughout  the  EIS and Title
XI  processes.   If  the  preferred   alternative  was   developed   with  a land
exchange,  the environmental  impacts  would be  similar.

Cominco's most  probable  schedule (Fig. I-2)  shows  the  winter  of  1985-86 as
the beginning of construction.   The construction  period would  last a minimum
of  24 months  with  mining  beginning in 1988.  The  actual beginning of con-
struction would depend on  world economic conditions, ability to complete de-
tailed engineering  design,  and the progress of the  environmental permit pro-
cess.  In the event that  any delays  in the  schedule occurred, the necessity
to meet annual sealift* windows  would require modification in the construction
period by one year increments.
*  Defined  in Glossary.
                                   I  - 4

-------
    o
    c
    30
    m

    T
3

EIS PROCESS
CONSTRUCTION PERMITS
GEOTECHNICAL FIELD ENGR.
DESIGN ENGINEERING
ROAD CONSTRUCTION
MILL CONSTRUCTION (SITE)
MINE DEVELOPMENT
PROJECTED START-UP
CONCENTRATE SHIPMENT
1
1983
•M^M









1984
••


•••••I






1985



•«••







1986






^•IHBHi
•i^
m^m


1987





••M
^•i
m^mmm


1988







-
—
A
5
m
2  13
m  3D
m
m

-------
COMINCO AND NANA OBJECTIVES

The agreement between NANA  and Cominco for development  of  the  Red  Dog
mine  represents   a  melding of  social,  cultural,  environmental and  economic
interests.   The intent of  the  agreement  is to  allow development in a manner
that provides for:  a long-term economic base  for the NANA  region; jobs  for
NANA  shareholders  and  other  Alaskans;  a source  of  lead/zinc concentrates
and  an  economic  return for  Cominco; and minimal impacts  on  the region's
social,  historical, cultural  and  subsistence lifestyles.   Important features of
the agreement include:

     0  A  rate of production  jointly  determined to  maximize  life of  the mine
        and economic  return.

     0  Development  of "temporary"  facilities  to  house workers on  a rota-
        tional basis to eliminate the  long-term  disruptive  influence of  a  new
        townsite on  the existing village lifestyle of  the  region.

     0  A commitment to  develop and operate the project with  careful consid-
        eration for  the existing subsistence lifestyle  of the  region.   NANA
        has the authority to suspend operations if  the project were  to have
        too  negative  an effect  upon  subsistence  (e.g.,  during caribou,  fish
        or marine mammal migrations).

     0  Complete  reclamation of  the  area,  to  the  extent  feasible, following
        completion of the project.


SCOPING ISSUES

During  the  scoping process, which involved the full participation  of Cominco,
members of the public,  special  interest groups, and agencies  involved  in the
EIS  process,  the following  12  issues  were  identified as being of  major con-
cern if  the  project were developed:

Issue 1:  Maintaining  the Quality and Quantity  of Water

The  project has  the  potential  for  both  enhancement and   degradation  of
freshwater resources  in the project area.  Potential problems  associated with
the project  include:

     0  Increased  sediment loads in watercourses from  disturbed  areas.

     0  Alteration  of  streamflow   which  could affect fish  movements  and
        habitat.

     0  Degradation  of surface  and/or groundwater through  mine  drainage,
        heavy metal  and  trace  element leachates, and  the  addition of  reagent
        chemicals.
                                   I  - 6

-------
Issue 2:   Maintaining  the Quality  and Quantity of Fishery Habitat,  and
          Minimizing  Disruption  of Fish  Movements

Construction  of  an overland  transportation  system  and  a  port site  has  the
potential to disturb fish  movements,  spawning, and  rearing  habitats.  Failure
to meet water quality  criteria  at  the mine could  also  adversely affect fishery
resources.

Issue 3:   Maintaining  the Quality  and Quantity of Wildlife Habitat,  and
          Minimizing  Impacts on Wildlife

Development  of several project  components,  particularly  the  overland trans-
portation  system  and  the  port  site,  has  the potential to impact wildlife  and
wildlife habitats.   Specific concerns include:

     0  Direct habitat  loss due  to physical change.

     0  Indirect  habitat loss due to increased activity and human disturbance.

     0  Alteration  of traditional  movement patterns (e.g., caribou).

Issue 4:   Minimizing  Impacts on Coastal Geologic  Processes

Development of a  port site and concentrate  shipping  facilities has  the poten-
tial to disturb natural  sediment  processes (e.g.,  longshore gravel  transport).
Such disturbance  might affect the integrity of coastal lagoons  and  could con-
ceivably   affect   the  archeologically  significant  beach  ridges   at  Cape
Krusenstern.

Issue 5:   Minimizing  Impacts on Marine  Life

Construction  and  operation of  a  port site with  fuel  and concentrate loading
facilities  and  shipping activity  could directly  impact or  cause  the relocation
of marine species.

Issue 6:   Protecting  Subsistence Resources and Their Use

Construction  and operation of the project could  impact  subsistence resources
and  their  use  by  residents   of  the  nearby  communities  of Kivalina  and
Noatak.   Of  particular   concern   are  caribou,  Arctic  char,  waterfowl  and
marine mammals.

Issue 7:   Protecting  Cultural  Resources

The  project would be  constructed  and operated in an area of important arch-
eological  resources  as  evidenced  by  the  creation  of  Cape  Krusenstern
National   Monument around the significant  archeological  values of the Cape
Krusenstern beach ridges.

Issue 8:   Minimizing  the  Social, Cultural and Economic Impacts on  Residents
          of the  Region

Development  of  a  large  mining project in an otherwise  rural  area of north-
western  Alaska  would have impacts  upon the  social, cultural and economic
lifestyles  of the  region's residents.

                                    I  -  7

-------
Issue 9:   Designing Project  Components from  a  Regional  Use Perspective

The  design  of several project components,  particularly  the port  site and
transportation  corridor, would  significantly influence the future development
of the  western De Long  Mountains  region of  northwest Alaska.   DNR has
indicated  that they  will  permit only  one,  multi-use transportation  corridor
through  the  region,  so the siting  and design of these components should  be
made from a  regional use perspective.

Issue 10:   Impacts on Cape  Krusenstern National  Monument

Since  some  feasible  transportation   corridor  options  pass  through  Cape
Krusenstern  National  Monument,  impacts  on the  Monument  would have to  be
evaluated.  This  issue  could  have  national  significance.   While  Title XI  of
ANILCA  establishes a process for gaining access through the Monument, the
act requires that  there  be no  economically feasible and prudent  alternative
route for  the  system.

Issue 11:   Technical  Feasibility

If project  components or mitigation and reclamation  measures became  too com-
plex,   an   increased  risk  of failure  could  result,   and technical  feasibility
would then become an issue.

Issue 12:   Economic Feasibility

If costs   of  project  components  or  mitigation  and  reclamation  requirements
exceeded  reasonable  or  practical  limits,  economic feasibility  would become  an
issue.
FEDERAL,  STATE AND MUNICIPAL PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS

Before  construction  and  operation  of  the  Red  Dog  project  could begin,
Cominco  must  obtain  several  federal  and state approvals.   These  are  dis-
cussed in more detail  in Chapter  VI as they relate to the EIS process.  Some
of the major  permits, contracts or other approvals  include:

Federal Government

U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency (EPA):

     0  National Pollutant  Discharge Elimination  System Permit (NPDES)

     0  Review of U.S.  Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 Permit for con-
        formance with Section 404(b)(1)  guidelines

     0  Review of ANILCA Title XI Permit Application

U.S.  Army Corps  of Engineers (Corps):

     0  Department  of the Army  (DA)  Permit  under authority of Section  404
        (discharge  of dredged or fill  material  into  U.S. waters,  including
        wetlands)
                                     -  8

-------
     0   DA  Permit under  authority  of  Section  10  (any structure or activity
        affecting navigable waters of the  U.S.)
     0   Review of transportation system under ANILCA Title  XI
U.S. National  Park Service (NPS):
     0   Right-of-way  for  transportation  system under  ANILCA  Title  XI  (if
        Cape Krusenstern  National Monument route was selected)
     0   ANILCA Section 810 Subsistence Compliance Findings
U.S. Fish and  Wildlife  Service (FWS):
     0   Possible Section 7 Consultation  (for the endangered peregrine falcon)
National Marine  Fisheries Service (NMFS):
     0   Possible Section 7  Consultation  (for endangered  marine mammals)
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP)
     0   Consultation on Cultural Sites
State of Alaska
Department  of  Environmental  Conservation (DEC):
     0   Air  Quality Permit  to  Operate (including  Prevention of Significant
        Deterioration [PSD]  Permit approval)
     0   Certificate of  Reasonable Assurance (Water Quality)
     0   Wastewater Disposal  Permit
     0   Solid Waste  Disposal Permit
Department  of  Fish &  Game (ADF&G):
     0   Title 16 Anadromous*  Fish Stream Permit
Department  of  Natural  Resources (DNR):
     0   Right-of-Way Permit
     0   Water Rights Permit
     0   Dam Safety  Permit
     0   Tidelands Use  Permit
     0   Tidelands Lease
     0   Materials Sale  Contract
* Defined in Glossary.
                                   I  -  9

-------
State  Historic Preservation Office  (SHPO):

     0  Cultural Resources Clearance on State Lands

     0  Consultation on Cultural Sites, Federal Lands

Governor's Office of Management and Budget,  Division of Governmental
Coordination:

     0  Coastal Zone Management Consistency  Determination Concurrence

Local  Government

North Slope Borough  (NSB):

     0  Land Use Permit


COOPERATING AGENCY

In addition to the EPA and  DOI  as co-lead  agencies,  the Corps  is  a coop-
erating  agency for  the  Red Dog EIS.
                                     -  10

-------
	Chapter II
The Proposed Project

-------
                       II.  THE PROPOSED PROJECT
INTRODUCTION

Development  of  the  Red  Dog mining  project would  involve  an open  pit lead/
zinc mine  located  131  km  (82  mi) north  of  Kotzebue.   The  ore would  be
crushed  and the metallic  sulfides concentrated in a mill  near the mine  site,
with the concentrates  transported to the coast for shipment to market.  While
the deposit has not yet  been fully defined  by geologists,  at least 77 million
Mg  (85 million  tons) of ore exist.  The ore  contains  approximately  5.0 per-
cent lead, 17.1  percent zinc,  75  g/Mg  (2.4 oz/ton)  silver  and  measurable
levels  of  barite.  The project has a  potential life of at least 40 years  under
expected  production  rates,  with  the  possibility of extension  if additional ore
is  found.  The  mine  would  be developed  in two  phases.   The  "initial"  phase
of   production  would  extend five  years  and  produce  approximately 434,450
Mg/yr   (479,000  tons/yr)  of concentrates  (Table  11-1).   The  "expanded"
phase  of  production   would  extend   from  the   sixth  year  of development
through  the  life of  the  project.   Approximately  683,878  Mg/yr  (754,000
tons/yr) of concentrates would  be produced  during this phase (Table  11-1).

The mine,  tailings  pond,  mill,  power   plant,   worker  housing  and  water
reservoir would all  be located within  a 8,975  ha  (22,176 ac) parcel of private
land owned  by  NANA in Red  Dog Valley.   The port  site would  also  be  on
private NANA  land  if located  at VABM  28,  and probably on  NANA land  if
located at  Tugak   Lagoon.    The  transportation  corridor would  be almost
totally on public land.


PROJECT COMPONENTS AND OPTIONS

In   reviewing  this document, it  is important  that the  reader understand the
relationship  among  the  terms "component",  "option"  and "alternative".  The
project has  several   components, each  one  a  necessary  part  of an  entire
viable  mining project  (e.g.,  the  mine,  mill site,  tailings pond,  transportation
system,  port site,  etc.).   For   each  component  there may be  one or  more
options (e.g.,  a northern or a southern transportation corridor option).   An
alternative is a combination of options (one for  each component) that consti-
tutes an entire  functioning project.

The EIS scoping process  initially identified at least two,  and  often several,
options for  each  component.   The process  by  which  this large  number of
options was  screened  to  reduce the  number to  a manageable level,  and the
                                   II  - 1

-------
                                 Table  11-1
                  CONCENTRATE  PRODUCTION SCHEDULE
Daily Production
(Average
Amount/Day)
Ore
Lead Concentrate
Zinc Concentrate
Barite Concentrate
Tailings*
Annual Production
Ore
Lead Concentrate
Zinc Concentrate
Barite Concentrate
Tailings
Initial Production Rate
Mg1
2,721
204
907
127
1,678
958,700
71,650
317,450
45,350
524,250
Tons
3,000
225
1,000
140
1,850
1,057,000
79,000
350,000
50,000
578,000
Expanded Production Rate
Mg1
5,079
308
1,515
127
2,766
1,779,534
107,933
530,595
45,350
1,095,656
Tons
5,600
340
1,670
140
3,050
1,962,000
119,000
585,000
50,000
1,208,000
1  1 Mg  (megagram)  =  1.102  tons
   1 ton = 0.907 Mg

Source:   Cominco Alaska, Inc.
ultimate  project alternatives  were selected,  is  described  in  detail in Chapter
Ml.   The following  description of  each project  component, therefore,  ad-
dresses only  those component  options which  were ultimately  retained and
are specifically addressed in  at  least one of the three  action alternatives.

Mine

The  Red Dog deposit is located  on  a side hill  on  the main fork of Red Dog
Creek.   The immediate  topography  generally  consists of  rolling  hills with
wide  valleys.  The  zone of  mining  influence would impact  the  main stem  of
Red  Dog Creek  (Fig.  11-1).
* Defined in Glossary.
                                      - 2

-------
      APPROX PT
      OF WATER
      TREATMENT
      DISCHARGE
             SOUTH FQRK
             TAILINGS POND
               SITE
FIGURE II -1  RED DOG VALLEY MAP

-------
The  outcropping ore body  and its geological configuration  dictate that a con-
ventional  underground mine  would  not  be feasible.   Open  pit mining  would
require overburden (waste rock)  removal  from the surface  of the ore  body,
followed  by drilling and  blasting  of  the ore  in  benches within an  open pit.
Overburden material not  suitable for  mill processing would be stockpiled near
the tailings pond.

The  mine pit  would be developed in two stages:   preproduction  followed  by
production  mining.   During   preproduction,  overburden  would   be   removed
from the  pit,  and  access roads, pit  ramps and  the initial  benches would  be
established.   Unmineralized waste  would be  used  for road  and tailings dam
construction.   Mineralized  waste  would be stockpiled  in  a catchment area
above  the tailings  pond.    During preproduction,  it is estimated  that a total
of 1,242,000 Mg (1,365,000 tons) of material would  be  removed.

Ore  production  rates  are an  important  economic factor  and are  normally
based  on the  extent of services and the estimated quantities of concentrates
that  would  be accepted in  the markets.   Initial  production  mining  would in-
volve  the annual  extraction  of 958,700  Mg  (1,057,000 tons) of  ore.   On  an
initial  operating basis, an  average of 2,721 Mg  (3,000 tons) of ore would  be
sent each day to  the  concentrator (mill) for upgrading (Table 11-1).   Drilled
and  blasted  ore  would  be loaded  into  mine type trucks  using  front-end
loaders.    The  mine  trucks would transport  the  ore  to  a  crushing facility
adjacent to the mill.  The  same  loaders and  trucks would be used to trans-
port low  grade ore and  waste materials  to  stockpiles at the tailings  pond.

The  open pit  would be designed to optimize ore  recovery with due considera-
tion  given to  protection  of the Red  Dog Creek  watershed adjacent  to the  pit
area (Fig.  II-2).   Pit  slopes  would be designed at 35 degrees and would  be
confirmed  by  rock mechanics  design.   Benches  would be  7.6 m  (25  ft) high
and  access ramps 18.3 m (60  ft) wide at an eight  percent grade.  The  initial
pit would be approximately   244  m  (800  ft)  in  diameter and  could  contain
seven  benches down to the 297 m (975  ft) elevation.   The final  pit could  be
853 m  x  305  m (2,800  ft x 1,000  ft) in  area and contain  up to 28 benches to
the 152 m (500 ft) elevation.

A  diversion ditch  would be constructed between  Red Dog Creek and  the open
pit to  collect  runoff from  the  mine area.   The  ditch would  initially intercept
runoff from an approximate area  of 0.65  km2 (0.25 mi2).   The depth  of the
ditch would be sufficient to ensure that it would collect most of the ore zone
runoff from the south side  of the creek.   If  significant subsurface  inflow
from the  creek occurred,  a seepage cutoff wall  would  be added where neces-
sary to block this  inflow.

The  drainage ditch  would also  collect  surface  erosion sediment originating
from the open  pit  and  the  associated ore  haul  road  to  the mill.   A pump
station would route runoff  from  the  open  pit to the tailings  pond.  The
ditch,  collection sump and pump  to the  tailings  pond would be sized for  a
10-year   recurrence  24-hour   storm  event.    Adequate   capacity  would  be
allowed  for  winter  icings and  snow  accumulation.   The  ditch  would  be
cleaned of  ice and  erosion debris,  if necessary,  in late winter or spring to
retain  capacity  for spring  breakup and summer storm  runoff.
                                   II  -  4

-------
      LATITUDE
I	f
      Z50FT. ,
                                       PROPOSED DIVERSION
                                       DITCH/BERM
            FIGURE II -2   MINE  PIT LAYOUT

-------
Tailings  Pond

The  location of the South  Fork tailings pond in Red  Dog Valley is shown on
Figure  11-1.   A detailed  diagram of the  approximately  237 ha (585 ac) tail-
ings pond  facility  is shown on  Figure  II-3.  The  tailings  pond dam  would be
in the form  of  an  impervious earth-filled  structure with a spillway  designed
to maintain  structural integrity  in the event of an overflow.  The  earth-filled
dam  would  be  constructed  in  stages.    Prior  to  full  production,  the  dam
would  be constructed to contain five  years of production tailings.  The  dam
would  then  be  raised  to  its  final elevation  in stages  during the next  five
years.  The top of the dam would be used as a road to  haul  ore from  the  pit
to the mill  complex.   The  dam  is designated  to handle  tailings  from  produc-
tion  of the known  ore  body which is presently identified as 77 million  Mg  (85
million tons) of ore.

Thickened  tailings slurry  from the mill concentrating process would  contain
about  60 percent solids by weight,  with  the  liquid portion consisting of ex-
cess process water,  dissolved  minerals  and perhaps some  residual reagents.
The  slurry would flow by  gravity from the  mill  into  the  tailings  pond.   An
internal  process using  a thickener would  be  used to return water directly to
the mill  process circuit  as a  step  in  minimizing  process  water loss.   It is
estimated that  approximately 85 percent of mill process  water could be recir-
culated directly  in the mill in  this way.  Additional mill process water would
be  recycled from  the  tailings  pond  (25  percent) or  from  the  freshwater
source (11  percent).   These  recycle estimates are  based  upon water  balance
flowsheet data  (Cominco Engineering  Services,  Ltd., 1983b).   Tailings  in  the
form of a thickened pump  would be deposited behind the dam.

Red  Dog Creek tributaries  with  known  metal  content  of toxic  concentrations
would  continue  to  drain into the  tailings  pond for  treatment,  as  would pre-
cipitation-related runoff.   Diversion  structures and ditches would be built to
control or  prevent excess  surface drainage of uncontaminated  water  into  the
tailings  pond.    The surface water  would  be  routed  into  the  Bons  Creek
drainage,  thus  reducing  the  amount of  water accumulating  in  the tailings
pond.   Chemical treatment  and metals  removal  of  tailings  pond water would
take place in a treatment  plant prior to discharge to  the  presently minerals-
contaminated Red Dog  Creek.  Discharges  would occur only between May  and
October.   A seepage contingency  dam  would  be  constructed downstream of
the  main tailings  pond  dam  to  collect  any  seepage and  return it  to   the
tailings pond.

Mill

Proximity to the mine and  tailings pond  were determining factors in mill loca-
tion.   The  proposed mill   site would  be  on  a small  hill of  bedrock outcrop
located opposite the  ore  body  on the northwest  side  of the  South Fork tail-
ings pond  (Fig.  11-1).   This site  would be located  within the pond catchment
area so  that tailings slurry could flow  by  gravity from the concentrator com-
plex to  the tailings  pond.  In addition,  worker  housing  facilities would be
located within  a reasonable distance  of  the mill site so  that waste heat pro-
duced  in the power generation process could be used  to heat the  accommoda-
tions.
                                   II  - 6

-------
WORKER HOUSING
                   EEPAGE
                  CONTINGENCY
                  DAM
                                             VERBURDE

                                            STOCKPILE

                                              AREA
      NATURAL RUNOFF
      DIVERSION DITCH


                                       HAUL ROAD
                     YEAR 5
  SEEPAGE CONTINGENCY
  DAM
                                                     -EL 950
                                                     -EL 870
                                              HAUL ROAD

                                                     EL 800

930
	 —•" — t ^*» 	
i 310

                     TAILINGS  DAM SECTION
     FIGURE II -3 SOUTH  FORK TAILINGS POND

-------
The  proposed  mill  complex is shown on  Figure  11-4.   The approximately  14
ha (35  ac) complex would  include  a water  treatment  plant,   a  diesel-based
power  plant,  fuel  storage  and distribution  facilities,  and  a vehicle  mainten-
ance/warehouse  structure   in  addition  to  facilities  integral   to  the  milling
process.

The  project would use  a  selective flotation milling  process  to  concentrate
valuable minerals.   The  flotation  process  would consist of three  major steps:
size  reduction,  selective mineral concentration and  moisture  reduction of the
concentrates.    During  the milling  process,  lead,  zinc and  barite  minerals
would be separated and  concentrated, while the residual  tailings  slurry  con-
taining  waste  rock  would  be directed to  the  tailings  pond.   Silver forms
complexes  with  the  lead  and  zinc  concentrates  in  the  milling process,  and
would be  separated out later during  smelting.

After grinding,  the ore  would be  suspended in a  water slurry and trans-
ported  to  flotation  cells  (tanks)  where  the valuable minerals  would  be sepa-
rated from waste  materials  in  a  froth flotation  process.   In this  process,
valuable minerals adhere to air bubbles that  rise to the surface  of the tanks
and  are removed.   To make the process  work efficiently, it  is  necessary to
add  air and various reagents.  The reagents either  aid flotation of valuable
components or suppress  flotation of waste material.   This allows the  bubbling
and  frothing  action to float  different ore  minerals  selectively so that metal
concentrates  can  be  produced.   The  ore minerals  would be separated  as
sulfide  concentrates of lead and zinc,  with  barite recovered in the last stage
of the  process  as  barium  sulfate.   Waste would  include silicate  minerals and
small concentrations of sulfides.

Following separation of the ore minerals from waste rock, dewatering of the
concentrates would take  place  using lead and  zinc  thickeners,  followed  by
filtration  and  thermal  drying.  Wherever possible, waste heat  from the diesel-
based power generation would  be  used for drying the concentrates.

No   reduction  of  sulfides  to  base  metals  or other  changes  in  the  chemical
composition of  ore  minerals would  take place in the  concentrator or at the
project  site.   The  upgraded  lead  and  zinc concentrates  (which would  also
contain  silver)  would be shipped  to  smelters outside of Alaska for processing
to refined metals.   Barite concentrate would  be dried and bagged locally for
possible use in  formulating  oil  well drilling mud.

The  mill  would  be  a major consumer  of water and,  as such,  recirculation of
process  water  would  be used  to  the fullest extent  possible.   In addition to
concentrate thickeners,  a  tailings  thickener would  be used to recycle water,
thus decreasing  the   volume  of tailings  slurry  produced.   This would  de-
crease  the  amount  of  water that would  have to  be treated, and would reduce
annual  water  demand by approximately 3,400 million £ (900 million gal).

Reagents are an integral part of  mill operation and  sufficient  quantities for a
year's operation would be stored at the  mill  site.   Reagents to  be  used for
the  Red  Dog  project  are  shown in  Table II-2.   These  materials  would  be
supplied  in  annual shipments  and  stored  in  a secure area at the port  site.
                                    II - 8

-------
3
O

DO
m
CO

m
o
F
H
fn
CO
TRUCK MAINTENANCE
AND WAREHOUSE


-------
                                Table  11-2
                   RED DOG CONCENTRATOR  REAGENTS
                                 Initial  Production
Zinc sulfate (ZnSO4)
Copper  sulfate (CuSO4)
Sodium  cyanide  (NaCn)
MethylisobutyI carbinol (MIBC)
Sodium  isopropyl xanthate
Sodium  cetylsulfonate  (EC-111)
Sulfuric acid (H2SO4)
Hydrated  lime [Ca(OH)2]*
Polyacrylamide flocculant*
  (Percol  730)
Mg/yr
  480
  480
   96
   48
  480
   72
  959
2,396
    5
tons/yr
   529
   529
   106
    53
   529
    79
 1,057
 2,642
     6
Expanded Production
 Mg/yr      tons/yr
   891
   891
   179
    89
   891
    72
 1,780
 5,845
     5
  982
  982
  197
   98
  982
   79
1,962
6,443
    6
*  Note:  Part of the lime and all of the flocculant supply would  be  used in
          the wastewater treatment  process.
The  zinc  (ZnSO4) and  copper (CuSO4) sulfates used as conditioners  in flota-
tion  would be  handled  in  polylined and sealed  palletized  cartons of  approxi-
mately 0.9 Mg  (1  ton)  capacity.   These  materials could  be compatibly stored
together and their toxic environmental hazards are well  known.
Sodium  cyanide (NaCn) is  a  toxic  reagent  and must,  at  all times, be stored
and  handled in isolation from  other  chemicals,  particularly those which  are
acidic in  nature, including the sulfate salts.  This  material would be  shipped
in 102 kg  (225 Ib) sealed  drums  on  pallets.  The reagent  is essential to  the
metallurgical process  as a  depressant  of iron minerals.
                                   II - 10

-------
Methylisobutyl carbinol  (MIBC) is  an aliphatic liquid alcohol  which has only a
moderate  solubility  in  water.  It is  moderately toxic to  aquatic  life  and com-
parable in this respect to most  intermediate  molecular weight  liquid  alcohols.
This  chemical  would be shipped  in 181 kg  (400  Ib)  steel drums  and could be
safely stored  with  the  other  chemicals.

Sodium isopropyl  xanthate  is an  essential  sulfide mineral  collector  in the
flotation process, and  is very  toxic in the environment.   It would be shipped
in approximately  0.9 Mg  (1  ton)  sealed, palletized  containers which prefei—
ably  would be  stored  apart  from  acidic materials.   A potential  problem with
xanthate  is that it may deteriorate from  prolonged contact with  moisture and
then  would require disposal  as it would be  unusable as a reagent.

Sodium cetylsulfonate  (EC-Ill) is  a  paste-like surface active  agent  used for
barite flotation that   has  only a  moderate  solubility in  water.   It  is  essen-
tially  non-toxic  and has  been  approved  for  use  in food  applications.   This
material  would  be  shipped  in  181  kg (400  Ib)  steel drums  on pallets  and
would be  compatible with all  other  reagents.

Sulfuric acid  (H2SO4)  is  a  hazard to aquatic life by  virtue  of  pH  reduction
effects.   Because of its liquid  nature, spills would  be  difficult to contain and
the  chemical  could  have  long  lasting impacts on  vegetation  recovery unless
lime  were  applied  as a  neutralizing  agent.   Sulfuric acid  would  be  stored at
the  port  in an isolated, berm-protected bulk  tank and hauled to the mine in
acid  standard tank  trailers of 24,227  £  (6,400  gal) capacity.

Lime  would be  used as a  pH modifier in  the  mill flotation  process and  in the
wastewater treatment plant.    It  is only toxic in concentrations  which  result
in high  alkalinity  and  would  be  relatively  safe to manage in  the  hydrated
form.   It  would be shipped and  stored  in heavy-wall plastic bags  of about
1.8 Mg (2 tons) capacity.  There would be  no constraints  on  its  storage with
other  reagents.

Polyacrylamide flocculant  (Percol 730) is  a  slowly water soluble, high molec-
ular   weight,  acrylamide-based polymer that  would  be used as  a solids set-
tling  aid  in the wastewater  treatment plant.   This material is relatively non-
toxic.  It would be shipped in  23 kg  (50  Ib) sacks on pallets  and must be
protected  from temperature  extremes  in storage  or  its effectiveness  might
deteriorate.

The  mill  would produce lead,  zinc  and barite concentrates.   Lead  and zinc
concentrates  would  be shipped  to  the  port site  in  covered  gondola-type
trailers while barite would be  moved in sealed containers on  flat bed  units.

The  mill  would operate on a continuous, round-the-clock basis  for an  esti-
mated 350 days  per year.   Initial  and final mill  production  rates are  shown
in Table  11-1.  Concentrates would  be transported  from the mill  site to the
main  storage  terminal at the port  site  in truck/trailer units.  Approximately
nine   to 12 daily truck  trips to  the  seaport would  be  required to handle the
estimated  daily production rate.  Six weeks' production of concentrates could
be stored  at  the mill to allow for transportation  delays during periods  of bad
weather,  when  the  roads  were unsafe  for travel,  or  if  transportation  activ-
                                   11-11

-------
ities were temporarily suspended to  protect subsistence activities or animal
migrations.

Wastewater Treatment Plant

Excess  water from the mill  process and  site runoff would  accumulate in the
tailings  pond.   By  federal  law  only water  from precipitation  in  excess of
evaporation  can  be   discharged,   and  it  must  meet  federal  water quality
criteria  for  metals  and  suspended solids.   All  discharged  water would  be
drawn   from   the  tailings  pond  and  passed  through  a  chemical  treatment
process  to  reduce  metals   and  suspended  solids  concentrations.   Normal
discharge of  treated  water into the  main  stem of  Red Dog  Creek 19 m (62 ft)
below  its confluence  with the South  Fork (Fig.  11-1)  would occur during ice
free months from  May to  October.

The proposed treatment  plant  would  be  based   on a High Density  Sludge
(HDS)   process  that  would  use  lime  to neutralize acidity  and  precipitate
soluble metals as hydroxides,  followed  by flocculant-induced clarification to
remove solids.   Treatment plant process  reliability  would depend on a  sub-
stantial  degree of  internal  sludge recycle  to produce  a  final  sludge  with
about  10 times the  density  that could  be  achieved without  recycle.   This
feature is designed to enhance  clarification and  reduce the  volume of  waste
sludge  by an order  of magnitude.   Approximately 9 Mg  (10 tons) of sludge
solids  as  a 25 percent pulp density slurry would  be produced each operating
day.

Worker Housing

A  campsite  or hotel-style facility  would  be constructed a  reasonable distance
from the  mill  site complex.   The actual  location  of  the accommodations  would
be  more specifically  defined  during the  detailed  design stage of  the project
in  accordance with  Mining Safety and  Health  Administration  (MSHA) regula-
tions that mandate specific criteria  for worker safety and comfort.

Approximately 225 to 250 full-time  employees would comprise the  project site
workforce  at  any given  time.  Workers  would  be scheduled on  a rotation of
approximately two weeks on  and two weeks  off so the total  project workforce
would  be twice that  figure.  The  projected  mine/mill workforce breakdown
would  be as  follows:

              Miners/Mill Operators             50 percent

              Mechanics/Electricians            15 percent

              Support                         15 percent

              Supervisory/Management          20 percent
Water Supply

The mill  would  be  a major  consumer  of  water so  a guaranteed  year-round
water source would  be  essential  to the project.   Wells  would not be feasible
since the  permanently  frozen  ground  prohibits free-flowing water  aquifers.
                                   II  -  12

-------
An approximately  25  ha (63  ac) water  storage reservoir located on  Bons
Creek at the south end of  Red  Dog Valley would  serve as the water supply
(Fig.  11-5).  A  rock-filled  dam  would  be constructed  on bedrock  foundation
near  the  existing  airstrip,  and a  pipeline would  follow  the existing  road
system to  the mill site.   The  reservoir would  also serve as a domestic water
supply.   It would  have a  capacity  of  1,462 dam3 (1,185  ac-ft) of water to
meet  an expected  total  daily consumption  rate of  1,136 £/min (300 gal/min)
for all the mine area facilities.

Power Generation

For  the concentration of minerals to  take  place,  a  large  amount of  power
would be expended in grinding  to achieve  a fineness  which allows adequate
liberation  of  lead  sulfide, zinc  sulfide and barite particles from  waste par-
ticles.   On an average basis,  electric  power at  a rate of 19.3 kWh/Mg (17.5
kWh/ton) of mill feed  would be  required for the grinding process.  In order
to  meet this and  other support facility demands,  a dedicated power plant
would be necessary.  The  Red Dog project would consume approximately 10.2
MW,  and an 18 MW diesel-based power plant would be  installed to allow for
down time  of some  generators.

It was desirable  to  minimize  both the  loss of waste  heat  and air pollutant
discharge  by  designing a  system  whereby waste  heat would  be used for
concentrate  drying,  with the dryer  exhaust treated in a  scrubber or other
type  of  pollutant control device.  Diesel fuel   storage  and  distribution facil-
ities  would  be provided at  the mill  site.   Fuel  storage units (capacity of
4,800  bbls)  would  periodically  be replenished from the  main fuel depot at the
coast  by tanker  trucks  or by  ore trucks specially fitted with tanker units.

Transportation Corridor

A transportation corridor would  link the Red   Dog  Valley mine facilities with
the  Chukchi  Sea  coast.   Two  corridor options are included  in the alterna-
tives:   a  northern  and a  southern  corridor (Fig.   11-6).   For the  first
11.8  km  (7.4 mi) the  two  corridors  follow  a common  alignment.   At a point
near  Dudd  Creek,  the northern  corridor swings westward  across  the Wulik,
Kivalina  and Asikpak  River drainages to  a   port  site  near  Tugak  Lagoon
24 km (15  mi) northwest of Kivalina.   At Dudd Creek the southern corridor
continues  southwest along the  flanks  of  the   Mulgrave  Hills  to  a port  site
near  VABM  28,  approximately  25.6 km (16 mi) southeast  of  Kivalina.  The
topography  of  both corridors   would  be  gentle enough  to handle  railroad
grades.  Both corridors have therefore been  laid out  to accommodate a rail-
road  at some future time.

Northern Corridor

The   northern  transportation  corridor  would  be  approximately  117.0 km
(73.1 mi) long and  would require the construction of six major (greater than
30.5 m [100  ft]) multiple-span  bridges, six minor bridges  and approximately
300 culverts.  The  route would  traverse the main stems of  Ikalukrok Creek,
and  the Kivalina,   Wulik and  Asikpak  Rivers  (Fig.   II-6).   It would  cross
approximately  12 streams which  contain fish,  including  major  char spawning
                                   II - 13

-------
r
                       DAM SECTION
              FIGURE II -5 WATER STORAGE RESERVOIR J

-------
                                                                                                                    D050G
                                                                                                                 .MINE SIT
                                                                                                                     A
                                                                                                                 DEADLOCK
 TUGAK LAGOON
TUGAK LAGOON
    PORT SITE
        KAVRORAK LAGOON
                                  IMIKRUK
                                  LAGOON
            LEGEND
                                            IPIAVIK
                                            LAGOON
               MONUMENT BOUNDARY

               TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR

               MAJOR BRIDGE CROSSING

               MINOR BRIDGE CROSSING
VABM 28
PORT SITE
     KRUSENSTERN

NATIONAL IVONUMENT

-------
and  overwintering  areas along  Ikalukrok Creek,  the Wulik  River,  Grayling
Creek  and  the  Kivalina  River.   The  route would  provide  access  to  these
fisheries streams.

Southern Corridor

The  southern  transportation corridor would be 89.9 km (56.2 mi)  long and
would  require  the  construction of one  major bridge, four minor bridges and
approximately  182  culverts.   The corridor  would  cross  tributaries of the
Wulik,   Noatak  and  Omikviorok  Rivers  near their  headwaters,   and  would
generally  stay  at  a  higher elevation  than  the  northern  corridor  until its
terminus at the VABM 28 port site (Fig.  11-6).   It would cross approximately
11 streams  which  contain  fish.    None of the streams  is considered a  major
fishery stream;  the route  would  not  provide  access to  major  fisheries
streams.

Road Transportation  System

The  road  haulage  system  would comprise a  gravel  surfaced road  and double
truck/trailer  haulage units  similar  to normal  highway vehicles,  but  over-
sized.   A  truck and a trailer  would weigh approximately 103 Mg (114 ton)
and  90 Mg  (108 ton), respectively,  or 201  Mg  (222 tons)  for one  combined
truck  and  trailer unit.   Nine to 12 daily truck/trailer  round trips  to  carry
concentrates to  the  port  site would  be  required  for the first five  years  at
initial  production rates.    Following  proposed expansion  of  production  after
five  years, daily concentrate transport trips would average  between 16 and
20.  Additional daily tanker  and  supply truck trips  and one or two trips per
day  by light  utility  vehicles would also occur.   Inbound freight would  likely
be containerized, though   some  specialized  trailers such as  tanker units (to
haul  fuel  oil to  the  mill site) would be required.  Continuous maintenance of
the  roadway  would be  necessary, thus  requiring  a  full complement of road
maintenance and  repair equipment.

Road Construction

Gravel  or competent soils  are the desirable materials for construction of the
road either as a base or as topping  material.  The roadbed or subbase  would
be composed of  granular fill 2.0 m  (6.5  ft) thick  to  prevent degradation of
permafrost.  The top surface of the road would  be  9 m (30 ft) in  width  as
shown  on  Figure 11-7.  Turnouts and passing places would  be provided  along
the  route.   Curvature  and  grade would generally  be  limited  to  10 degrees
and  three  percent,  respectively, to permit eventual  construction of a rail-
road.   Bridge  structures  and  culverts  would  be designed  to accommodate
year-round  concentrate haulage  by combined truck/trailer units.

Borrow Sites*

Because few  gravel sources  have been  identified along the corridors,  the
majority of fill  needed  for road  construction would come  from rock quarry
borrow sites.    An overview of  potential  borrow  sites along the  southern
corridor is  shown  on Figure 11-8.  Locations of these borrow sites are  shown
* Defined in Glossary.


                                   II - 16

-------
                                 30'
           rtfc
                n    n
         St1^
                          8 GIRDER
  S at 4'-(
                                 28'
                      TYPICAL BRIDGE CROSSING
                            O         2"
                                                        P.C. SLAB


                                                     STEEL GIRDERS
                                            TYPICAL SIDE SLOPE
GRADED ROCK

PROTECTION  AROUND

CULVERT AS REQUIRED
                                                             CORRIDOR
                                                             BOUNDARY
                                                             65'WIDE.
    NATURAL STREAM SLOPE
CORRUGATED STEEL CULVERT
                    TYPICAL  CULVERT  CROSSING
                                   FIGURE 11-7  TYPICAL  BRIDGE
                                         & CULVERT CROSSINGS

-------
CO

H
m
CO   TUGAK LAGOON
               LEGEND
                                             IPIAVIK
                                             LAGOON

                                            VABM 28
                                            PORT SITE
MONUMENT BOUNDARY

TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR

POTENTIAL BORROW SITE
                                                              NATIONAL M ONUMENT

-------
in more  detail  on Figures  11-9 through 11-13.   In addition, specific  informa-
tion  about each  potential borrow  site, including surface area and volume  of
material  to be  extracted, is  shown  in  Table 11-3.  This  is preliminary infor-
mation that  could  change  as better field data  are collected  for  the detailed
design and  permitting  phases of the  project.   Preliminary borrow  site infor-
mation is not available  for the northern corridor.

In.  the  event  that  a   right-of-way was  granted  across  Cape  Krusenstern
National   Monument,  but borrow  extraction  was  not permitted  within the
boundaries  of  the  Monument,  all  borrow  material would  be  extracted from
Sites  7 to 14 (Fig.   11-8).   Anticipated changes  in borrow site  specifications
(area, volume,   etc.)  are  shown  in  Table  II-4.   Sites  7 and  8 would  be
expanded in  surface area and excavation depth to compensate for the change
in the total  number  of  sites, and to provide the  necessary volume of borrow
material.   In  addition,  the  main  concentrate  storage   building  would  be
located at the  port  site rather than 4.0 km  (2.5 mi)  inland at Borrow Site  1.

Port Site

Though  operations  at  the  mine would continue  yeai—round,  activity  at the
deep-draft port  site would  be  limited to the  receipt of  supplies and fuel
during the summer  sealift,  and the shipment of concentrates from late June
until  early October.   Climatic constraints on  shipping activities thus  require
that  adequate  storage  facilities  for  concentrates,  fuel  and  other  supplies
exist  at  the  port site.   Using an all-weather road, it is estimated that eight
and a half months of concentrate storage capacity would  be required  at the
port site.

Schematics of  the  approximately 20 ha (50 ac)  proposed  port  site facilities
are shown on  Figures  11-14 and  11-15.  Depending upon  the  type of  transfer
facility (described  below),  fuel  would  be stored either onboard an "offshore
island" or in tanks  on  land  at the port site.   In either case, a year's supply
would  be kept there to  serve as  the  main fuel depot  for  the project.  Fuel
would  be periodically  hauled to  the mine site as required.  A  short cause-
way/dock structure would  be required to receive incoming freight and sup-
plies,  and for transfer of the concentrates  for  shipment.

Only  emergency  and temporary ship  loading crews  would be housed  at the
port  site.   A  small accommodation complex  would  be provided  to  support
activities during  the  summer  shipping season.   Domestic sewage would  be
collected  and treated using  a package treatment facility before discharge into
the  sea.  An   NPDES  permit  (separate  from  the  major  permit)  would  be
required  for discharge  at  the port  facility.   A  small diesel-based  1.5 MW
power plant  would be  required  to  operate  conveyor  equipment and life sup-
port facilities.

In addition   to  the  facilities  located immediately  at the coast, the  main con-
centrate   storage  building  would be located  approximately 4.0  km (2.5 mi)
inland, adjacent  to  the  transportation corridor  at  about  the  76 m  (250 ft)
elevation  (Fig.   11-16).   This structure  would  be constructed  at  excavated
Borrow  Site  1  to  minimize  habitat  destruction,  and  to take advantage  of
foundation materials and  protection  from the wind.
                                   II  - 19

-------
IPIAVIK
LAGOON
                  VABM 28 PORT SITE

             CHUCKCHI    SEA
      1 mile
       .GRAVEL PIT

       EXPLORATION AREA
FIGURE 11-9
LOCATION OF POTENTIAL
BORROW SITES 1. 2  & 3

-------
FIGURE 11-10
LOCATION OF POTENTIAL
BORROW SITES  4, 5 & 6

-------
             >E KRUSENSTERN
           NATIONAL
FIGURE
LOCATION
BORROW

-------
FIGURE
LOCATION
BORROW

-------
/FIGURE 11-13 LOCATION
 OF POTENTIAL BORROW
 SITES  10.11. 12, 13&14/

-------
                                                      Table 11-3





                                   PRELIMINARY  BORROW SITE SPECIFICATIONS,


                                               SOUTHERN CORRIDOR
INJ
en
Borrow
Site
Number
1*
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Exploration
Area
ha
85.5
49.2
57.0
98.4
77.7
163.2
67.3
59.6
88.1
20.7
20.7
16.8
36.3
15.5
ac
211.2
121.6
140.8
243/2
192.0
403.2
166.4
147.2
217.6
51.2
51.2
41.6
89.6
38.4
Disturbed
Pit Area
ha
19.4
9.5
--
5.2
13.9
--
2.4
5.0
5.6
6.3
3.0
3.0
6.5
4.6
ac
48.0
23.4
--
12.8
34.4
--
6.0
12.4
13.8
15.5
7.3
7.3
16.1
11.5
Approximate
Volume Needed
m3
305,853
289,144
--
190,189
590,100
--
149,447
307,096
422,903
246,600
54,008
54,008
174,850
171,703
yd3
400,043
378,188
--
248,760
771,826
--
195,471
401,669
553,140
322,543
70,640
70,640
228,697
224,580
Average
Excavation
Depth
m
2.1
3.0
--
4.9
4.3
--
6.1
6.1
7.6
4.0
1.8
1.8
2.7
3.6
ft
7.0
10.0
--
16.0
14.0
--
20.0
20.0
25.0
13.0
6.0
6.0
9.0
12.0
Access
Road
Length
km
0.19
0.39
--
1.29
1.08
--
0.48
1.06
3.96
0.24
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.08
mi
0.12
0.24
--
0.80
0.67
--
0.30
0.66
2.46
0.15
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.05
Within 91 m
(300 ft)
of Stream
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
         * Would also serve  as  the  coastal concentrate storage facility site after borrow excavation.

-------
Table 11-4
PRELIMINARY BORROW SITE SPECIFICATIONS
IF ALL BORROW MATERIAL WAS TAKEN FROM
OUTSIDE CAPE KRUSENSTERN NATIONAL MONUMENT
Borrow
Site
Number
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Exploration
Area
ha
80.8
71.5
88.1
20.7
20.7
16.8
36.3
15.5
ac
199.6
176.6
217.6
51.2
51.2
41.6
89.6
38.4
Disturbed
Pit Area
ha
9.9
10.2
5.6
6.3
3.0
3.0
6.5
4.6
ac
24.5
25.3
13.8
15.5
7.3
7.3
16.1
11.5
Approximate
Volume Needed
m3
760,569
974,211
422,903
246,600
54,008
54,008
174,850
171,703
yd3
994,793
1,274,228
553,140
322,543
70,640
70,640
228,697
224,580
Average
Excavation
Depth
m
7.6
9.1
7.6
4.0
1.8
1.8
2.7
3.6
ft
25.0
30.0
25.0
13.0
6.0
6.0
9.0
12.0
Access
Road
Length
km
0.48
1.06
3.96
0.24
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.08
mi
0.30
0.66
2.46
0.15
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.05
Within 91 m
(300 ft)
of Stream
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No

-------
H0)0

     O
  r>
  02

  5o
  m""
  5>
  z
  o
                     TUG,


                     •BARGE LIGHTER



                     ONCENTRATE TRANSPORT

                     SHIP
                                                                          WATER STORAGE



                                                                          SEWAGE PACKAGE TREATMENT FACILITY
                                                                       30 DIA. H2S04
214,000 BARREL FUEL STORAGE

a DRUM STORAGE
                                                                       POWER GENERATOR
                                                                     ONSHORE PORT SITE FACILITIES
                                                   DOCK OVER SHEET PILES

                                                   OR CONCRETE CAISSON
                                                                           i
                                                                                       400
              EARTHFILL-
     BARGE  DOCK
                                                    DRAWINGS NOT DRAWN TO SCALE

-------
CO
LU
O
LJ
CO

h-
ct
O
CL
Ld
tr
O
X
CO
CO
      LJ
      CC
      O
      X
      CO
  CK
  UJ
  UJ
  <
  00
           O
           O
                    UJ

                    \:
O
O
O

LU
O
ET
<
00
                          O
                          O)
                          IE
                          O
                FIGURE 11-15
            CONCEPTUAL DIAGRAM
OF A SHORT CAUSEWAY/OFFSHORE
      ISLAND TRANSFER FACILITY
                         M
                         y

-------
                 CONCENTRATE STORAGE FACILITY
                             PORT LAGOON
              VABM 2S PORT SITE
            LOCATION  DETAIL
             PLAN VIEW
                                      75 TON TRUCK

                                      75 TON TRAILER
TRACKED LOADER
         BUILDING CROSS SECTION
                                  FIGURE II-
COASTAL CONCENTRATE STORAGE FACILITY
                                                    ITY/

-------
Transfer Facility

Two methods  to transfer concentrates from the  port  site storage facility to
ocean  going vessels  are included  in  the alternatives:   a  short causeway/
lightering*  transfer  system  and  a short  causeway/offshore island  transfer
system.   Both systems  would use  a  122  m (400 ft)  causeway/dock structure
as  an  interface  between  the shore and  the  concentrate  loading  vessels  or
offshore island.   The causeway/dock  structure  would extend  to the  4.6 m
(15 ft)  water  depth.  Concentrates would  be   transferred  by  conveyor belt
from a  storage building, along the  causeway,  to a  barge  loader structure
mounted on the dock face.

The causeway structure  would  be constructed  of sheet pilings with  solid
earth  fill  (Fig.   11-14).  It  would  be suitably  capped and faced  to allow
lighter*  barges to tie up at its  seaward  face.   Depending  on the transfer
facility  option  selected,  lighter barges ranging from 907  to 4,535 Mg  (1,000
to 5,000 tons)  would  be used.

Short Causeway/Lightering System

This transfer  method would  use  two 4,535 Mg  (5,000 ton)  lighters and  two
support  tugs  to transfer  concentrates from the dock directly to the side of a
moored  ocean  going bulk-handling ship (Fig.  11-14).   The ocean going vessel
would  load  concentrates  with clam  shell cranes,  though rough  sea conditions
might  make  this  transfer method  unreliable.    Winter  shelter  for  the  two
large-capacity  lighters and their tugs  would  be  provided  in a  coastal  lagoon
located  adjacent to the port facilities.   The barrier beach  between the  lagoon
and  the sea would be breached by bulldozing  each fall and spring for  winter
harboring.   Lighters would  also  be sheltered in the  lagoon  during  severe
storms.  No dredging would take place within  the lagoon.

Short Causeway/Offshore  Island

This transfer  method would  use  an approximately 226,750 Mg  (250,000 ton)
Very Large Crude Carrier (VLCC)  surplus oil  tanker  as an  "offshore  island"
dock for the  smaller, ocean going  bulk carriers (Fig.  11-15).  Prior to being
ballasted perpendicular to shore at a prepared bottom  location, the outer hull
of this  305 m  (1,000 ft) tanker would  be  ice  strengthened by the addition of
approximately 544 Mg (600 tons) of new,  corrosion-protected steel plate.   In
addition,  about 181 Mg  (200  tons) of steel would be  provided  for additional
bulkheads  in  the  ship's  internal  tanks.  Approximately 72,628 m3  (95,000
yd3) of  gravel  ballast would be  used  to stabilize the  vessel on  the sea floor
(Fig. 11-17).

Sea  floor preparation for tanker placement would  require dredging of material
in the specific placement area  so that the exterior edges  of  the tanker would
rest on  berms, while  the central  axis of the ship would settle  in a  slight
depression.   This  would  place the hull  bottom  in tension.  Gaps under the
hull would  then be  filled with additional  dredged material,  thus creating  a
stable  "bed" in  which the bottom of the tanker would be firmly  seated.
* Defined in Glossary.


                                   II - 30

-------
                                  
-------
The  landward end  of the  tanker  would be in approximately 9.1  to  10.7 m (30
to 35 ft) of  water and the  seaward end  in  10.7  to  12.2 m (35 to 40 ft) of
water.  The tanker would have a molded sidewall  height of 24 to 27 m (80 to
90 ft) depending on the type of  VLCC selected, which would provide a free-
board of  approximately  12 to 18  m  (40  to 60  ft).  Depending  upon the  port
site  selected, the  landward end  of  the  tanker would  be  approximately  1,067
to 1,219  m   (3,500  to 4,000 ft)  from  shore.   The  tanker would be  large
enough  to accommodate  storage of concentrates,  fuel  and supplies in center
compartments protected from the  sea  by two layers of steel  (Fig.  11-17).
Onboard  concentrate  storage capacity  would  be  sufficient to  load  three to
five  ocean going bulk carriers.

The  bow  of the ship would be  modified to accommodate a  907 Mg (1,000 ton),
self-unloading  lighter which  would  discharge directly  by conveyor  belt  into
the  ship  (Fig.  11-17).   Only  one self-propelled lighter  would  be needed to
transport concentrates  because of the storage capacity onboard the  tanker.
Shelter  for  the  single,  smaller  lighter  could be  provided in  the lee of the
tanker  if necessary during bad  weather.  Winter  shelter and protection  from
severe  storms would  be  provided  in  a coastal  lagoon adjacent to the  port
site.  The lagoon  would be breached each fall and spring for winter  harbor-
ing,  but  no  dredging would  take place within the lagoon.   If  ice conditions
were suitable, winter transfer of concentrates to  the tanker island  might be
accomplished by trucks  driven  directly over  the ice.

Transfer  of  concentrates  from  the ballasted  tanker to bulk carriers would be
accomplished  using  moveable  conveyors  between ships which would be loaded
from  storage  by a clam  shell  bucket.  Similar to the  shore-based  system,
conveyors would be  covered, and  the  end of the  loader would  be  fitted  with
a telescoping spout or  "elephant's trunk", to direct  the  concentrate  into the
receiving ship's hold  below  deck  level.   Conveyor  return  belts would  be
brushed  in  an  enclosure  to  prevent  losses  to  the  sea.   Sealed barite  con-
tainers  would be loaded  by crane.

Fuel  Storage

Location of  the major fuel storage depot for the  project would  depend  upon
the  transfer  facility  selected.   For the short  causeway/lightering  option  a
full  year's supply  of  fuel  for  the  project, as well as  fuel to meet  the annual
needs of  the  region's villages, would  be stored in tanks on land at the  port
site  (Fig.  11-14).    The  fuel  would  be  lightered to  the dock from  ships
moored  offshore and  then  transferred by  pipe  to  onshore storage tanks.
These tanks would  be constructed either  on well  drained gravel pads or on
pilings  to preclude  heaving  or  jacking problems that could result  in  tank
failure.    Spillage containment  dikes and  synthetic  liners would be installed
around  the  tank  structures.   Storage capacity  of  the onshore  fuel tanks
would total  approximately  214,000 bbls with about  56  percent of that (120,000
bbls) being  for the project.   Fuel would be hauled to the mine area facilities
by tanker truck as needed during  the  year.   It  would be distributed to the
villages from  the  port site using the  same smaller barges  as presently  used
by local barge services  to navigate the rivers.
                                   II - 32

-------
For the  offshore island option,  the  same amount of fuel  would be transferred
directly  into  the  ballasted  tanker from  fuel transport  ships and  stored in
tanks aboard  the  ship (Fig. 11-17).   It would  be  moved to shore year-round
through  a 10-cm  (4-in)  diameter steel  pipe (schedule 40) surrounded by a
15-cm (6-in) diameter steel  guard pipe.   The pipeline  would be buried in  the
sea bed  below  ice  gouge depth.   Flow  detectors  would be  used to monitor
fuel  transfer  operations  to  give  immediate  indication  of pipeline leakage or
unusual  transfer  conditions.  As an  extra  precaution,  a  fuel  leak  detection
system  would be  installed to detect  leakage from  the 10-cm (4-in) transfer
pipe into the  space  between  the two pipes.  Fuel  would be  stored at the port
site to a capacity  of approximately 2,000  bbls (Fig. 11-15).   It would then be
transported to the  mine  area  facilities by tanker truck  as  needed.   Regiohal
village fuel would  be distributed by barges directly from the  tankers.
DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE

As  is the  case  with  any endeavor in  the Arctic,  the  critical factor  affecting
the  development  schedule  is  the  limited shipping  season  (generally  July
through  September).   Within these  confines and  assuming  a  project start-up
date of January 1985,  key periods in  the  development  schedule are discussed
below.

Construction equipment for road  building activities would be  landed  at the
port site during  the summer  of 1985.  This equipment would  be  idled  until
freeze-up  occurred  prior to moving  inland to the  first borrow  site.    From
January  to July of  1986,  a road  would  be built inland from the first borrow
site, as well as  back to the port site.

The first major  construction sealift of  equipment and materials would be  made
in the 1986 shipping season.  The equipment for  constructing  the  main  road,
as  well  as the mining  equipment,  would be brought in at that time.   A  small
20-person  "fly-in" construction camp  would be set  up at the  Red Dog  mine
site.  A self-contained  barge-mounted camp would be  located  in  a lagoon at
the  port  site to  support construction activity  during  the  same sealift  (Fig.
11-18).    The  barrier   beach  between  the lagoon  and  the  sea  would  be
breached  by a  bulldozer during  the first season  to  position the barge in the
lagoon.   The  100-person barge  camp  would remain in  the lagoon for the two
to  three  seasons  required for  construction of the  port  site facilities.    The
lagoon would be rebreached to  remove  the barge after  the  port facilities  were
established.  The barge would then be  converted to  the self-propelled  con-
centrate  transport lighter.

In  January of  1987  the main  road would  be completed from the port site to
Red Dog  Valley.  Construction  equipment to prepare the mill site, as well as
mining equipment to begin  development  work, would  then  be moved  to the
site.  Additional camp  facilities  (for 50 people) would  also be moved  over the
road to  the Red  Dog  site  at  that  time.   Mine development would  continue
through  1987 to the  time of production  mining  start-up in  early 1988.   Suit-
able mine  waste would  be used to construct the tailings  pond  dam during
this period.  To the  extent  that  schedule  constraints  would allow,   initial
mine work  would  be carried  out  by  permanent  crews so  that fully trained
personnel would be available by the commencement of full  operation.
                                   II - 33

-------
I 168' I.
T 1







z
IE
O






Z

-------
A  permanent dockface  (in  4.6  m [15 ft]  of water)  and short causeway would
be constructed  prior to the  1987 sealift.   This facility would be used to off-
load  ore  concentrator  and worker housing  modules,  as  well  as other  mine
equipment.  During the 1987  sealift the worker housing modules would  be the
first to be  moved  to the  mine site.   These living  quarters would  be  estab-
lished  as  quickly  as  possible  for  use by construction crews, and later by
operating  personnel during the project start-up period.  In this manner, the
additional  expense  of a larger construction camp would  be avoided.

During  the  summer and  early  fall  of  1987,  the concentrate storage building
and  other port site facilities  would  be constructed.   If the offshore island
transfer facility was selected,  the modified tanker would be towed to the site
and ballasted to the bottom during  the 1987 shipping  season.

From  September to December 1987, the  concentrator  complex modules  at the
mine  site  would be  joined and services  installed.   The facilities  would be
ready for commissioning  (start-up) in December.   Once commissioned, opera-
tions  would  commence  in  February 1988.  Construction  activities  would be
completed  prior  to the  1988  sealift.   Construction  surplus and  equipment
would be  snipped out at that time.

The  first  movements of concentrates to market would probably be during the
1988 shipping season, though this would depend on project  financing and the
status of  world  lead and zinc markets.
                                  II  - 35

-------
	Chapter III
Alternatives

-------
         III.   ALTERNATIVES  INCLUDING  THE  PROPOSED ACTION
INTRODUCTION

The EIS  scoping  process,  described in Chapter VII,  established  two impor-
tant cornerstones for the EIS.   First, it identified  12  issues of major concern
to  be  addressed  during the  EIS process.   These issues  are  described in
Chapter   I and were the bases  for  ultimately  determining the makeup of the
project alternatives.  Second,  to address  these  12 issues,  the  scoping  pro-
cess  identified  a  full  range of  options  for  the project components (Table
111-1).   Thus, a  large  number  of options  was initially considered to address
the  major technical,  environmental  and  economic issues associated  with the
project.

Even  before  the  scoping  process  began, however,   certain transportation
corridor   and  port  site  options in the  lowlands of the Wulik  and  Kivalina
drainages  were eliminated  because  of  the obvious and  significant technical,
environmental, and  social  impacts they  would  cause.   As  shown  in Figure
IV-2,  that  area  is  dominated by organic soils  (poor  foundation  conditions),
floodplains  (annual  flooding  and unstable  banks),  patterned ground (severe
permafrost  conditions),  aufeis  zones (blockage  of drainage  structures  and
transportation  systems)  and occasional  steep  slopes (landslides,  solifluction*
and  steep grades).

Environmentally these lowland  areas  contain  important  wetlands,  waterfowl
and  shorebird breeding areas,  caribou  winter  range,  and  fish migration,
spawning, rearing  and overwintering habitats.   From a social standpoint  they
are  the   prime subsistence  areas for the  residents of  Kivalina.   Also,  the
location  of  a  transportation corridor and  port site in close proximity to the
village would  have  a  much  greater  disruptive effect upon existing  lifestyles,
an impact the project is striving to avoid.


OPTIONS INITIALLY CONSIDERED

Thirty  options  and  seven   suboptions  were  identified  for  the  11 project
components  (Table  111-1).   Three components (mine,  mill  site  and  housing
locations) had only  one option  for  each.   The  ore body,  and therefore the
mine,  was fixed  in location.   For technical,   environmental  and  economic
reasons  (e.g., shorter  tailings  slurry line; natural drainage  into the tailings
pond;  good foundation  material; use of  waste heat to dry  concentrates  and
heat worker housing), locating  the  mill,  power generation source and worker
* Defined in Glossary.

                                  Ill  -  1

-------
                                Table 111-1


            COMPONENT OPTIONS AND SUBOPTIONS  IDENTIFIED

                      DURING THE SCOPING PROCESS
      Component
           Option
    Suboption
Mine Location
Fixed
Tailings Pond  Location
North Fork Red  Dog Creek
Volcano Creek
South Fork Red  Dog Creek
Mill Site  Location
Dependent  upon Tailings Pond Location
Worker Housing
  0  Location
Dependent  upon Mill Site Location
     Type
Townsite
Campsite
Water Supply
Buddy Creek
Bons  Creek
Power Generation
Coal
Gas
Hydropower
Diesel
Transportation
  0  Corridor Location
Northern
                         Southern
                         Noatak
GCO Route
Asikpak Route

Western Route
Omikviorok Route
Kruz Route
     System
Slurry Pipeline
Hovercraft
Railroad
Road
                                                         Winter Only
                                                         Year-round
Port Site
  0  Location
Singoalik  Lagoon
Tugak Lagoon
VABM  17
VABM  28
Hotham Inlet/Kotzebue Sound
     Transfer Facility
Short Causeway/Lightering
Medium  Causeway
Long Causeway
Short Causeway/Offshore Island
                                   I  - 2

-------
housing  together  near  the tailings  pond was necessary  for  logistical  pui—
poses.  Since  no objections to locating  them there were identified,  no other
options were investigated.

Tailings  Pond

Three options  were  identified  (North  and South Forks  of Red  Dog  Creek,
and  Volcano Creek),  all within  7 km (4.4 mi) of the ore  body (Fig.  111-1).
Characteristics important for locating these  options  include capacity,  amount
of surrounding surface drainage area,  structural soundness of dam founda-
tions,  minimal  impact upon fish, and  the ability of adjacent slopes to hold
the  mill  and  worker   housing  facilities  as  well as  stockpiled  overburden
materials.

Worker Housing Type

Two options were  identified, a campsite and  a townsite.  The  campsite would
house  only  workers  and support staff,  with rotations on  a periodic basis to
allow employees to return  to their homes  elsewhere  in the  region.  A town-
site  would  be  considerably larger,  including  families  and  all the  infrastruc-
ture necessary to support  a larger population.

Water  Supply

The  inability of  wells to supply  water,  because  of permafrost,  required use
of surface impoundments.   Two options, Buddy and Sons Creeks,  were iden-
tified  just south of the headwaters  of the South  Fork of Red  Dog  Creek in
the  Dudd Creek drainage  (Fig.  II-5).   Characteristics important in  selecting
a water  supply include  water  quality (particularly the ambient concentrations
of zinc),  impoundment  capacity,  structural  soundness of foundations,  stabil-
ity,  minimal  fish  impact  and minimal  pumping  distance.

Power Generation

Four options were  identified; coal,  natural gas,  hydropower and diesel.  The
primary  factors  affecting  selection   of  the  power source  were  energy  effi-
ciency and  the primary  resource  availability.

Transportation  Corridor Location

Three options  were identified  (northern,  southern and  Noatak) between Red
Dog  Valley  and the coast  (Fig.  III-2).   Characteristics important in  selecting
a corridor  include distance, ability  to  maintain  grades  suitable  for  both  a
railroad  and  road,  suitability of  soil  conditions, avoidance  to  the  extent
possible  of  major stream crossings,  subsistence use areas and cultural sites,
impact  on  Cape  Krusenstern  National  Monument,  and   impacts  on  other
regional  uses.

Northern  Corridor

The  northern corridor has two  suboptions (Fig.  III-2).   The first  would  be
the  GCO  route originally  suggested by GCO Minerals (drawing No.  1763-0-
002).  This route  would  connect GCO's Lik mineral  prospect 19  km (12 mi)
                                   III  -  3

-------
                       APPROX PT
                       OF WATER
                       TREATMENT
                       DISCHARGE
) "—'..MOUNTAI
\  JEL.2I27

V	/   /—
                     FIGURE 111-1  RED DOG VALLEY MAP
                     SHOWING TAILINGS POND OPTIONS

-------
            FIGURE
RED
SHOWING
OPTIONSV
    KDOG PROJECT AREA
TRANSPORTATION ROUTE

-------
northwest  of  Red  Dog  Valley to  the Chukchi  Sea  port  site  at  Singoalik
Lagoon,  43 km  (27 mi)  northwest  of Kivalina.   The  route,  as  modified  to
reach the  Red Dog  Valley, would traverse the Wulik and  Kivalina Rivers and
then  cross into  and  down the Singoalik River  drainage to the  coast.   It
would be 133.6  km (83.5 mi)  long  (Table  III-2) and have eight major multi-
span  bridge  crossings  (greater than  30.5 m  [100 ft]).   This route would  be
similar to  the route considered in  the Western and Arctic  Alaska  Transpor-
tation Study  (WAATS)  (Louis  Berger &  Assoc.,  1981)  as  a route from the
Noatak mining district to the coast.

The second  northern  corridor suboption would be the  Asikpak  route  (Fig.
III-2).   This  route  would  share a  common alignment with the GCO route for
the first  46.6 km (29.1  mi) from Red Dog Valley.  From the point of diver-
gence at  the  west  fork  of  the Wulik  River,  the Asikpak route would  proceed
westerly  similar  to  the  GCO  route,  but  south of it, reaching  the coast via
the Asikpak River  at  Tugak  Lagoon,  24 km  (15 mi) northwest of Kivalina.
The route would  be 120 km  (75 mi)  long (Table III-2)  and have  six  major
multi-span bridge crossings.
                                Table  III-2
DISTANCES  FOR TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR  OPTIONS AND SUBOPTIONS
                                                    Total Distance
Transportation Corridor
Option
Northern

Southern




Noatak

Suboption
GCO
Asikpak
Western (VABM 17)
Western (VABM 28)
Omikviorok (VABM 17)
Omikviorok (VABM 28)
KRUZ (VABM 28)
To Noatak Village
To Fish Hatchery
Mine to
km
133.6
117.0
95.8
104.8
88.6
97.6
89.9
81.6
110.4
Port Site
mi
83.5
73.1
59.9
65.5
55.4
61.0
56.2
51.0
69.0
Within
km
NA
NA
15.7
27.2
34.6
46.1
38.4
NA
NA
Monument
mi


9.8
17.0
21.6
28.8
24.0


                                   III - 6

-------
Southern Corridor

The  southern corridor has three suboptions, all following the same  alignment
for approximately  the first  48.3 km  (30.2 mi)  south from  Red  Dog  Valley
(Fig.  111-2).   At that point, just north of the  northern  boundary of Cape
Krusenstern  National  Monument,  the western  route  suboption  would diverge
west to  within  approximately 3.2 km  (2 mi) of the  Wulik  River.   It  would
then turn  south into  Native-selected,  but not  yet conveyed, lands still with-
in the Monument, paralleling  the  Omikviorok River to the VABM 17 port site,
or crossing the  river and  proceeding  south to the VABM 28 port site.  This
route to  VABM  17 would  be  a  total  of  95.8 km  (59.9 mi)  long  (15.7 km
[9.8 mi]  within  the Monument), and  to VABM 28 would be 104.8 km  (65.5 mi)
long (27.2  km  [17.0  mi]  within  the Monument)  (Table III-2).   The  leg  to
VABM  17 would  cross no  major  streams.   The leg  to VABM 28  would have
one major multi-span  bridge crossing.

The  Omikviorok  route suboption  would  also diverge  west  from the common
alignment.   Beginning just south of the  northern boundary  of the Monument,
the  route  would  parallel  the Omikviorok  River  to  VABM  17,  or cross the
Omikviorok  River and proceed south  to VABM 28.   This  route to  VABM  17
would be a  total of  88.6 km (55.4 mi)  long  (34.6  km  [21.6 mi] within the
Monument),  and  to  VABM  28 would  be  97.6 km  (61.0 mi) long  (46.1  km
[28.8 mi] within the  Monument)  (Table  III-2).   The  leg to VABM  17  would
cross no  major streams.   The leg  to  VABM 28 would have  one major  multi-
span bridge  crossing.

The  Kruz  route suboption would continue  to  VABM  28 from the  points  of
divergence  from the other suboptions.   It would  be 89.9 km (56.2 mi)  long
with 38.4 km (24.0 mi)  within the Monument  (Table III-2).  It would cross
the  Omikviorok  River considerably  further  upstream  than the  other  two
suboptions, and  would have one major  multi-span  bridge  crossing.

Noatak Corridor

The  Noatak  corridor  option  (Fig.  III-2),  unlike  the others,  has  not been
specifically  located  by any  study.   It  would  proceed  south from  Red  Dog
Valley on  the  same   alignment  as  the  southern  corridor for  approximately
20.8 km  (13 mi)  and  then southeast down Evaingiknuk Creek into the Noatak
Valley.   It  would then proceed  south  on the  west side  of the Noatak  River,
paralleling  the river  at least  as far as the  village of Noatak 81.6 km (51  mi).
It would probably  continue on to the  vicinity of the  fish  hatchery approxi-
mately  28.8 km  (18  mi)  downriver from  Noatak (total corridor length  of
110.4 km  [69  mi]) to reach deeper water  for barge transport.

Transportation System

Four options were identified  (slurry pipeline, hovercraft, railroad and  road).
The  road  had two suboptions:  a winter only road  and a  year-round road.
Characteristics  important  in  selecting a  transportation system include avail-
ability of technology  and  reliability.
                                  Ill  -  7

-------
Port Site  Locations

Five options  were  identified  (Singoalik Lagoon,  Tugak  Lagoon,  VABM  17,
VABM  28,  and an unspecified location in Hotham Inlet/Kotzebue Sound)  (Fig.
III-2).   Each site was specifically associated with one transportation corridor
suboption  except for VABM 17, which  could  be the terminus of  either  the
Western or Omikviorok southern route suboptions, and VABIVl 28, which  could
be the terminous of all three southern  route suboptions.   The  Hotham  Inlet/
Kotzebue  Sound  site would serve  as the  loading  point  for barges  moving
down the Noatak River.

Characteristics important  for  locating a  port site  include  suitability of soils
for  construction,  distance to  deep  water,  suitability  for  expansion,  and
suitability  for  other regional uses.   Selection  of a  port  site was,  obviously,
closely associated with the selection  of a  transportation corridor.

Transfer Facility

Four  options  were  identified  (short causeway/lightering,  medium  causeway,
long causeway and  short  causeway/offshore  island).  The  short  causeway/
lightering  option would involve a 122 m (400 ft) earth-filled dock  structure
with  stone protection facing.   Concentrates  would be  transferred to bulk
carriers  anchored  offshore using two large  barge lighters  moved  by  tugs.
The  medium and long causeways would be earth-filled  structures approxi-
mately 1,219 m  (4,000 ft)  and  2,438 to  4,267 m (8,000 to 14,000 ft), respec-
tively,  that  would  allow  loading of concentrates directly to  ships  in deeper
water.   The short  causeway/offshore island  option  would involve  the same
122 m  (400 ft) filled dock  structure and  lightering as in  the  short causeway/
lightering  option, but the concentrates  would  be transferred by one smaller,
self-powered lighter to a  large  ballasted  ship  resting on the  sea  bottom at
sufficient depth  to  directly load the bulk carriers.  The  ballasted ship would
serve as a docking  platform and concentrate storage  facility.

Characteristics important  for selecting these options include  distance to deep
water,  longshore sediment transport,  fish  and  marine  mammal  movements,
reliability and  seasonal shipping constraints.

OPTIONS SCREENING PROCESS

The  options  screening process was  conducted in two steps.  First,  all  of  the
30 options  and  seven suboptions identified during  the  scoping process  (as
described  previously)  were  initially . reviewed  to eliminate from further con-
sideration  those  options which  were  clearly  unreasonable or  infeasible pri-
marily for environmental  or technical  reasons.  In the  second step, all  re-
maining  options  and  suboptions not eliminated  in  step one were  individually
evaluated  in detail  from  the perspective of each  resource or technical  disci-
pline (e.g., water  quality, subsistence, technical  feasibility,   etc.).   These
two  steps  are described below.

Initial  Options  Evaluation

Each component  option and suboption identified during  the scoping process
was  individually  reviewed  from  environmental and  technical perspectives.   If


                                   III - 8

-------
an option (or  suboption)  was environmentally and technically reasonable and
feasible, it  was  retained for further detailed analysis.  If,  however, the op-
tion  was  determined  to be  unreasonable  or  infeasible on  environmental  or
technical  grounds,  and if other  options  retained  for that component ade-
quately addressed the  12 issues, it was eliminated.  Table III-3  identifies the
11 options  and one  suboption eliminated  during  this  initial options review,
and  outlines the  major reasons  why each  was eliminated.   Table  III-4 sum-
marizes the results  of the  initial  options  review process  and  shows  those
options and suboptions  retained and eliminated.

Note that as a result of this initial  options review two additional components,
i.e.,  type  of  worker  housing and  power  generation,  had options eliminated
such that only one  option  remained for each.  Thus, a total of five compon-
ents at this stage of  the  option  screening process had  only one  option left
while the  six other components still had two or more  options  each.

Remaining Options Evaluation

Each of the remaining 14 options and  six suboptions (for the six components
having  two or more options) was then individually  evaluated  in detail from
the perspective of each resource or technical discipline (e.g., water quality,
subsistence, technical  feasibility, etc.).   For each  discipline,  a specific set
of "options  screening  criteria" was developed against which each option (and
suboption)  was screened  to  identify  potential  impacts  upon that  discipline.
Table  III-5  lists these  individual  discipline  screening  criteria.

For  example,   when  evaluating the  two remaining  tailings pond location op-
tions from the water  quality perspective (Table III-5) five screening criteria
were used:  stream diversion  requirements, spill hazard, downstream  impacts,
capacity and reclamation difficulty.

For  each  discipline,  once each  option  for  a specific component had been
evaluated  against all  screening  criteria,  each  option  was then  compared  to
all other options  for that component and a  "relative level of  potential impact"
was  assigned.    It  is  important  to  understand  that potential  impacts were
assigned relative to the other options  for  each  project component.  The rela-
tive  levels  of  potential impact were low,  moderate  and high.   For example,
using  the water  quality discipline  and the tailings pond location  component,
both remaining tailings pond  options (North Fork and South  Fork of  Red Dog
Creek) were first evaluated  individually against the  option screening criteria
to determine what the stream diversion requirements would  be,  what was the
spill hazard,  etc.   When  this was completed for  both the  North  Fork and
South  Fork options separately,  the two were  compared  on  the  basis  of the
screening criteria and  a  relative  level of potential  impact  was assigned  to
each option.   In  this  case (i.e., for  water  quality),  the  relative  level  of
potential impact  for  North  Fork  was   "high" while  that for South  Fork was
"low".   Thus,  from a  water  quality perspective,  the South  Fork of  Red Dog
Creek  had the relatively lower level of potential  impact for  location of  a tail-
ings pond.
                                   Ill  - 9

-------
                                Table 111-3

       MAJOR REASONS FOR ELIMINATION OF  INDIVIDUAL OPTIONS
           AND SUBOPTIONS  DURING INITIAL OPTIONS  REVIEW
  Component

Tailings  Pond
  Option or
  Suboption

Volcano Creek
Worker  Housing
Townsite
Power Generation
Coal
                     Natural  Gas
                     Hydropower
  Major Reasons for Elimination	

Two dam structures required
Higher risk of embankment failure
Limited storage capacity
Major pumping required
Difficult mitigation/reclamation
Insufficient overburden storage  area
Least dilution/mixing of runoff,
seepage &  spills
Short distance to fish populations in
Ikalukrok Creek if spill occurred

Substantially greater infrastructure
required (water,  sewer,  housing,
etc.)
Adverse to local autonomy
Less adaptable to  traditional  regional
lifestyles
Fewer  local hire opportunities
Competition with  subsistence  activities
Greater land area impact
Increased site  runoff problems
Greater impacts on fish and wildlife
(increased hunting & fishing; human/
wildlife contacts; etc.)

No  nearby, operating source of  supply
Low energy efficiency
Scrubber and cooling  wastewater
disposal  impacts
Air pollutant  emissions

No  nearby, operating source of  supply
Low temperature  pipeline technology  re-
quired (if liquified gas  was considered)
Major additional impacts if  pipeline
constructed

No  nearby, operating source of  supply
No  year-round sites  identified in area
Construction of dam  & impoundment
would  create additional  major environ-
mental impacts
                                   III - 10

-------
                                Table 111-3
                                (Continued)
       MAJOR REASONS FOR ELIMINATION OF  INDIVIDUAL OPTIONS
           AND SUBOPTIONS  DURING INITIAL  OPTIONS  REVIEW
  Component

Transportation
Corridor and
Port Site
   Option or
   Suboption
Noatak Corridor
& Hotham Inlet
Transportation
  System
Slurry Pipeline
                    Hovercraft
                   Winter  Road
Transfer Facility   Medium Causeway
                    Long Causeway
  Major Reasons for Elimination	
Limited barging season would require
significant dredging of Noatak  River
Substantial  weather and low water
problems
Barge  to bulk  carrier transfer  point
would  still have to be constructed in
Hotham Inlet/Kotzebue  Sound
Corridor would cross many lowlands
with substantial permafrost and
wetlands problems
Many stream crossings  with  associated
impacts on water quality  and fish

Cold weather slurry lines  not yet
feasible
High spill hazard
Slurry water disposal  problems
Waste heat from power  generation
couldn't be  used to dry concentrates
Units large  enough to efficiently haul
concentrates not yet available
Excessive fuel  consumption
Noise levels reach  105 db
Substantial  disturbance to wildlife

Unpredictability of snow availability
Annual construction of ice/snow
bridges at river crossings pose ero-
sion problems
Greater spill hazards at river crossings
Increased disturbance to  wintering
caribou
Less flexibility for other  regional uses

Possible significant impacts on  sedi-
ment transport causing erosion  &
lagoon  breaching
Impacts on fish and marine mammal
movements
Winter  and breakup ice problems
Greater disruption  of marine benthos
Substantial  armor  rock  needed  - no
local source available

Same problems  as  for medium cause-
way -  but of greater magnitude
                                  III - 11

-------
                                                  Table  111-4

                            OPTIONS AND SUBOPTIONS  ELIMINATED OR  RETAINED
                          FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS DURING INITIAL OPTIONS  REVIEW
Component
Mine Location
Tailings Pond Location
Mill Site Location
Worker Housing
0 Location
• Type
Water Supply
Power Generation
Transportation
0 Corridor Location
• System
Port Site
• Location
c Transfer Facility
Retained
Option Suboption
Fixed1
North Fork R.D. Creek
South Fork R.D. Creek
Dependent upon Tailings Pond Location
Dependent upon Mill Site Location
Campsite1
Buddy Creek
Bons Creek
Diesel1
Northern GCO Route
Aslkpak Route
Southern Western Route
Omikviorok Route
Kruz Route
Railroad
Road Yeai — round
Singoallk Lagoon
Tugak Lagoon
VABM 17
VABM 28
Short Causeway/
Lightering
Short Causeway/
Offshore Island
Eliminated
Option Subootion

Volcano Creek


Townslte

Coal
Natural Gas
Hydro power
Noatak
Slurry Pipeline
Hovercraft
Road Winter Only
Hotham Inlet/
Kotzebue Sound
Medium Causeway
Long Causeway
1  Sole option remaining  for that component.
                                                Ill  -  12

-------
                                 Table  111-5
           INDIVIDUAL DISCIPLINE  OPTIONS SCREENING CRITERIA
DISCIPLINE
OPTIONS SCREENING CRITERIA
Water Quality
Air Quality
Coastal Geologic  Processes
Tailings  Pond Location:
   Stream diversion requirements
   Spill hazard
   Downstream impacts
   Capacity
   Reclamation difficulty
Transportation Corridor Location:
   Spill hazard
   Reclamation difficulty
   Sediment production  from road  surface,  cuts,
      fills,  sideslopes and  road  crossings
Transportation System:
   Spill hazard
   Sediment production  and control

Port Site  and Transfer  Facility:
   Impact on  seawater quality
   Impact on  lagoons
   Spill hazard

Air pollutant  emission rates
Power  plant plume impact  areas
Transportation system dust generation

Net sediment  transport

Erosion of port facilities
Breaching of  adjacent lagoons
Vegetation
Direct vegetation  loss
Indirect loss from dust,  foot or vehicular traffic

Relative functions of wetlands
Freshwater Biology
Quality and quantity of habitat affected

Quality/quantity of  trophic* resources
* Defined in Glossary.
                                   Ill - 13

-------
                                 Table 111-5
                                 (continued)
          INDIVIDUAL DISCIPLINE OPTIONS SCREENING CRITERIA
DISCIPLINE
OPTIONS  SCREENING CRITERIA
Fish
Wildlife
Marine Biology
Socioeconomics
Subsistence
Fish present or absent
Resource value in terms of spawning,  rearing,
   overwintering and migration
Recreation  and access
Number of  major stream crossings

Direct habitat loss
Indirect habitat loss  due to noise, other
   disturbance or human contacts
Affect on  animal  movements

Quality and quantity of benthic  habitat affected
Disruption  of sedimentation patterns
Disruption  of organism movements
Spill hazard

Impact on community population  growth and
   infrastructure  needs
Impact on autonomy of social and governing
   institutions
Ratio of nonresident/resident  hire
Resident employment and income  gains
Project compatibility  with continuance  of
   subsistence culture and traditional  lifestyle

Interference with subsistence  harvest  activities
Compatibility  of project employment with sub-
   sistence  harvest cycles
Increased nonresident  harvest of subsistence
   resources
Effects of mine  employment on subsistence
   efficiency  and  success.
                                   Ill - 14

-------
                                 Table 111-5
                                 (continued)
           INDIVIDUAL  DISCIPLINE OPTIONS  SCREENING CRITERIA
DISCIPLINE
OPTIONS SCREENING CRITERIA
Cultural  Resources
Direct impact
Indirect impact from erosion,  foot or vehicular
   traffic, accessibility,  unauthorized artifact
   collection, etc.
Significance  based on National Register of His-
   toric Places  Criteria  for  Evaluation
   (36  CFR Part 60.4)
Recreation
Impacts on  existing recreation
Access
Regional Use
Flexibility for  other  regional uses
Size and  location  of  component site
Preclusion of other users or uses
Krusenstern Impact
Beach  erosion  at Cape Krusenstern
Archeological  site protection
Aesthetic degradation (visual,  sound,  wilderness
   character)
Access
Technical Feasibility
Availability of adequate construction technology
Relative difficulty  of  design,  construction  and
   operation
Economic  Feasibility
Cost of construction
Operation costs
Reclamation costs
                                   III  -  15

-------
In addition  to  the water quality discipline,  the options screening  criteria  for
every  other discipline were applied in a  similar manner  and a  relative level
of potential impact was assigned to each  option for every remaining  compon-
ent.    The  results of this  process, including the assigned  relative levels of
potential  impact,  are summarized in Table  111-6 for each discipline  where a
reasonable difference  existed between options.

Where  screening  analyses  comments  shown  in Table  111-6  were based upon
published  material or documentation  (letters,  etc.) developed  for  the  Red
Dog  project,  a  lower case  citation letter  in  parenthesis  (e.g., "(c)")  is
shown  that corresponds  to the  proper citation listed on a separate page that
follows  the  table.  Where no citation letter is shown, the comment represents
best  professional  judgement  based  upon  past experience,  discussion with
others, visits  to the  project area  or  calculations developed  specifically  for
this  options screening  process.

It should  be  noted  in  Table III-6C and III-6D that  the suboptions for  the
northern  and  southern transportation corridors, respectively, were compared
only against the  other suboption(s) for  each  of those  corridors  (i.e.,  the
GCO route  and the Asikpak  route  were compared  only  against each other  for
the  northern  corridor, and  the Western,  Omikviorok and  Kruz routes were
compared  only among themselves for the  southern  corridor).  This was done
to specifically  address the Title XI requirement that alternate  routes around
the  Monument  be  fully evaluated  in  the EIS  process.   By comparing each
corridor's  routes only among themselves,  the  best  route  for   each  corridor
was  identified,  thus  guaranteeing  that each  corridor  would be considered
during  the  evaluation  of alternatives process and be included in the  alterna-
tives for formal public review in the draft EIS.

In the  next step of  the  process, the  levels of potential impact for all disci-
plines  (as  shown  in Table  111-6) were grouped for each option.   This pro-
vided  a combined  picture  of the individual  levels  of  potential   impact  (Table
111-7).

A perusal  of  Table 111-7 shows  that for most  options the distribution  of  the
relative  levels of  potential  impact made determination of an overall relative
level of potential impact  for  a  specific option  fairly  straightforward.   These
overall  relative levels of  potential impact are shown in Table 111-8.

The  final step of  the  option screening process was to select the  best option
for  each  of the  remaining  six  components.   This was  done by using Table
111-8 to determine the  option  for  each  component  which showed the  lowest
level of potential impact (the lower the  potential  level of impact, the  better
the  option).  That option  was  then  selected unless one  of  the  other options
for that component addressed one  or more  of  the 12 issues  in a significantly
more favorable manner.

For  three  of the six  remaining  components,  selection of the best option was
relatively straightforward.   For the tailings pond  component the  South Fork
of Red Dog Creek (Table  III-8) was clearly  the  best  location,  as was Bons
Creek  for  the  water supply.   For the southern transportation  corridor and
port site  the Kruz route to VABM 28 was selected.
                                   Ill - 16

-------
                                                                        Table III-6A
SUMMARY OF

Discipline1 Low
Water Quality Larger capacity.
OPTIONS SCREENING
NORTH FORK RED
Moderate
(1) Larger drainage
CRITERIA ANALYSES
TAILINGS POND
DOG CREEK
High
Higher risk of
SHOWING RELATIVE LEVELS
LOCATION
OF POTENTIAL IMPACT
SOUTH FORK RED DOG CREEK
Total
High
Low
Smaller drainage
Moderate
Smaller capacity.
High
(I)
Total
Low
                                         area.

                                         Spill closer to
                                         Ikalukrok  Creek.
diversion  system
failure.
                                Lower  risk of
                                diversion  system
                                failure.

                                Spill further from
                                Ikalukrok Creek.
Vegetation
Direct loss of
468 ha (1,157 ac).
Greater wetlands
impact.
High
Direct loss of
237 ha (585 ac).

Lesser wetlands
impact.
                                                                                                                                                        Moderate
Freshwater Biology
Best quality habi-
tat lost.

Greater quantity
habitat lost.

Greater trophic
resources lost.
High      Poor quality habi-
          tat  lost.

          Lesser quantity
          habitat lost.

          Fewer trophic
          resources lost.
                                                                                                                                                           Low
Fish
                                                            Migration, spawn-
                                                            ing 1  rearing
                                                            habitat lost.(d)

                                                            Fish present.(d)
                      High      No migration,
                                spawning & rearing
                                habitat lost.(d)
                                Fish absent.(d)
                                                                                                                                                           Low
Wildlife
                                                            Greater direct
                                                            habitat loss.(c)

                                                            Greater indirect
                                                            habitat loss.

                                                            Greater effect on
                                                            animal movements.
                      High      Lesser direct hab-
                                itat loss.(c)

                                Lesser indirect
                                habitat loss.

                                Lesser effect on
                                animal movements.
                                                                                                                                                           Low
Technical Feasibility
Greater thaw bulb
&  stability prob-
lems with larger
pond.(n)

Larger dam to
build, (c)
High      Smaller thaw bulb
          & stability prob-
          lems with smaller
          pond.(n)

          Smaller dam  to
          build.(c)
                                                                                                                                                           Low
Economic Feasibility
25% greater cost.(I)  High
          25% lower cost.(I)
                                                                                                                                                          Low
    Includes  only  disciplines  having a  reasonable difference  In impacts between options.

-------
                                                                           Table Ill-SB

                           SUMMARY OF OPTIONS SCREENING CRITERIA ANALYSES SHOWING RELATIVE LEVELS OF POTENTIAL IMPACT

                                                                         WATER SUPPLY
Discipline1
Vegetation
BUDDY CREEK
Low Moderate High
Direct loss of
>40 ha (>100 ac).

Total Low
Low Direct loss of
31 ha (76 ac).
BONS CREEK
Moderate High Total
Low
    Technical Feasibility
00
Greater dam
height.(c)

Lower capacity.(c)

Longer access
road.(c)
Moderate    Lower dam  height.(c)

            Higher capacity.(c)

            Shorter access
            road.(c)
Low
    Economic Feasibility
                   Construction  cost
                   approximately
                   $9.3M.(I)
  High      Construction cost
            approximately
                                                                                                                                                            Low
    1    Includes only disciplines having  a  reasonable difference in impacts between options.
    (a)  etc.  See reference list following Table  III-6H.

-------
                                                                        Table
                                                                                I-6C
                        SUMMARY OF OPTIONS SCREENING CRITERIA ANALYSES SHOWING RELATIVE LEVELS  OF POTENTIAL  IMPACT

                                                          NORTHERN TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR
     Discipline1
Low
Vegetation
                                                  GCO ROUTE
                                                                                                                      ASIKPAK ROUTE
                                              Moderate
             Direct loss of
             293 ha (723 ac)
             (not Including
             borrow  sites).(I)
                                                                   High
                                                                                  Total
                                                                                Moderate
                                                                                                   Low
                                                                                                                     Moderate
                                                                                                                Direct loss of
                                                                                                                257 ha (634 ac)
                                                                                                                (not including
                                                                                                                borrow  sites).(I)
                                                                                                              High
                                                                                                                                                          Total
                                                                                                                                                        Moderate
Fish
                                                             Impacts on  spawn-
                                                             ing, rearing, over-
                                                             wintering and
                                                             migration from
                                                             crossings of import-
                                                             ant streams,
                                                             particularly the
                                                             upper Kivalina
                                                             River and tributar-
                                                             ies.(d,  i, j, p)

                                                             Impacts from access
                                                             to important spawn-
                                                             ing areas.
                                                      High
                                        Impacts on spawn-
                                        ing, rearing, over-
                                        wintering and
                                        migration from
                                        crossings of  import-
                                        ant streams,
                                        particularly Grayling
                                        Creek  and Kivalina
                                        River.(d, i,  j,  p)
                                                                                                        Impacts  from access
                                                                                                        to important spawn-
                                                                                                        ing areas.
Wildlife
                                         Direct habitat loss
                                         of 293 ha (723 ac)
                                         (not Including
                                         borrow sites).(I)
                                                    Moderate
                                                                                    Direct habitat loss
                                                                                    of 257 ha (634 ac)
                                                                                    (not including
                                                                                    borrow sites).(I)
                                                                                                                           Moderate
Subsistence
                                         Lesser conflict
                                         with subsistence
                                         use areas.(a)
                                         Lesser nonresident
                                         harvest of subsis-
                                         tence resources.(a)
                                                    Moderate
                                                                                                       Greater conflict
                                                                                                       with  subsistence
                                                                                                       use  areas.(a)
                                                                                                       Greater nonresi-
                                                                                                       dent harvest of
                                                                                                       subsistence
                                                                                                       resources.(a)
                                                              High
Cultural  Resources2
                                                             Potential indirect
                                                             impacts on 12
                                                             sites,  (f)
                                                      High
No sites along
route, (d, e)
                                                                                                                              Low
1   Includes only  disciplines having  a  reasonable difference  in impacts between  options.

2   Does not address common alignment segment in eastern  portion of northern  corridor.
(a) etc.  See  reference list following  Table  III-6H.

-------
                                                                        Table  III-6C

                                                                        (Continued)

                        SUMMARY OF OPTIONS SCREENING CRITERIA ANALYSES SHOWING RELATIVE LEVELS OF POTENTIAL  IMPACT

                                                          NORTHERN TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR

GCO ROUTE ASIKPAK ROUTE
Discipline1
Regional Use
Low Moderate High Total Low Moderate
More difficult to Moderate Easier to access
access from from Kivalina.
Kivalma.
High Total
Low
Technical  Feasibility
65% of route
moderately diffi-
cult or difficult
to construct, (c)

Two more major
bridge crossings. (m)
High
41% of route
moderately diffi-
cult  or difficult
to construct.(c)

Two  fewer major
bridge crossings.(m)
                                                                                                                                                        Moderate
Economic Feasibility
Construction cost
approximately
$128M.(c)
High
                    Construction cost
                    approximately
                    $126M.(C)
High
1   Includes  only  disciplines having a reasonable difference  in impacts between options.

(a) etc.   See reference  list following Table III-6H.

-------
                                               T«bl« III-6D
SUMMARY OF  OPTIONS  SCREENING CRITERIA ANALYSES SHOWING RELATIVE LEVELS OF POTENTIAL IMPACT
                                 SOUTHERN TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR*
WESTERN ROUTE
Discipline1 Low Moderate High Total
Water Quality Close to Wuhk and Moderate
crosses Omikvio-
rok. spill hazard.
sedimentation
problems
Vageutton Direct loss of High
230 ha (S6£ ac).(l)
Most Impact to
productive wet-
— '»na*
Freshwater Biology Close to Wulik and Moderate
f\) crosses Omikvio-
— i rok: risk of dis-
ruption ti habitat
and trophic re-
sources

Fl»h Close to Wuhk and High
crosses Omlkvio-
rok-. tptll and sed-
imentation risks.
(d 1 1)

Increased access
to fish populations.


Wildlife Most direct habl- High
tat loss.(l)
Most Indirect
habitat loss
OMIKIVOROK ROUTE
Low Moderate High Total
Parallels and Moderate
crosses the Omik-
viorok: spill haz-
ard; sedimentation
problems
Direct loss of Moderate
214 ha (529 ac).(l)
Moderate impact to
productive wet-
lands.
Adjacent to and High
crosses Onukvto-
rok: greatest risk
of disruption to
habitat and trophic
resources.

Adjacent to and High
crosses Omlkvio-
rok: spill and sed-
imentation risks.
(d,i I)

Increased access
to fish populations.


Moderate direct Moderate
habitat loss.(l)
Moderate indirect
habitat loss.
KRUZ ROUTE
Low Moderate High
Minor crossings
of upper Omikvio-
rok: less cplll hai-
ard ; less sedimen-
tation.
Direct lost of
197 ha (487 ac).(l)
Least impact to
productive wetlands

One major bridge
crossing of upper
reaches of Omikvlo-
rok* least risk of
disruption to habi-
tat and trophic
resources .
One major bridge
crossing of upper
reaches of Omfkvlo-
rok: fewer spill
and sedimentation
risks. 
-------


Discipline Low
Subsistence
Cultural Resources9
1 access and traffic
no
r\} Two of the four
archeological sites
In the Monument
(f,g)
Technical Feasibility
Economic Feasibility
SUMMARY OF OPTIONS SCREENING CRITERIA
SOUTHERN
WESTERN ROUTE
Moderate High Total
Some interference Moderate
with harvest
activities .
Some Increase In
nonresident harvest
Potential Indirect Moderate
Impacts on four
sites (f,g)
Low
23% of route mod- Moderate
erately difficult or
difficult to con-
struct (1)
One major multi-
span bridge
crossing . (c)
approximately
$98M (1)
Table III-6D
(Continued)
ANALYSES SHOWING RELATIVE LEVELS OF POTENTIAL IMPACT
TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR
OMIKVIOROK ROUTE KRUZ ROUTE
' Low Moderate High Total Low Moderate High

with harvest with harvest
activities activities
Some Increase In Least Increase In
nonresident harvest nonresident harvest
Potential indirect Moderate Potential Indirect
Impacts on three Impacts on six
sites (f,g) sites (f.g)
Moderate Increase In Moderate Most increased In
Monument (c) |n Monument (c)
All three archeo- Alt six archeo-
the Monument Monument {f g>
(f,g)
25% of route mod- Moderate 19% of route mod-
dtfficult to con- difficult to con-
struct. (1) struct (1)
One major multl- One major multi-
span bridge span bridge
crossing (c) crossing (1)
approximately approximately
$83M.(I) $75M (1)


Total
Low
High
High
Low
Low
1 Includes only disciplines having a reasonable difference In impacts between options.
* The Western, Omikylorok and Kruz routes are compared using the alignments to the environmentally and technically superior VABM 28 port tilt option
(a) etc   See reference  list  following Table  III-6H

-------
                                                                            Table III-6E

                            SUMMARY OF OPTIONS SCREENING CRITERIA ANALYSES  SHOWING RELATIVE LEVELS  OF POTENTIAL IMPACT

                                                                    TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
         Discipline1
                                Low
                                                      RAILROAD
                                                 Moderate
                                                                       High
                                                                                                                       YEAR-ROUND ROAD
                                                                                      Total
                                                          Low
                                                                           Moderate
                                                                                                 High
                                                                                                                Total
    Water Quality
                                             Greater spill
                                             hazard.

                                             Lower sedimenta-
                                             tion hazard.
                                       Moderate    Lower spill hazard.
Higher sedimenta-
hazard.
High
    Air Quality
                                             Lower dust
                                             generation.
                                       Moderate
                                                                                          Higher dust
                                                                                          generation.
                      High
    Vegetation
t>0
00
                                             Lesser loss from
                                             dust.

                                             Fewer impacts
                                             from  poorer access.
                                       Moderate
                                                                                          Greater loss from     High
                                                                                          dust.

                                                                                          Greater loss from
                                                                                          better access.
    Freshwater Biology
Fewer Impacts at
stream crossings.
                                                                                   Moderate
                                                                                                                                       Greater impacts  at    High
                                                                                                                                       stream crossings.
    Fish
                                            Lower sedimenta-
                                            tion hazard.

                                            Greater spill
                                            hazard.

                                            Poorer access.
                                       Moderate    Lower spill hazard.
Higher sedimenta-     High
tion   hazard.

Better access.
   Wildlife
                                            Lower  indirect
                                            habitat loss.

                                            Fewer  effects on
                                            animal  movements.
                                       Moderate
                                                                                          Higher indirect
                                                                                          habitat loss.

                                                                                          Greater effects on
                                                                                          animal movements.
                     High

-------
                                                                        Table III-6E
                                                                        (Continued)

                        SUMMARY  OF OPTIONS SCREENING CRITERIA  ANALYSES SHOWING RELATIVE  LEVELS OF POTENTIAL  IMPACT

                                                                 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
     Discipline
                                                   RAILROAD
Low
                 Moderate
                                      High
                                                     Total
                                                                      Low
                                                                                                                   YEAR-ROUND  ROAD
                                                                                       Moderate
                                                          High
                                                                                                                            Total
Subsistence
                      Lower nonresident
                      harvest of  subsis-
                      tence resources.
                                                     Low
                                                                                                      Higher  nonresident    High
                                                                                                      harvest of subsis-
                                                                                                      tence resources.
Cultural Resources
                                         Fewer  Indirect
                                         impacts due to
                                         poorer access.
                                                   Moderate
                                                   Greater indirect
                                                   impacts due to
                                                   better access.
                                          High
Recreation
                                                            Poorer access.
                                                                                  High      Better access.
                                                                                                                                                          Low
Regional Use
             Less adaptability
             to other uses.
Moderate    Most adaptability
            to  other  uses.
                                                                                                                                                          Low
Krusenstern  Impact
            Poorer access to
            Monument.
                                                   Moderate
                                                   Better access to
                                                   Monument.
                                         High
Technical Feasibility
                                Cannot transport
                                large mine area
                                facilities modules, (c)
  High      Can transport
            large mine  area
            facilities  modules.(c)
                                          Low
Economic Feasibility
                                High capital  costs
                                ($20M to $50M
                                greater than
                                road2).(c)
  High
Lower capital costs
($20M to BOM less
than R.R.2).(c)
Moderate
1   Includes  only  disciplines having  a  reasonable difference In impacts between options.

*   For Kruz route suboptlon.

(a) etc.   See reference  list following Table  III-6H.

-------
                                                                              Table III-6F


                              SUMMARY OF  OPTIONS SCREENING CRITERIA  ANALYSES SHOWING RELATIVE  LEVELS OF POTENTIAL  IMPACT

                                                            PORT  SITE LOCATION  (NORTHERN CORRIDOR)
Discipline1
Coastal Geologic
Processes
SINGOALIK LAGOON
Low Moderate High
Low net sediment
transport, (o)
TUGAK LAGOON
Total Low Moderate High
Low Low net sediment
transport, (o)

Total
Low
      Fish
                    Herring  present
                    offshore, (d)
Anadromous* fish
present in lagoon.
(d,0
High      Anadromous fish
          absent from
          lagoon.(d,i)
Herring present
offshore, (d)
                                                                                                                                                                Low
ro
      Wildlife
      Marine Biology
Lesser inter-
ference with
coastal animal
movements.
                                                                                      Low
                                       Marine biota  in        High
                                       lagoon.
                                Greater inter-
                                ference with
                                coastal animal
                                movements.
                                Few marine biota
                                In  lagoon.
                                                                                                                                                             Moderate
                                                                                                                                                                Low
      Subsistence
Some  Interference
with subsistence
harvest areas.(a)
                                                                                         Low
                                                                       Greater inter-
                                                                       ference with
                                                                       marine mammal  and
                                                                       waterfowl harvest
                                                                       areas.(a)
                                                                                                                                                               High
       Cultural Resources
Facility design
should prevent
impact to sod
house.(f)
                      Low       Facility  design
                                should prevent
                                impact to eroding
                                cabin  slte.(f)
                                                                                                                                                                Low
       Regional Use
                    Potential  private
                    GCO mill  site
                    claims.
                                                                                      Moderate
                                                   Potential NANA
                                                   private lands.
                                                                                                                                                             Moderate
       1    Includes only disciplines having a reasonable difference In  impacts between options.

       (a)  etc.  See reference list following Table III-6H.

       *  Defined in Glossary.

-------
                                                                             Table III-6G


                            SUMMARY  OF OPTIONS  SCREENING  CRITERIA ANALYSES  SHOWING  RELATIVE LEVELS OF POTENTIAL IMPACT

                                                           PORT SITE LOCATION (SOUTHERN CORRIDOR)
          Discipline'
       Low
                                                       VABM 17
                         Moderate
                          High
                                                             Total
                                                                              Low
                                                                                                                              VABM 28
                                                                                               Moderate
                                                                                                                     High
                                                                                                                                    Total
    Water Quality
                                       High lagoon
                                       sedimentation
                                       risk from
                                       construction.
                                         High
                                                   Moderate  lagoon
                                                   sedimentation
                                                   risk from
                                                   construction.
                                                                                                                                                           Moderate
    Coastal Geologic
       Processes
 I
ro
     Fish
Possible erosion
of port facilities.
Moderate net
sediment
transport.
(h,k,o)
Severe storm(s)
could breach
Imlkruk or Ipiavlk
Lagoons.
High
                                       Anadromous fish      High
                                       present in lagoon.
                                       (d, I)
Possible erosion
of port facilities.
Moderate net
sediment
transport.
(h,k,o)

Severe storm(s)
could breach Port
Lagoon.
                                                   Anadromous fish
                                                   absent from lagoon.
                                                   (d, i)
                                                                                                                                                           Moderate
                                                                                                                                                              Low
    Wildlife
                                       Greater indirect       High
                                       waterfowl  habitat
                                       loss.
                                                   Lesser Indirect
                                                   waterfowl  habitat
                                                   loss.
                                                                                                                                                             Low
    Marine Biology
                                       Marine biota  in        High
                                       both lagoons.
                                                   Few marine biota
                                                   in  lagoon.
                                                                                             Low
    Subsistence
                          Some interference
                          with  subsistence
                          harvest areas.(a)
                                                                                        Low
                                                                                          Greater interference
                                                                                          with marine mammal
                                                                                          harvest area.(a)
                                                                                                              Moderate
    Cultural Resources
                          Facility  design
                          should prevent
                          impact to one
                          cabin  and two
                          grave sites.(f)
                                                             Low       Facility design
                                                                       should  prevent
                                                                       impact to
                                                                       reindeer herding
                                                                       site.(d,e,g)
                                                                                                                Low

-------
                                                                         Table III-6G

                                                                         (Continued)


                        SUMMARY OF OPTIONS  SCREENING CRITERIA  ANALYSES SHOWING RELATIVE LEVELS OF POTENTIAL IMPACT

                                                       PORT  SITE LOCATION  (SOUTHERN CORRIDOR)
Discipline
Regional Use
VABM 17
Low Moderate High
NANA private Small size.
land.
Poor expansion
potential, (c)
VABM 28
Total Low Moderate
High Adequate size. NANA private
land.
Good expansion
potential, (c)

High Total
Low
—   Krusenstern Impacts

IV)
                                         Some impact  on
                                         littoral sediment
                                         drift, but  proba-
                                         bility of  Impact
                                         on beach ridges
                                         not significant.(o)

                                         Lower aesthetic
                                         impact of site
                                         adjacent to
                                         Monument.

                                         Less access to
                                         Monument,  (c)
                                        Moderate
                                                                        Some impact on
                                                                        littoral sediment
                                                                        drift,  but proba-
                                                                        bility of impact
                                                                        on beach ridges
                                                                        not  significant, (o)
                                                                        Higher, aesthetic
                                                                        impacts of site
                                                                        surrounded by
                                                                        Monument.

                                                                        Greater access
                                                                        to Monument.(c)
                                         High
Technical  Feasibility
Bedrock  not
present to
18.9 m (62 ft).(I)
Greater ice con-
tent in  soils.(I)
                                                                                 Moderate
                                                                                             Bedrock  present
                                                                                             about 16.8 m
                                                                                             (55  ft).(I)
Lower ice content
in  soils.(I)
                                                                                                                                                               Low
1   Includes only disciplines having  a  reasonable difference in  impacts  between options.

(a) etc.  See reference list following Table  III-6H.

-------
                                                                             Table III-6H

                            SUMMARY OF OPTIONS SCREENING CRITERIA ANALYSES SHOWING RELATIVE  LEVELS OF  POTENTIAL IMPACT

                                                                        TRANSFER  FACILITY
                                            SHORT CAUSEWAY/LIGHTERING
                                                                                                            SHORT CAUSEWAY/OFFSHORE ISLAND
          Discipline1
                                 Low
                                                  Moderate
                                                                        High
                                                                                       Total
                                                                                                        Low
                                                                                                                         Moderate
                                                                                                                                           High
                                                                                                                                                              Total
     Water  Quality
                      Less seabed
                      disturbance.
                                       Greater spill risk
                                       from many in-sea
                                       fuel/concentrate
                                       transfers  between
                                       unstable transfer
                                       platforms.

                                       Greater spill risk
                                       from fuel  lightered
                                       to shore. (I)

                                       Greater risk of
                                       weather impact-
                                       ing lightering or
                                       transfers.  (I)
                                                                                       High      Minor risk of
                                                                                                 weather impacting
                                                                                                 lightering or
                                                                                                 transfers.(I)
                              More seabed
                              disturbance.

                              Significantly  fewer
                              in-sea concentrate
                              transfers  between
                              unstable  transfer
                              platforms.
                                                                                                                     Lower spill risk
                                                                                                                     from  fuel trans-
                                                                                                                     ported  to shore
                                                                                                                     via pipeline.(I)
                                                                                                                                                            Moderate
no
CO
Coastal  Geologic
  Processes
Some  sediment
transport restric-
tion.(h,k,o)

Possible  erosion of
port facilities and
lagoon breaching.
Low       Some sediment
          transport restric-
          tion. (h,k,o)

          Possible  erosion of
          port facilities and
          lagoon  breaching.
                                                                                                                                                               Low
    Fish
                          Some movement
                          interference, (d)
                                                            Greater spill risk
                                                            from many in-sea
                                                            fuel/concentrate
                                                            transfers between
                                                            unstable transfer
                                                            platforms.(b, m)

                                                            Greater spill risk
                                                            from fuel lightered
                                                            to shore, (m)
                                                             High      Some movement
                                                                       interference.(d)

                                                                       Small loss/con-
                                                                       version of habi-
                                                                       tat under ship.(d)
                              Significantly fewer
                              in-sea concentrate
                              transfers between
                              unstable  transfer
                              platforms.(b, m)

                              Lower spill risk
                              from  fuel trans-
                              ported to ship
                              via pipeline.(m)
Moderate
    Wildlife
                          Little direct habitat
                          loss.(I)

                          Little indirect habitat
                          loss.

                          Few  effects on  animal
                          movements.
                                                                                   Low
                                                                                                                Greater direct habitat
                                                                                                                loss. (I)

                                                                                                                Greater indirect habitat
                                                                                                                loss.

                                                                                                                Greater effects on
                                                                                                                animal  movements.
                                                                                                                                                       Moderate

-------
                                                                              Table  III-6H

                                                                              (Continued)

                              SUMMARY OF OPTIONS SCREENING  CRITERIA ANALYSES SHOWING  RELATIVE  LEVELS OF  POTENTIAL IMPACT

                                                                          TRANSFER  FACILITY
no
CD

SHORT CAUSEWAY/LIGHTERING
Discipline
Marine Biology



Regional Use
Krusenstern Impacts


Technical Feasibility
Low
Low bottom dis-
turbance.
Some movement
interference.



Some impact on
littoral sediment
drift, but proba-
bility of impact on
beach ridges is
not significant. (o)
Some aesthetic
impact to coast-
line.
No ship or
pipeline ice/
scour problems.
Moderate High Total
Moderate lagoon Moderate
disturbance.
Greater spill risk
from in-sea con-
centrate transfers
and lightering of
fuel
Less flexibility Moderate
for other users.
Low


Two concentrate Two large tug/ High
transfers. (1) barge lighters. (1)
SHORT CAUSEWAY/OFFSHORE ISLAND
Low
Some movement
interference.
Lesser spill risk
from fewer in-
sea concentrate
transfers and use
of fuel pipeline.
Greater flexibility
for other users.
Some impact on
littoral sediment
drift, but proba-
bility of impact
on beach ridges
Is not significant.



Moderate
Greater bottom
disturbance.
Moderate lagoon
disturbance.



Greater aesthetic
impact on coast-
line from large
ballasted tanker.
(o)


Fuel piped to
shore. (1)
High Total
Low



Low
Moderate


One self-propelled/ High
unloading barge. (1)
      Economic Feasibility
More transfers
between unstable
platforms.(I)

Fuel lightered to
shore. (I)

Construction costs
approximately $74M.
(I)
Annual operating
costs $1.4M greater.
(I)
                                                                                                                      Fewer transfers
                                                                                                                      between unstable
                                                                                                                      platforms.(I)
Ballasted ship and
pipeline ice/scour
problems.

Three concentrate
transfers.(I)
                                                                                        High      Construction  costs
                                                                                                  approximately $55M.
                                                                                                  (I)
                                                                                                  Annual operating
                                                                                                  costs $1.4M less.
                                                                                                  (I)
                       Low
      1  Includes only disciplines having a reasonable difference  in impacts between  options.

      (a) etc.  See reference list following this table.

-------
                          Table 111-6 References1
(a)  Braund &  Associates,  1983
(b)  Cominco Alaska,  Inc.,  1983a
(c)  Cominco Alaska,  Inc.,  1983c
(d)  Dames & Moore, 1983a
(e)  Hall, 1982a
(f)  Hall, 1983a
(g)  Hall, Pers. Comm., 1983b
(h)  Hopkins,  1977
(i)   Houghton, Pens. Comm., 1983
(j)   LGL  Ecological Research Associates,  1980
(k)  Moore,  1966
(I)   Noah, Pens.  Comm., 1983
(m)  Rae, Pers. Comm., 1983
(n)  Tsytovich, 1977
(o)  Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 1983
(p)  Alt,  Pers. Comm., 1983
     Full references found in  Chapter XI  (References Cited),
                                  III  -  30

-------
                                                 Table 111-7
            GROUPED RELATIVE LEVELS OF POTENTIAL  IMPACT FOR INDIVIDUAL DISCIPLINES1
Component
    Option
	Suboption
Tailings  Pond Location

    North  Fork  Red Dog Creek
         Low
                 Relative  Level  of  Potential  Impact2
                              Moderate
                                                                                               High
                                                                                       Water Quality
                                                                                       Vegetation
                                                                                       Freshwater Biology
                                                                                       Fish
                                                                                       Wildlife
                                                                                       Technical Feasibility
                                                                                       Economic  Feasibility
    South  Fork Red Dog Creek
Water Quality
Freshwater  Biology
Fish
Wildlife
Technical Feasibility
Economic Feasibility
Vegetation
Water Supply

    Buddy Creek
Vegetation
Technical Feasibility  Economic  Feasibility
    Bons  Creek
    Southern Corridor3

        Western Route
                                        Vegetation
                                        Technical Feasibility
                                        Economic  Feasibility.
Transportation Corridor3
Northern Corridor
GCO Route
Asikpak Route Cultural Resources
Regional Use
Subsistence Cultural Resources
Regional Use Technical Feasibility
Technical Feasibility Subsistence
                                  Krusenstern  Impact
                         Water Quality
                         Freshwater Biology
                         Subsistence
                         Cultural  Resources
                         Technical Feasibility
                      Vegetation
                      Fish
                      Wildlife
                      Economic  Feasibility
        Omikviorok Route
                                                                Water Quality
                                                                Vegetation
                                                                Wildlife
                                                                Subsistence
                                                                Cultural Resources
                                                                Krusenstern Impact
                                                                Technical Feasibility
                                                                Economic Feasibility
                                               Freshwater Biology
                                               Fish
                                                III  - 31

-------
                                                 Table
                                                         1-7
                                                (Continued)
            GROUPED RELATIVE LEVELS OF POTENTIAL  IMPACT FOR INDIVIDUAL DISCIPLINES1
Component
    Option
	Suboption
         Low
                 Relative Level of  Potential  Impact2
        Kruz  Route
                                        Water Quality
                                        Vegetation
                                        Freshwater  Biology
                                        Wildlife
                                        Subsistence
                                        Technical Feasibility
                                        Economic  Feasibility
                              Moderate
                                                                 Fish
                                                                                               High
                                               Cultural Resources
                                               Krusenstern Impact
Transportation System

    Railroad
                                        Subsistence
                                                                 Water Quality
                                                                 Air Quality
                                                                 Vegetation
                                                                 Freshwater Biology
                                                                 Fish
                                                                 Wildlife
                                                                 Cultural  Resources
                                                                 Regional  Use
                                                                 Krusenstern Impact
                                               Recreation
                                               Technical Feasibility
                                               Economic  Feasibility
    Road
                                        Recreation
                                        Regional Use
                                        Technical Feasibility
                         Economic  Feasibility
Water Quality
Air Quality
Vegetation
Freshwater Biology
Fish
Wildlife
Subsistence
Cultural Resources
Krusenstern Impact
Port Site Location*

    Singoalik  Lagoon
Wildlife
Subsistence
Fish
Marine Biology
    Tugak Lagoon
Fish
Marine Biology
                                                                 Wildlife
                                                                                       Subsistence
    VABM 17
                                        Subsistence
                                                                 Krusenstern Impact
                                                                 Technical Feasibility
                                               Water  Quality
                                               Coastal Processes
                                               Fish
                                               Wildlife
                                               Marine Biology
                                               Regional Use
    VABM 28
                                        Fish
                                        Wildlife
                                        Marine Biology
                                        Regional  Use
                                        Technical Feasibility
                         Water  Quality
                         Coastal Processes
                         Subsistance
Krusenstern Impact
                                               III  - 32

-------
                                               Table 111-7
                                               (Continued)
           GROUPED RELATIVE LEVELS OF  POTENTIAL  IMPACT FOR INDIVIDUAL DISCIPLINES1
Component
    Option
                 Relative Level of  Potential  Impact2
Suboption
Transfer Facility
Short Causeway/Lightering
Low Moderate

Wildlife Marine Biology
Krusenstern Impact Regional Use
High

Water Quality
Fish
Technical Feasibility
Economic Feasibility
    Short Causeway/Offshore  Island
Marine Biology
Regional  Use
Economic Feasibility
Water Quality
Fish
Wildlife
Krusenstern  Impact
Technical  Feasibility
1   Excludes components for which only one option  remained.

2   Disciplines  having  the  same level of potential  impact  for all options of a component are not shown.

3   Suboptlons  compared only with the other(s) for same corridor (i.e.,  GCO  and Asikpak routes for north-
    ern corridor; western, Omikviorok and Kruz routes for southern corridor).

*   Options  compared only with other one for same  corridor (i.e.,  Singoalik and  Tugak Lagoon  for northern
    corridor; VABM  17 and VABM 28 for southern corridor).
                                              II!  -  33

-------
                                Table 111-8
            OVERALL  RELATIVE LEVELS OF  POTENTIAL  IMPACT1
Component
   - Option
Tailings Pond
 Location
      Overall Relative  Level of Potential  Impact
      Low
    Moderate
South Fork Red
 Dog Creek
High
                  North Fork  Red
                   Dog  Creek
Water Supply
Bons Creek
Buddy Creek
Transportation
 0 Corridor Location
   - Northern
   - Southern
 0 System
                 Asikpak  Route     GCO  Route
Kruz Route       Omikviorok Route  Western  Route
                 Railroad
                 Year-round  Road
Port Site
 0 Location
   - Northern Corridor

   - Southern Corridor  VABM 28
 0 Transfer Facility
                 Tugak Lagoon
                 Singoalik  Lagoon
                 Short Causeway/
                    Lightering
                 Short Causeway/
                    Offshore Island
                                   VABM 17
1  Excludes components for which only one option remained.
                                  Ill  -  34

-------
Selection  of  the  best northern corridor route and  port site was not as clear
cut.  Because the northern corridor routes went to separate port sites  (Fig.
111-2),  each  route and  its port site had to be  considered in  combination for
comparison   with  the   other.  As shown in Table  111-8,  both   the  Singoalik
Lagoon  and  Tugak Lagoon port sites were  considered to have  moderate levels
of potential impact.

Comparison of the GCO and  Asikpak  routes  (Table 111-8)  showed  an overall
high  level of  potential  impact for  the GCO  route and  an overall  moderate
level  of  potential  impact  for  the Asikpak route.   For  those disciplines  in
which a reasonable  difference  existed  between the two  routes (Table 111-7),
the Asikpak  route had  lower  relative levels of  potential  impact for technical
feasibility, cultural  resources  and regional use, while the GCO  route  had a
lower relative level of potential impact for subsistence.

Thus,  while  comparison of the Asikpak route/Tugak Lagoon combination with
the GCO  route/Singoalik  Lagoon  combination  did  not  show  great differences
between them, on balance the Asikpak route/Tugak Lagoon combination had
an  overall lower  potential  for  impacts, and it was selected  as the best com-
bination for  the northern  corridor.

For the two  remaining  components  selection  of  the best option  was not as
simple.    For the transportation  system,  the railroad  initially  appeared  to
have  a lower  overall  level of potential  impact.   However, analysis showed
that several  of the  individual discipline differences were either not signifi-
cantly   different,  or could  be mitigated  or  eliminated  by  construction  or
operational  procedures.    The  road  was  finally  selected on the  bases  of
greater regional  use flexibility, substantially  less  capital cost, and  the fact
that the transportation  corridors  would be initially laid out to meet the more
restrictive railroad  grade  constraints,  thus  keeping  open  the option for
construction  of a  railroad  within the same right-of-way at a  later time.

For the marine transfer facility both the short causeway/lightering and  short
causeway/offshore  island  options  appeared to  have about  the same overall
level of potential impact.   An  analysis  of the  12  issues showed that  where
one  option  addressed  some   of  the  issues  more  favorably,  the  second
addressed  other  issues more  favorably.    Thus, both  options were  retained
for this component.

At  the  completion  of the  options  screening  process, therefore, the options
that were  retained  and  used  to  form the alternatives  were  those  shown  in
Table III-9.

Transportation Corridor Identification

This section  describes in more specific detail the  process by  which the two
transportation corridor  options (Asikpak route for the northern corridor and
Kruz  route for the  southern  corridor)  were identified  for inclusion in the
alternatives.   This  description is  included because of  the importance of the
location of the  southern  corridor which  passes  through  Cape  Krusenstern
National Monument,   and because  of a previous  attempt  to  identify  a trans-
portation  corridor which would avoid the  Monument.
                                   Ill  - 35

-------
                                Table  111-9
                 OPTIONS USED TO  FORM ALTERNATIVES
      Component
Mine Location
Tailings Pond  Location
Mill Site Location
Worker Housing
     Type
     Location
Water Supply
Power Generation
Transportation
     Corridor  Location

     System
Port Site
     Location

     Transfer Facility
          Option(s)
Fixed
South Fork  Red Dog Creek
South Fork  Red Dog Creek

Campsite
South Fork  Red Dog Creek
Bons Creek
Diesel

Northern
Southern
Road

Tugak  Lagoon
VABM 28
Short Causeway/Lightering
Short Causeway/Offshore
  Island
   Suboption
Asikpak Route
Kruz  Route
Yeai—round
During  its  ANILCA deliberations,  Congress  decided  to  exclude fom National
Interest  Lands  status  certain  lands within  a  north/south  corridor  in  the
Noatak  Valley,  located  between  the Noatak  Preserve on  the east  and Cape
Krusenstern  National Monument on  the  west.  This  corridor was proposed for
transportation  purposes  for the  Red  Dog  prospect as  well  as  for  other
potential  resource  developments  in the  Western  Brooks   Range  and  the
National  Petroleum  Reserve.   Thus,  the possibility that the  Red Dog project
southern transportation corridor would  now traverse the Monument has raised
concern.
                                   II - 36

-------
Noatak Corridor and Port Site

The scoping  process initially  identified  three corridors, the  northern, the
southern  and  the   Noatak  (Table  111-1).   The  Noatak  route followed the
ANILCA north/south corridor to the  village  of  Noatak, or to an unidentified
port  somewhere  on  Hotham  Inlet  or Kotzebue  Sound  (Fig.   III-2).   This
corridor  and  port  option was  eliminated  during  the  initial options review
because of significant  potential  problems  with  both the  route  and the port
(Table  III-3).   The corridor  would  cross  many  lowlands  with  substantial
permafrost  and  wetlands problems,   and  the  many  stream  crossings  would
have  impacts upon  water quality  and fish.  If  the  terminus of the overland
corridor was  at the Noatak River, the  limited barging  season  would require
significant  dredging of  the  Noatak  River, and  substantial  weather  and low
water  problems  would  still  exist.   Whether  the overland  corridor  ended  at
the  Noatak  River  or  continued  directly to  some  point on  Hotham  Inlet  or
Kotzebue  Sound,  either  a  barge  to bulk carrier  or  port  transfer facility
would  still have to  be constructed.

Of  the remaining two transportation  corridor options,  the southern  corridor
would  cross the Monument while the northern  corridor would  completely avoid
the Monument.   Because of the Title XI   requirement that alternate routes not
crossing the  Monument  be fully considered in  the EIS, a decision was  made
that a  northern  corridor route  would   be retained  and  incorporated  in  an
alternative.   This was done to ensure that full consideration  and opportunity
for formal  public  review  would  be   given to  a  non-Monument  corridor  by
inclusion  in  the draft  EIS.   Thus,  during the analysis  of the suboptions for
both corridors,  each corridor's routes were  compared only among themselves
(i.e.,  the GCO route and the Asikpak route were  compared only against each
other  for  the  northern  corridor, and   the  Western,  Omikviorok  and  Kruz
routes  were  compared  only  among  themselves  for the southern corridor).
This  guaranteed  that  a non-Monument  corridor  would be  included  in  an
alternative, and that the environmentally and technically best routes for each
of the  northern and southern  corridors  would be considered in the compari-
son of alternatives  process.

Northern  Corridor and Port Site

The results  of  the remaining  options  evaluation  process for  the  northern
corridor  routes,   when  the  individual  discipline  screening  criteria   were
applied to  both the  GCO and Asikpak  routes, are  shown in Table III-6C,  and
are summarized  in  Table III-7.   For those  disciplines in which reasonable
difference  existed  between  the  two  routes,  the  Asikpak  route had  lower
relative levels of potential impact for technical feasibility,  cultural resources
and regional  use,  while  the GCO  route had a lower  relative level of potential
impact for subsistence.

For those  disciplines in which  a  reasonable  difference existed between the
two northern corridor port sites,  the  remaining  options evaluation  process
(Tables III-6F and  III-7)  showed that Tugak  Lagoon had lower  relative  levels
of potential  impact  for  fish and  marine  biology, while  Singoalik Lagoon  had
lower  relative levels  of potential impact for  wildlife and  subsistence.
                                  Ill  -  37

-------
Because  the  northern  corridor routes  went  to  separate  port  sites  (Fig.
111-2), each  route and  its port site  had to be  considered  in combination for
comparison with  the other.   Such  a  comparison of the  Asikpak route/Tugak
Lagoon combination  with the GCO  route/Singoalik  Lagoon combination did not
show  great  differences  between them.   However, on  balance,  the  Asikpak
route/Tugak  Lagoon combination had an overall  lower  potential for impacts,
and  it  was  tentatively  selected as  the  best  combination  for the  northern
corridor.

The  GCO  route/Singoalik Lagoon combination  was then  reviewed against the
12 issues to  see if  it addressed one or  more  of the issues in a significantly
more  favorable  manner  than did the Asikpak  route/Tugak Lagoon  combina-
tion.   As  it  did   not,  the Asikpak  route/Tugak  Lagoon combination  was
selected  as the best one for the northern  transportation corridor.

Southern Corridor and Port Site

The   results  of  the  remaining  options  evaluation  process  for  the  three
southern  corridor   routes  are  shown  in  Tables  III-6D and III-7,  with the
overall relative levels of potential  impact shown in Table III-8.  These  tables
show  the specific discipline by discipline analysis of  impacts  which  resulted
in overall  relative  levels of potential impact of high for the  Western  route,
moderate  for the Omikviorok  route,  and  low  for  the  Kruz  route.   Although
Table  III-7 shows that  the  grouped  levels of  potential  impact  did  not  differ
greatly between  the  Western  and  Omikviorok  routes,  the  grouped  levels of
potential impact  for the  Kruz  route were clearly lower than  the  other two.

For  the  VABM  17  and  VABM  28  port  sites,  the  results  of  the  remaining
options evaluation   process  are  shown  in Tables  III-6G  and  III-7,  with the
overall  relative  levels of potential  impact shown  in Table  III-8.   As  Table
UI-7  shows,  the grouped levels of  potential impact for  the  VABM 28 port site
were  significantly lower than those for the VABM  17 port site.

Two of  the  southern corridor  options,  the Western and Omikviorok routes,
could have used either VABM  17 or VABM 28 as  a  port site,  while the Kruz
route could  only use  VABM 28  (Fig. III-2).   To  reduce the number of com-
binations of  routes  and  port sites  to be  compared,  it  was  decided  that since
the VABM 28 port  site  clearly  had the lowest  overall  relative level  of  poten-
tial impact (Table  III-8), and since it was also common to all three routes, it
would  be  considered  as the port  site  for comparison  of  all  three southern
corridor routes.

With  VABM  28 as the common  port site,  selection of the  best southern  cor-
ridor  route  was straightforward  (Tables  III-7  and   III-8).   As   discussed
above,  the  Kruz route  clearly had the lowest overall  relative level  of  poten-
tial impact,  and it  was thus tentatively selected  as the best  southern  corri-
dor route.

The Western and Omikviorok  routes  to VABM  28  were then reviewed against
the  12 issues  to see if either  addressed one  or  more of the  12 issues  in  a
significantly more  favorable manner than  did the Kruz route.   This  review
showed that both the Western  and Omikviorok  routes  would have less  impact
upon the Monument by being closer  to  its northwest boundary than the Kruz


                                   III - 38

-------
route,  with  the Western  route having  the  least impact.   Even that  route,
however, would traverse 27.2 km  (17 mi)  of  the  Monument.

While  the  lesser  potential  for  impacts  to the Monument  from either  the
Western or the Omikviorok  routes  was important, it was  not considered  to be
significantly so  (as  would  a  route along  the northern  corridor  which would
completely  avoid  the  Monument).    Therefore,  when  the advantages of  the
smaller  potential  for  impacts  to  the Monument  from either the  Western or
Omikviorok routes  were weighed against the significantly lower overall  rela-
tive level  of potential  impact for the Kruz  route  (Tables  III-7 and III-8),  the
Kruz route to VABM 28 was selected as the  best route for  the southern cor-
ridor.

As  a result of the  analyses described above,  two transportation  options  re-
mained;  the Asikpak route  to  Tugak Lagoon for the  northern corridor, and
the  Kruz  route  to  VABM  28 for  the southern  corridor.  These two  options
were then incorporated into the alternatives as described in the next section
(Identification  and Description of Alternatives).   Once  incorporated  into  the
alternatives, selection  of  the  final transportation corridor became part of  the
overall  process for  selecting the preferred alternative.   This was decided by
comparison of  alternatives as described later  in this chapter.


IDENTIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION  OF ALTERNATIVES

The options screening process left only three components with  more than one
option  remaining.  These  were the transportation corridor and  port site loca-
tions,  which  were dependent  upon  one  another,  and the  transfer  facility.
The identification of alternatives   process  was  therefore  relatively  straight-
forward as  there   were  only three  combinations (and  hence alternatives)
necessary  to address the issues raised  by those three components with more
than one option remaining (Fig. III-3).

Alternative 1

This  alternative  would site  the tailings  pond in  the  South  Fork of Red  Dog
Creek with the  mill  in close proximity to the west  (Fig.  11-3).  A  worker
camp would be located close to the  mill.   Power would be supplied by diesel
generators  also sited near the mill.   Water would  come  from an impoundment
on  Bons  Creek to the south of  the tailings pond and  airstrip.  All these
facilities,  as  well as the mine,  would be  located  on  private land  owned  by
NANA.

Transportation would be by  yeai—round road along the southern  corridor to
a port site at VABM  28 (Fig.  II-6).  The  transfer facility would be the short
causeway/offshore island (Fig.  II-8).

Alternative 2

This  alternative  is  the same  as  Alternative  1  for all  components except the
transportation  corridor  and port site locations  (Fig.   III-3).   It  includes the
northern  corridor to Tugak Lagoon  (Fig.  11-6).  A  northern  corridor and
                                   III  -  39

-------






•n
O
c
3
m
z
i
CO
J)
m


Q

0
J
O
c_
m
O

>
r-
H
m
30
z
H
m
0)
r ^
RED DOG PROJECT EIS ALTERNATIVES

(A
W*
Ul

^

Ul



1



2



3






PROJECT COMPONENTS
h-

5g
gl
Q-J-
1*
OPTIONS VARYING
AMONG ALTERNATIVES

• SOUTHERN CORRIDOR
• VABM 28 PORT SITE
• OFFSHORE ISLAND FACILITY

• NORTHERN CORRIDOR
• TUGAK LAGOON PORT SITE

• OFFSHORE ISLAND FACILITY
•SOUTHERN CORRIDOR
• VABM 28 PORT SITE
• LIGHTERING FACILITY


NO ACTION

MINE
LOCATION




o
UJ
X
u.
















TAILINGS
POND


o
§
o
UJ
cr
*
X
£
o
tf>
















MILL
SITE




o
[
\
0
UJ
cr
*:
or
e
d
y>































V
WORKER HOUSING
TYPE








UJ
K
OT
Q.
2
<
o
































LOCATION




0
\
^
Q
UJ
cr
cr
o
u.
d
0













0



















WATER
SUPPLY








^L.
UJ
UJ
cr
o
OT
O
00






1



























POWER
GENERATION








UJ
UJ
Q
































TRANSPORTATION
CORRIDOR
LOCATION

Of 9E
§ 1
I 1
8 o
H i
¥ £
g 3
2 OT


•



g



•







SYSTEM




o
0
cr
o
|
cr
UJ
>

































PORT SITE
LOCATION



z
o
8
00 <
evj -1
oo o
> H


•



B



•





TRANSFER
FACILITY


o
z
<"
— o
O UJ
I H
u. _
O _l


•



B



•









J

-------
 port  site were included in an alternative to specifically  address Issue Number
 10  -   Impacts  on Cape Krusenstern National  Monument.  Since Alternative 1
 identified  a southern  corridor  that crossed  the Monument,  the  question of
 gaining  legal access through the Monument arose.   The process for acquiring
 such   access was established   by   Title XI  of  ANILCA,  and  requires  that
 alternative routes be considered that  would not cross the Monument.  Thus,
 although the northern  corridor and  Tugak Lagoon options  might  otherwise
 have   been  eliminated  earlier  in  the  option  screening  process,  both  were
 specifically  retained  and  included  in  a separate  alternative  to  ensure this
 Title  XI issue would be addressed  during the formal draft  EIS review.

 Alternative 3

 This  alternative is  the same as Alternative 1 except that the  transfer facility
 is  the  short  causeway/lightering  option   instead  of  the short causeway/
 offshore island  option (Fig. 11-7).

 No  Action  Alternative

 The No  Action  Alternative  is defined  as meaning no  development of the Red
 Dog  Project  would occur.   This alternative  may  be used as  a  baseline  to
 which the  other  alternatives can be compared.

 The  No Action  Alternative would  result  from  denial  of  at least  one,  or
 perhaps more, of the  federal or state permits  necessary for project  develop-
 ment.   Or,  it could  mean  that the project sponsor  chose not to undertake
 the project.   However,  under  both federal and state  law,  a  landowner  or
 leasee generally  has a right to reasonable  access across public  lands to his
 land,   and  a right to develop that land in a manner  consistent with applicable
 law.   The  specific purpose  of Section  1418  of ANILCA was  to  permit  NANA to
 select a known,  valuable mineral  prospect with the intention  of developing it
 for the  benefit of its  shareholders  and other  residents of northwest Alaska.
 Therefore,  it is understood that implementation  of  the  No Action Alternative
 might  be  in conflict  with existing  federal  and  state  law.   However, federal
 regulations  governing  the  content of  EIS's  require  an  analysis of the No
 Action Alternative.
COMPARISON OF  ALTERNATIVES

To  compare  the three  action alternatives  it was necessary  to develop  evalua-
tion criteria.   Development of  these criteria  was  based  upon  the  twelve
issues  identified during  the scoping process  (Chapter VII) and  described  in
Chapter  I.   Each of the twelve  issues was considered appropriate  as  a  cri-
terion  for  evaluation of  the three  action alternatives.  The twelve evaluation
criteria are shown in the first  column of  Table 111-10.

To  evaluate  the alternatives, the evaluation criteria were  applied  separately
to each  of the  three  alternatives to determine a  relative value for the total
potential impacts for each alternative.  It is important to note that the "rela-
tive total impact value"  assigned to  a  given alternative  was derived only by
evaluation  of that alternative  relative to  the  other  two  alternatives for each
                                   III  - 41

-------
                                                      Table 111-10
                          EVALUATION CRITERIA  MATRIX SHOWING RELATIVE  TOTAL IMPACT

                              VALUES ASSIGNED  TO THE THREE ACTION ALTERNATIVES
ro
Evaluation Criteria
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Minimize Risk of Water
Quality Degradation
Minimize Impacts to Fish
and Fish Habitat
Minimize Impacts to Wildlife
and Wildlife Habitat
Minimize Impacts to Coastal
Geologic Processes
Minimize Impacts to Marine
Life and Marine Habitat
Minimize Impacts to
ALTERNATIVE 1
Southern Corridor
VABM 28 Port Site
Offshore Island Fac.
Low Risk
Low Impact
Low Impact
Low Impact
Low Impact
Low Impact
ALTERNATIVE 2
Northern Corridor
Tugak Lagoon P. S.
Offshore Island Fac.
High Risk
High Impact
High Impact
Low Impact
Low Impact
High Impact
ALTERNATIVE 3
Southern Corridor
VABM 28 Port Site
Lightering Facility
Moderate Risk
Moderate Impact
Low Impact
Low Impact
Moderate Impact
Moderate Impact
        10.
Traditional Subsistence
Harvest Activities

Minimize  Impacts  to
Cultural  Resources

Minimize  Social,  Cultural and
Economic Impacts upon
Residents of the  Region
Maximize the Potential for
Other Regional Uses

Minimize  Impacts  on  Cape
Krusenstern  National
Monument
                                            Low Impact
                         Low Impact
                        Low Impact
                                               These impacts would be similar for all three alternatives.
        11.  Minimize Technical Complexity

        12.  Minimize Costs
High Potential

High Impact


Moderate Complexity
Low Cost
High Potential

Low  Impact


High Complexity
High Cost
Moderate  Potential

Moderate  Impact


Moderate  Complexity
Moderate Cost
           See text  explanation on preceding page.

-------
criterion.   The  relative  values  used  were  low,  moderate  and  high.    For
example,  using the  first evaluation criterion, "Minimizing the  risk of water
quality  degradation",  each  alternative  was analyzed  from the  standpoint of
its  total potential risk of impact to water quality,  and a relative  total impact
value  (compared  to  the other  two  alternatives)   was assigned.  For  this
example,  as shown  in  Table 111-10,  Alternative 1  had a relatively low value
for total  potential water  quality  impacts compared to Alternatives  2 and  3,
which  had  relative values of  high  and  moderate,  respectively.   Table 111-10
is  important as it summarizes, for  each  evaluation  criterion  and  alternative,
the relative total  impact values for all the disciplines.  Thus, the evaluation
criteria  and relative total  impact values are devices  which provide for con-
sistent  comparison of alternatives.

It   must be emphasized  again that while a  particular alternative  might  be
assigned  a  high  relative total impact value when  compared  with  the other two
alternatives,  that did  not  necessarily  mean that  alternative would  have  a
high  absolute  impact;  only  that  it  was  relatively higher  than the other two
alternatives.   For example,  Alternative  1  was assigned a  high  relative total
impact  value  for  impacts upon Cape Krusenstern   National Monument simply
because of the visual  impact  of the ballasted  tanker.   But,  although  this
meant  Alternative 1 would have  a  higher relative  impact  than the other two
alternatives,  the  absolute  impact  of that visual  effect was  not considered
significant.   In   this  chapter,  therefore,  alternatives were assigned  total
impact  values  relative  to  one another,  while the  actual  significance of  an
alternative's  impacts  was   described   under  Environmental   Consequences
(Chapter V).

Following is a discussion,  on an individual evaluation criterion  basis, which
describes the  reasoning  behind the assignment of relative  total  impact values
to  the three action alternatives.   In most cases the discussion focuses on  the
three  components  which  differ  among  the alternatives,  that is:  the road
corridor location  (southern versus  northern); the port site  location (VABM
28  versus  Tugak  Lagoon);   and  the  transfer  facility  (short  causeway/
lightering  versus short causeway/offshore island).   If one of these  compon-
ents  is  not mentioned for  a  particular evaluation criterion,  it is  because
there were no significant  differences  among  the  alternatives.  This  discus-
sion  also   considers  the  mitigation,  monitoring   and  reclamation  measures
described under  Environmental Consequences (Chapter V).

Water Quality

Potential water quality  impacts were evaluated primarily on the  bases of  the
number, size and difficulty of stream crossings as they would relate to  sedi-
mentation and spill risks (for the  northern  and  southern road  corridors);
and on  the number of concentrate and  fuel transfers as they would relate to
spill risk (for  the lightering and offshore island transfer facilities).

Because the northern  road  corridor  in  Alternative 2 would  have six major
multi-span  bridges compared to one on the southern  corridor in Alternatives
1  and 3, there would  be a much  greater  opportunity for increased sedimenta-
tion and spills.   For  the transfer  facilities,  the greater number of transfers
required in Alternative 3 between  unstable (i.e. floating)  platforms,  and  the
necessity for the lighters to work  in  more marginal  weather  to  load  moored
                                   III - 43

-------
ships,  were  considered  to  have  a  higher  risk for potential  spillage  than
would operations at the offshore  island facility in Alternatives 1 and  2.

Of  the  two higher  potential  risks,  i.e.  the  northern corridor stream  cross-
ings  and the lightering  transfer facility,  the environmental risks associated
with the many stream  crossings  were considered greater.   A spill or serious
sedimentation  problem  in  the  ocean  would  much more likely  be dispersed
quickly over  a  much  larger  area;  such  a  serious  problem on a major  stream
could have  impacts of  far  greater environmental magnitude,  particularly if it
occurred  during the  low flow period  in winter or  during a major  fish  use
period.

Thus,  Alternative  1  (with  the  southern  corridor  and the  offshore  island
transfer facility) was  assigned  a  low relative total  impact  value for  water
quality.   Alternative  3,   similar to  Alternative  1  but with  the lightering
transfer  facility,   was  assigned  a  moderate  relative  total  impact  value.
Alternative  2, with the northern corridor, was assigned a high relative total
impact value.

Fish

Potential  impacts to fish and  fish habitat were evaluated primarily on  the
bases of the number of stream crossings  and  possible borrow site  locations at
or  near important  spawning, rearing, overwintering or fish  migration  areas
(for the road corridors),  and on  the  number of concentrate and fuel  trans-
fers as  they would  relate to  spill  risk (for the transfer  facilities).

The northern  road corridor in  Alternative  2,  with 12 crossings of streams
important to fish compared to  11 on the southern corridor in Alternatives 1
and 3,  was considered  to  have  significantly  higher  risks  for  potential sedi-
mentation impacts on  spawning areas,  blockage of fish  movements,   and con-
centrate, fuel  and  reagent  spills.   For the  marine transfer facilities,  the
greater  number  of  transfers  required  between  unstable  platforms  and  the
necessity for the  lighters  to work in  more  marginal  weather to  load moored
ships in  Alternative 3  were  considered  to  have a  higher risk for  potential
spillage  and subsequent effects  upon fish than  would offshore island  opera-
tions.

Of  the  two major  potential  risks,  i.e.,  the northern  corridor  crossings of
important fish streams and the lightering  transfer facility, the  risks  to fish
and fish  habitat associated  with the  many  fish  stream crossings were con-
sidered greater.   A serious  sedimentation  problem or major spill  in the ocean
would be more  likely dispersed  quickly  over a much larger area, while such
a  serious  problem on a  major  fish  stream could have impacts  of  far greater
magnitude on fish, particularly  if it  occurred during the  low flow   period in
winter  when  fish would  be restricted  to relatively few  deep holes under the
ice.

Thus, Alternative 1 with the southern  road  corridor and  the offshore  island
transfer  facility  was  assigned  a  low relative  total impact  value   for  fish.
Alternative 3, similar  to Alternative 1 but with the lightering transfer facil-
ity, was  assigned a moderate relative  total impact value.   And Alternative 2,
with  the northern  route corridor,  was  assigned  a high relative  total  impact
value.

                                   Ill  -  44

-------
Wildlife

Potential  impacts  upon  wildlife  were evaluated primarily on the  bases of in-
direct habitat loss  due  to  noise, other  disturbance or human contacts, and
effects  on animal movements  for  the road corridors, port  site locations and
the transfer  facilities.

The northern  road  corridor in  Alternative 2,  which crosses directly through
the  currently used  primary  caribou  winter  range  in the Wulik  and Kivalina
drainages, was considered  to pose a  higher  risk of indirect habitat loss than
would  the southern  corridor road  in Alternatives  1  and 3,  which would  be
within,  but   near  the  eastern  edge of  that  currently used winter  range.
Also, the  northern  corridor would  be more  likely to affect  the major  spring,
post-calving   and  fall caribou  migrations than would the southern corridor.

For  the port  site,  the  Tugak  Lagoon  location in Alternative 2  would  likely
affect movements  of bears  and  muskoxen to a greater extent than  would the
VABM 28  location  in Alternatives 1 and 3 because  it would  be  located in a
much  narrower  and  more  restricted  area  between the coast and the  first
hills.

For  the transfer facility,  the offshore island  in  Alternatives  1  and 2  would
likely  have  marginally   greater  indirect  habitat  loss  and  migration   effects
upon marine  mammals than the lightering facility  in  Alternative 3.

Of  the  three higher  potential  risks,  i.e.,  the  northern  corridor  caribou
winter  range  and  movement  impacts,  the Tugak Lagoon  bear and  muskoxen
movement  impacts,  and  the offshore  island effects  upon marine mammals, the
first two are found in Alternative 2  while the third is common  to Alternatives
1 and 2.  The combined potential risks  to wildlife associated  with  the north-
ern  corridor  and  Tugak  Lagoon port  site  locations were  considered  to  be
significantly   greater  than  those  associated  with the southern corridor and
offshore island.   Thus,  Alternatives  1  and 3 were  assigned low  relative total
impact  values for  wildlife  while  Alternative 2 was  assigned  a high  relative
total  impact  value.

Coastal Geologic  Processes

Potential  coastal geologic  processes  impacts were evaluated on  the bases of
net  sediment transport,  facility  erosion  and  lagoon  breaching  for the port
site locations and the transfer facilities.

For  both  the VABM 28 port  site  in Alternatives 1 and  3  and  the  Tugak
Lagoon port   site  in  Alternative 2, the potential effects  on  sediment transport
and  erosion  were considered  similar.  Lagoon  breaching would take place at
either port site and  the  effects were  considered  similar.

For  the  transfer facility, it was considered that the presence of  the ballasted
tanker  in  Alternatives  1 and 2, or  its  absence in Alternative  3, would  be
insignificant   to net  sediment  transport,  erosion or  lagoon breaching at  either
of the port sites.
                                   Ill - 45

-------
For  the  port site locations  and the  transfer facilities, therefore,  no major
difference  existed between the  three alternatives.   All were considered to
have a low relative total impact for coastal geologic  processes.

Marine Biology

Potential marine biology impacts were evaluated primarily on the bases of the
quality and quantity of benthic habitat disturbed, disruption of sedimentation
and  organism movement patterns, lagoon  breaching and  spill  hazards for both
the port site  location  and transfer facility.

Differences among  the three  alternatives  were considered  to be  negligible
with respect  to  disruption of  sedimentation and organism movement patterns.
The  VABM 28  port  site  location in  Alternatives 1 and 3 was considered to
have a  lesser  density  and  diversity of  benthic  organisms  than the Tugak
Lagoon  port site.   The offshore island  transfer facility in  Alternatives 1  and
2  was considered to  have a greater  net  loss of benthic habitat  (due to the
ballasted  ship)   than  the lightering  facility in  Alternative  3.   However,  the
offshore island   facility was  considered  to have a  lower risk for concentrate
and  fuel spills than the lightering  facility.

The  differences  in  potential  impacts between  port  site  locations   were  not
considered  significant.   For the transfer facility,  the greater  loss of benthic
habitat  from  the offshore  island  in Alternatives  1   and  2 was considered
insignificant  compared  to  the  greater   risk  of  spills from  the  lightering
facility.   Thus, both Alternatives 1  and  2, with  the offshore  island  transfer
facility,  were assigned a low  relative  total  impact value  for  marine  biology
while Alternative 3,  with  the  lightering  transfer  facility, was assigned  a
moderate relative total impact value.

Subsistence

Potential  subsistence  impacts were evaluated  primarily  on  the  bases of inter-
ference  with  traditional  harvest activities and increased nonresident harvest
of fish  and  wildlife  resources for  the road corridors, port sites and transfer
facilities.

The southern road  corridor  in  Alternatives 1 and 3 was considered to have a
much lower  risk of interference with traditional  harvest  activities;  it would
parallel  the  primary winter caribou range  in the Kivalina and Wulik  drainages
rather  than  cut across  it  as would  the  northern  corridor  in Alternative 2.
Also,  the  southern  corridor  would  cross fewer fish  streams important for
subsistence  use  than  would  the northern corridor.   The southern corridor
would also provide  less  access to  prime subsistence harvest  areas for non-
residents  who  might  compete with local  residents for the same fish  and wild-
life  resources.

The  VABM 28  port site  in  Alternatives  1  and 3  would  likely  have a mar-
ginally greater  impact upon marine  mammal  hunting  than the Tugak Lagoon
port site in  Alternative 2.
                                    Ill  - 46

-------
The offshore  island transfer facility in Alternatives 1 and  2 was  considered
to have a lower risk of concentrate  and fuel  spills  than the  lightering facility
in Alternative 3,  although  the offshore  island  might cause  some  additional
sound  or activity  disturbance during  the spring  marine  mammal  subsistence
hunting period.

While the difference between the  VABM 28  port site  in Alternatives 1 and  3
and  the  Tugak Lagoon site in  Alternative 2  was considered  insignificant,  the
risk of potential impacts to subsistence harvests by  the  northern  road  cor-
ridor in  Alternative 2  compared to the southern  road  corridor in Alternatives
1  and 3  was considered  significant.   And,  for  the  transfer  facility,  the
lightering facility in Alternative 3 was  considered to have the greater risk of
potential impact  because of the higher  spill  hazard compared to the offshore
island  in Alternatives 1 and 2.

Thus,  Alternative  1,  with  the southern corridor and  offshore island facility,
was  assigned   a  low relative total impact  value for subsistence.   Alternative
2, with the northern corridor  and  the  offshore island  transfer facility, was
assigned a high  relative total  impact value.   Alternative 3, with the southern
corridor  and  lightering facility, was assigned a moderate value.

Cultural  Resources

Potential cultural resources impacts were  calculated primarily on  the bases of
the  number of sites  which would  likely  be  impacted and whether they  are
within   Cape   Krusenstern  National  Monument  or   the  Cape   Krusenstern
Archeological  District;  whether primary impacts  could be avoided by reason-
able corridor, port site or transfer facility  relocation; and  whether protec-
tive measures could be taken to avoid secondary impacts.

All sites would be avoided  if reasonably possible during road and  port  facil-
ities design  and  construction;  SHPO-  and  ACHP-approved  recovery opera-
tions would be  used  to preserve  site  data  and  material that  could not be
reasonably  preserved  in place; and approved  measures would be used  to
protect sites  near  the corridor  and port facilities from  secondary impacts.

The southern road  corridor  in Alternatives  1  and  3  includes  13 cultural
sites,  seven of which  are  within the Cape Krusenstern Archeological District
(six of these  being within  the Cape  Krusenstern National  Monument).  There
are  23 cultural sites  within the  northern road corridor  identified  by recon-
naissance survey.   Sites  along  the northern corridor road  have not  been
evaluated against National  Register  of  Historic Places  Criteria for Evaluation
(36 CFR  60.4).

The VABM 28 port site in  Alternatives  1  and 3 contains a historical  site that
appears to meet  National Register criteria,  while the  Tugak  Lagoon port site
in Alternative 2  has only a small eroding  sod cabin that  might  meet National
Register of  Historic Places  criteria for eligibility.

The offshore  island and  lightering transfer facilities for all three alternatives
would have  no impacts on known cultural  resources.
                                   Ill - 47

-------
No  significant  difference  in  potential  impacts  was  determined  among the
three alternatives  and  they  were  each  assigned  a low  relative total  impact
value.

Social, Cultural and  Economic Impacts

Potential social,  cultural and  economic impacts of the Red Dog  project would
occur  largely  from  development of  the  project  as  a whole  and  would not
depend  on selection of any particular  alternative.   Such impacts would  there-
fore not be  significantly altered by  selection of any  one of the three action
alternatives  and are  not  discussed further  here.  The social, cultural and
economic impacts of the project  are discussed  in Chapter V.

Regional Use

Potential impacts to  regional  use by development  of the  road  corridors, port
sites  and  the  transfer  facilities  were evaluated  primarily on  the bases  of
their  size  and  location, adaptability  for  other  potential  users, and  whether
any  other uses  would  be  precluded.   As described  under Regional Use  in
Chapter  V,  a  guarantee  of  reasonable  access  and use by other industrial
resource users  was considered  assured for the following analysis.

The offshore island  transfer facility in Alternatives  1 and  2  was considered
to be more flexible for other users than  the  lightering facility in  Alternative
3.  The size and  location  of the port site and transfer  facilities  in all  three
alternatives  were considered to be  adequate  for any  needed  expansion.  No
preclusion of any other uses  was identified for any of the alternatives.

Since this would be the first major development in this  area  of Alaska, it is
not possible to accurately  assess the best route location from the standpoint
of other potential  users.   GCO's Lik  prospect, which would  likely be  one  of
the earlier users  of  any  transportation  system  developed  for the Red Dog
project,  would  be  closer  to the  northern  corridor.   However,   this  route
would be correspondingly  further from Red  Dog  which  is  now actively  being
developed.   The   Lik  prospect would  be reasonably accessible  from  either
corridor location.

In assigning  relative total  impact values, Alternatives 1 and  2 with  the off-
shore island  facility  were  assigned  high values  for  regional  use potential,
while Alternative  3 with the  lightering facility was assigned a moderate value
for regional  use potential.

Cape  Krusenstern  National  Monument

Potential  impacts  on  Cape  Krusenstern  National  Monument  were evaluated
among the alternatives  primarily  on  the bases  of  impacts  on  cultural  re-
sources,  littoral sediment transport effects upon the Cape  Krusenstern  beach
ridges,  increased access to the  Monument and the visual  impact of the  marine
transfer facility.   Since Alternative 2 with  the northern corridor and  Tugak
Lagoon  port  site  would not impact Cape Krusenstern National Monument,  it
was not considered further in  this analysis  and  was  assigned a  low  relative
impact  value for  potential Monument  impacts.  Also, since potential  impacts
from  the  southern  corridor road and the  VABM  28 port  site location would  be
                                   III - 48

-------
identical  for  Alternatives  1  and  3,  these  impacts were not considered  in
differentiating between  these  alternatives.   Therefore, for Alternatives  1 and
3, only the type of transfer facility differed.

Neither the offshore island nor the lightering facility was considered  to have
a significant  potential  for  impact upon  the Monument from the standpoint of
interference  with littoral sediment transport,  nor would either facility signif-
icantly  affect  access  to the  Monument  more  than  the  other.  The offshore
island  facility,  however,  with the large tanker  ballasted  on  the  seabed was
considered to have  a higher visual impact  compared to the lightering  facility.
Thus,   Alternative  1  with  the  offshore island  facility  was  assigned  a high
relative total  impact value  while Alternative 3 with  the  lightering  facility was
assigned  a moderate value.

Technical Complexity

Potential  technical  complexity  impacts were evaluated  primarily on the basis
of the  relative complexity  of  the design, construction and operation of  the
road, port site and transfer facilities.

The  southern  corridor  road  in  Alternatives  1  and 3  would have  one  major
multi-span  bridge  over  30.5 m  (100 ft)   in  length  and  four  single-span
bridges  under 30.5 m  in   length,  and 19  percent  of its  alignment  would
traverse  soil,  slope,  permafrost  and other  conditions  in  which construction
would  be considered moderately difficult or difficult.   The northern  corridor
road  in  Alternative  2  would  have  six   major  multi-span  bridges  and  six
single-span bridges,  and  41  percent of its alignment  would  traverse condi-
tions in which  construction would be considered moderately  difficult or diffi-
cult.   For these  reasons,  the southern corridor road was considered  to have
significantly less  technical  complexity than the northern corridor road.

The  VABM  28 and  Tugak  Lagoon port  sites both had suitable soils and both
sites were considered to be of equivalent complexity.

The  offshore island transfer facility in Alternatives  1 and  2,  with a self-
propelled lighter,  more conveyors,  a buried fuel  pipeline and  possible winter
ice  scour  problems was  considered to   be  of  approximately equally high
technical   complexity   to   the  lightering  facility in  Alternative  3 with tug-
assisted  barges,  clam  shovel  concentrate transfers  between two unstable
platforms, and fuel lightering to shore.

Alternative 2, therefore, with the technically more  complex northern  corridor
road  and  high  complexity offshore  island transfer  facility  was   assigned  a
high relative  total  impact  value  for  technical complexity.   Alternatives  1 and
3 with  the  less  complex southern  corridor road  and high  complexity  offshore
island  facility were assigned moderate relative total  impact values.

Cost

The  estimated capital  cost for the southern  road  corridor in Alternatives  1
and  3  would  be approximately $74.7  M  (Table V-16),  while the cost  for  the
northern  road corridor in  Alternative 2 would be approximately $125.7  M,  or
                                   III - 49

-------
a  difference  of  $51  M.   The  estimated  annual  operating costs  would  be
approximately  $2.6  M and $3.3 M,  respectively,  or  a  difference  of  $0.7 M.

The  estimated  capital cost for the offshore  island marine  transfer  facility in
Alternatives  1  and  2  would  be  approximately $54.7 M,  while the cost for the
lightering  facility  in Alternative  3   would  be  approximately  $74.0 M,  or a
difference  of  $19.3 M.   The  estimated  annual  operating  costs   would  be
approximately  $1.6  M and $3.0 M,  respectively,  or  a  difference  of  $1.4 M.
On the basis of these estimates,  the  lightering facility  would be significantly
more  costly than  the offshore island  facility both to construct and maintain.

Alternative 1,  with the  southern  corridor and  offshore island facility,  would
be significantly less expensive than Alternative 2, with  the northern corridor
and  offshore island.  Costs  associated  with  Alternative 3,  with  the southern
corridor and lightering facility, would be intermediate between Alternatives 1
and  2.
IDENTIFICATION OF  PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

As  described above,  the  alternative evaluation process  assigned relative total
impact  values to  each of  the three  action  alternatives as  shown  in  Table
111-10.   While the individual  evaluation criteria  were not weighted equally, a
broad   review of  Table  111-10  showed that,  from  the standpoint  of best
addressing  the 12 evaluation  criteria, Alternative 1  rated equal  to or  better
than  Alternatives  2 and  3 for nine  of the  11  criteria for which comparison
was  possible.  Alternative  2  rated  equal to or better than Alternatives 1  and
3 for five of the  11  criteria,  and Alternative 3  rated equal to or better than
Alternatives 1 and 2 for three of  the 11  criteria.

On  a  more  specific  basis, the  alternatives were compared to  each other.
Because they differed  only for  the  marine transfer facility,  Alternatives 1
and  3 were  compared  first.  Alternative  1 showed a greater potential  impact
for only  one of  the  evaluation  criteria,   while Alternative 3 showed greater
potential  impacts  for  six  of  the  criteria.   Alternative 1  showed  greater
potential  impacts  to  Cape  Krusenstern  National  Monument,  based upon the
visual impact of  the ballasted tanker  at the VABM 28 port site.

Conversely,  Alternative  3 showed  greater  potential  for  impacts on  water
quality, fish, marine  life,  subsistence,   regional  use  and  cost.  The first
four  were based  upon  similar and  important concerns for the increased risks
associated with the lightering facility.  The  lesser flexibility of  the  Alterna-
tive 3  lightering  facility for  regional  use was  not  considered  a significant
difference.    For  the  sixth  criterion,  cost,  Alternative  3  was  significantly
greater.

In  comparing Alternatives  1  and  3,  therefore,  the major  differences were
that  Alternative  1 would  have a higher  visual  impact upon the Monument,
while Alternative  3 would have higher potential for impacts  to  water quality,
fish,  marine life  and subsistence  from higher  spill risks,  and  significantly
greater costs.
                                   Ill  -  50

-------
Alternative  1 was  then  compared  to  Alternative  2.   Alternative  1  showed  a
greater  potential  impact  for  only  one  of  the  evaluation  criteria,  while
Alternative   2  showed  greater  potential  impacts  for  six  of  the  criteria.
Alternative   1 showed  a clear,  and  substantial,  greater  potential  impact  to
Cape  Krusenstern  National Monument since Alternative 2 would have virtually
no direct impact upon the Monument.

Conversely,  Alternative 2 showed greater potential impacts for water quality,
fish,  wildlife,  subsistence, technical  complexity  and  cost.   While  the  tech-
nical  complexity criterion  could  be  considered  as a  relatively  insignificant
difference  between  the two  alternatives,  the  other five were  considered
significant.

In comparing Alternatives  1  and  2,  therefore,  the  major differences were
that  Alternative 1  would have  a  substantially  higher  potential  impact upon
the Monument,  while  Alternative 2 would have higher potential for impacts  to
water  quality,  fish,  wildlife,  and  subsistence,  and significantly  greater
costs.

Thus,   in  comparison  among  the alternatives,  Alternative  1  showed  sub-
stantially fewer potential  impacts  for  the  evaluation  criteria.    However,
Alternative  1 showed higher potential  impacts to the  Monument, substantially
so when compared  to Alternative 2.

Alternative  1 has  been  identified  by  the  co-lead agencies as the  preferred
alternative.
                                   Ill - 51

-------
	Chapter IV
Affected Environment

-------
                      IV.  AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
INTRODUCTION

This chapter describes the  existing environment  without the project,  empha-
sizing  those  environmental  aspects  of  the  Red Dog  project area* that  may be
affected  by  the  construction  and operation of the proposed mining facility.
Baseline  environmental investigations  were initiated in the  early  summer of
1981,   and  data  collection   has  continued through  the  summer  of  1983.
Environmental field  studies,  literature surveys and mapping  have been docu-
mented.   Much  of  this  information  is  included as  appendices to  this docu-
ment, or is on  file  at  those  sites  identified  in the Summary Sheet.
HISTORY

Traditionally much of northwest Alaska  is used  extensively  by residents  for
their  subsistence  livelihoods.   Following the purchase of Alaska from  Russia
in 1867, the  aboriginal land  claims of  Alaska  Natives,  including  northwest
Natives, were  formally  recognized.  As early  as the federal Organic  Act of
1884 it  was  stated (in Section  8) that:

     ...The  Indians  or  other  persons  in said  district shall  not  be dis-
     turbed  in  the  possession  of any  lands  actually  in  their  use or
     occupation  or now claimed by them  but the terms under which such
     persons  may  acquire  title to  such  lands  is  reserved  for future
     legislation by Congress...

The  current status  of  lands  in  northwest Alaska bears  the  imprint  of three
major  federal  land  laws:   the  Alaska  Statehood  Act  of  1958,  the  Alaska
Native  Claims  Settlement  Act  of  1971 (ANCSA)   and the  Alaska National
Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 (ANILCA).  As these laws are still
in the process of being implemented,  land  ownership and  management  status
are only partly settled; much remains to be  resolved  as implementation con-
tinues.

Pending  resolution of the  Native  land  claims  question,  virtually all land in
the region  remained  in the federal public domain,  managed  by the federal
Bureau of Land  Management  (BLM),  until the Alaska  Statehood  Act author-
ized  the  State  of Alaska  to  select  federal  lands  as part  of its  statehood
entitlement.  However, the land claims of Alaska Natives remained unresolved
until ANCSA's  passage in 1971.
* Defined in Glossary.

                                   IV  - 1

-------
ANCSA  set out terms for resolving  Native  land  claims as part of the complex
package  of land  legislation that also addressed  ownership and management of
state  and  federal  lands  in Alaska.   In simplest terms,  ANCSA  appropriated
funds and  land  entitlements to compensate Alaska  Natives in  exchange for
extinguishment  of  their  unresolved  aboriginal  land  claims.   These  benefits
were  distributed through and administered  by a two-tiered structure of pri-
vate  village  and  regional   corporations  established pursuant  to   ANCSA.
Based  on  population, traditional  Native  villages received  a share  of  funds
and selection  rights to the surface estate of lands at or  near their traditional
settlement  sites.  Similarly,  regional corporations received  funds and full fee
land selection  rights, plus subsurface estate  rights to village land selections
within their regions.

The NANA Regional  Corporation  for  northwest  Alaska  is  one of  12 in-state
regional  corporations  established under ANCSA. Originally, there were also
11 village  corporations set up  in  the region.    Both  the  NANA Regional Cor-
poration  and  the village  corporations  of  Kivalina and Noatak had  land  selec-
tion rights within  the Red Dog  project area.  Subsequently, all  of the  NANA
region's  village corporations except  Kotzebue merged with  the  regional cor-
poration, pooling land assets and  land  management functions.

ANILCA  amended  some terms of ANCSA, including giving  NANA the right to
select the  Red  Dog prospect.   Also  of significant  importance to the project,
ANILCA  established the  Cape Krusenstern   National  Monument under manage-
ment  of  the  National  Park  Service to, among  other purposes,  protect  and
interpret the  archeologic sites  and  other evidence  of prehistoric and historic
Native cultures,  and to protect  the  viability and use of  subsistence  resources.
LAND  STATUS

The Red  Dog project area (Figure III-2), encompassing  the mine,  mill, hous-
ing and tailings pond sites, and  the  transportation corridor and port site op-
tions,  falls  within  the  northwestern  corner of the NANA  Regional  Corpora-
tion's  boundaries.   Overall, the  project  area includes  only  a  small  portion
(about 650,000  ha  [1.6 million ac] or less than five percent)  of the land and
waters encompassed  by the NANA region.   Nearly all of  the project  area  is
within the so-called unorganized  borough.  That is,  it is  outside any incor-
porated city or borough governmental jurisdiction.  Only  the mine site and  a
thin  strip  immediately  to the  south fall  within the North  Slope  Borough.

Recognizing  that  land status within  the project study  area  is fluid pending
exercise of outstanding selection  rights  and  resolution  of  overlapping Native
and state  selections, current  land ownership and management status  of the
project study  area's 650,000  ha  (1.6  million  ac)  can be summarized very
approximately  as  follows  (Fig.  IV-1):   State  of  Alaska selected, tentatively
approved or  patented lands, some of which  are overlapped  by  and  may be
superceded  by Native selections,  comprise  about 50  percent; federal  lands,
chiefly Cape Krusenstern National Monument  (about 85,000  ha  [210,000 ac])
and other  federal  (d-l)   lands  (about 89,000  ha [220,000  ac]),  amount  to
about  29 percent;  Kivalina and  Noatak village selections  cover about 65,000
ha  (160,000  ac) or 10 percent of  the project  area; most of  the rest consists
of  regional  corporation  selections and overselections,  part of which  may  ulti-
mately revert to the federal or state governments.

                                   IV - 2

-------
                                                                                                                                              .
                                                                                                                                        II    I  ,1
                                                            ;:•>•! ii|
                                                            'HIIIIII!
                                                            Illlllli'l
*Yiilimmmi<
                                                                                                                         \\>\
                                                                                                                         \\v\
                                                                                9<)R9H^!li«IIIIIIIIIINWIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIhXN
                                                  9&V!lllllllltlllllll'.l..llli

                                 !!!!!!i!
-------
Although  much  of the Native  land  within  the project area was  selected  by
the villages  of  Kivalina  and Noatak following the  merger of NANA Regional
Corporation with  its  villages, all  land title issued has been  in NANA's name.
Lands  selected  from  within Cape  Krusenstern National Monument and  trans-
ferred  to  NANA,  even  though  owned  by  NANA in  fee  title,  would  remain
within  the boundaries of  the Monument  unless  those boundaries  were changed
by  Congress.   However,  such  lands would not be  subject to the regulations
applicable  solely to the public lands  within  the Monument.

The mine, tailings pond, mill, power plant, worker housing  and  water reser-
voir would all be  located within  a  8,975 ha  (22,176  ac) parcel of private land
in Red Dog Valley.   The port site would also  be on private  land if  located at
VABM  28, and  probably on private land  if   located  at Tugak Lagoon since
NANA  could still  select that  area.  The  transportation  corridor  would  be
almost  totally on public land.
AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Geology, Physiography and Soils

Geology

The  Red  Dog mine  site  is  located  approximately 89  km  (55  mi) from  the
Chukchi  Sea, east-northeast  of Kivalina  and 132 km  (82 mi) north of Kotze-
bue.   Local  topography  consists  of  moderately sloping hills with  elevations
ranging from 243 to  455  m  (800  to  1500 ft).  The ore  deposit  lies at  the
western base of  Deadlock Mountain (elevation 913 m  [2,995 ft]),  and is sur-
rounded  to  the north and  east by the rugged ridges of the De  Long Moun-
tains.   To  the west  and  southwest,  the foothills of the De Long  Mountains
drop off to gently sloping coastal  uplands.   The coastal region consists of a
series  of closed  and  open coastal  lagoons separated from the Chukchi Sea  by
narrow barrier beaches or islands.

The  De Long Mountains are  generally underlain by folded and faulted thrust
sheets  of  sedimentary  rocks  which  are intruded  by  mafic*  and  ultramafic
rocks  (containing large percentages  of dark-colored minerals).   Bedrock in
these  mountains  consists  principally  of  limestone,  sandstone,  shale,  chert
and mafic igneous* rocks (Selkregg, 1974).

The  geology  of  the  eastern  portion  of the  project area,  including the mine
site,  generally consists  of  bedrock  deposits  of  Mississippian  conglomerate
that  contain  shale and limestone  with subordinate shale, chert and dolomite.
Bedrock  igneous  complexes  of mafic  volcanic  and intrusive rocks are also
present.

Coastal upland regions further west  in the  project area generally  consist of
unconsolidated deposits of glacial  moraine*, as well  as glaciofluvial  or out-
wash  deposits associated with  glaciers  or bordering  older  moraines.   Glacial
moraines are  fairly regular,  low,  linear hills which are formed at the  edge of
* Defined in Glossary.


                                   IV  -  4

-------
glaciers.   Moraines generally  consist of a complex  mixture of unsorted  gra-
vel,  sand, silt and clay.

In addition to unconsolidated deposits, the  upland  regions  located between
the  Kivalina  and  Wulik  Rivers,   and  between  the Singoalik and  Kivalina
Rivers, also contain  areas of  bedrock outcroppings.  These consist of ultra-
mafic intrusives;  igneous complexes  of mafic volcanic  and  intrusive  rocks;
and  Precambrian-  to  Devonian-aged  rocks consisting of  limestone, dolomite,
chert and  phyllite  (Selkregg,  1974).

The  coastal region in the project  area consists  of  unconsolidated deposits of
older,  interlayered alluvium*  and  marine  sediments.   These  formations  were
laid  down  in  shallow, nearshore shelf environments where frequent sea  level
changes  alternately exposed  and  submerged  portions of the  gently  sloping
terrain.   Deposits  consist of alternating  lenses and  mixtures  of gravel, sand,
silt and  clay.  More modern  coastal beaches,  spits, bars and deltas are also
present in the region.

Seismology

According  to  Corps classification,   the project area falls within Seismic*  Risk
Zone 2.   This designation  applies  to areas that could be  affected by  earth-
quakes  with maximum magnitudes   of 4.5  to  6.0 on the Richter  scale.  The
only seismic activity reported in northwestern  Alaska between 1955 and  1964
occurred  in  the  Chukchi Sea.  It is  believed that  seismic shocks occur in-
land,  but equipment is not  available  in  the  area  to  record  such  events
(Selkregg, 1974).

Physiography

The  project  area is  characterized  by  moderately sloping  hills, broad  stream
valleys and coastal lowland lagoon  systems.  The entire area is underlain  by
permafrost.  Gentle,   poorly   defined surface undulations are caused by  pat-
terned ground,  old  drainage  channels, thaw lakes, and other  depositional,
erosional or permafrost  related features  (Fig.  IV-2).

Polygonal  or  patterned  ground  is  a  conspicuous  surface  feature, especially
near the  coast.  Temperature-induced contraction  cracks  are formed in poly-
gonal patterns similar to those encountered on dry mud  flats.  These  cracks
fill  with  water and freeze.   Continued  cracking,  filling and freezing along
the  same  lines eventually  form  a  network of ice wedges that sometimes  be-
come several  meters  deep and are generally spaced tens  of meters apart.   In
time  the  ice  wedges form  troughs bounded  by ice push  ridges.   Troughs,
ridges  and undisturbed  central  areas  are  referred  to as ice-wedge polygons
(Selkregg, 1974).

Thaw lakes are also  important features  in the area.  These  usually originate
from small, shallow ponds that  generally  begin  in  low-centered polygons or
at the  intersection of  ice wedges (Sellmann et al.,  1975).  Other  nearby
ponds  expand and coalesce  to  form  larger  ponds and  lakes.   During  the
summer period, the underlying permafrost is  thawed, which  allows deepening
* Defined in  Glossary.

                                   IV  - 5

-------
                                                                                                                      .MINESITE

                                                                                                                      DEADLOCK
                                                                                                                      MTN
PUSIGFAK
LAG004
        SINGOALIK
        LAGOON
SIN60ALI
LAGOON
PORT SITE
     TUGAK LAGOON
"0
O    TUGAK LAGOON
        PORT SITE
O          KAVRORAK LAGOON
                    KIVALINA
                    LAGOON
                                      IMIKRUK
                                      LAGOON
             LEGEND

                                       PORT SITE
                                             IPIAVIK
                                             LAGOON
               MONUMENT BOUNDARY          VABM  28
               TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR     PORT SITE
                                                PORT
               ORGANIC  SOILS                    LAGOON
             I • I  POSSIBLE CONNECTION
                   TO GCO'S LIK PROSPECT
                                                                    CAPEJKRUSENSTERN
                                                                   NATIONAL ft/ ONUMENT
                   FLOODPLAIN
                 S PATTERNED GROUND
         ^•-TJVm  AUFEI8 ZONE

-------
and enlarging of the  small lake.   As  the  lake  expands, it joins with others
and becomes deep  enough to maintain  a thaw bulb*.  Because thaw lakes are
largely  unstable with active  erosion   at  basin margins,  lake  basins  often
coalesce  and drain.  The thaw  lake cycle consists of repetitive stages of lake
formation  and ultimate drainage,  and  is the primary geomorphic  process that
modifies  the land  surface.   Nested and overlapped drained basins  contribute
most to characteristic  topography formation,  and drainage and wetland distri-
bution.

Among other  important  surface features in the area are pingos.   These are
small,  conical hills which  have a  central core of ice.   Closed-system pingos
develop when tundra  thaw  lakes  drain and  permafrost encroaches from the
sides.   As  sediments  near  the  center slowly freeze, massive segregation  of
ice  develops.   Volume increases  as freezing occurs  and  pushes the tundra
and ice upward, forming  a  large,  ice-cored mound or  pingo.  As the  pingo
expands  upward a summit  crack  or  fissure often opens,  exposing the  ice
core and  allowing  part of it to  melt and a small  lake  to form in the crater.
Closed-system  pingos  are  characteristic of the continuous  permafrost zone
(Selkregg,  1974).

Floodplains

The  floodplains  of the  Kivalina and  Wulik  Rivers  consist of unconsolidated
deposits  of alluvial material  (Fig.  IV-2).  Alluvial  deposits  represent rock
materials  that are  picked up and  carried along in streams  and rivers.  As
materials  move  downstream,  they  are  gradually broken,  abraded,  rounded,
and  eventually   deposited  as  stream  velocity decreases.   Older  alluvial
deposits  that  formed  in coastal plains during the Pleistocene Epoch are  often
interfingered  with  marine  sediments  that were deposited  during  that  time.

Seasonal   hydrologic  variations, though  not  documented   for the  Wulik and
Kivalina  Rivers,  are likely to be  similar to  those  of the  Noatak River  basin
as reported by Childers and  Kernodle  (1981).   Both  rivers  begin to  freeze
over  in  October and  exhibit  annual   low flows from January through  April.
Annual  peak  flows occur  in  May or   June  as  a  result of  snowmelt during
spring breakup.  Both  rivers exhibit rapid response to precipitation events
as a result of shallow permafrost  depths and  correspondingly small  ground-
water storage capacity.

Channel  geometry  surveys  (Childers  et al.,  1979) were conducted near the
Wulik and  Kivalina River  mouths in order to determine the two-year and 50-
year flood discharges.  This study computed the two-year and  50-year flood
flows  to  be 476 and  1,232 m3/s (17,000 and  44,000 ft3/s), respectively, for
the Wulik  River,  and  336 and 924 m3/s (12,000 and  33,000  ft3/s), respec-
tively, for the Kivalina  River.

Areas of  thick ice  cover occur within  the Wulik and Kivalina River drainages
as a result of aufeis* formation (Fig.  IV-2).   Aufeis  occurs due to confine-
ment of  surface  and groundwater  flows as ice  and  frost formations penetrate
deeper through  winter.  If  confinement pressures  become  sufficient,  the ice
cover is  fractured  and  pressure  ridges are formed as  the escaping water  is
frozen in  thin surface sheets.
* Defined in Glossary.
                                   IV  - 7

-------
Soils

Soils vary considerably in the project  area depending on location and  vegeta-
tion  cover.  The seasonal thaw  or active layer also varies throughout  the
area.   It generally  ranges from 50 to 100 cm (20 to 39 in)  deep in  vegetated
areas and may  range up to 3 m (10 ft) deep on exposed,  rocky hillsides.   In
general,  the slopes  of rolling hills have mineral,  silty soils with some sphag-
num  peat.   River terraces  are characterized  by sandy,  silty  soil  overlying
cobbles.    Upland drainage  channels  have  sphagnum peat  and mineral  soil
types, while moraine  knolls have mineral, rocky soils.  Lake  basins are gen-
erally characterized  by mineral, organic,  silty  soils  (Fig.  IV-2).

Permafrost

Permafrost is not a  material;  it is the temperature state  of a material and is
usually  defined as  any area  which remains below 0°C for a period  of two or
more  years.    Rock  or gravel  can be  permafrost,  and  its thawing will  not
usually  cause  settlement.   However,  ice can  be permafrost  (such  as an  ice
lens  in  the  ground  or  even a  glacier) and  its thawing  would very much
affect  the surrounding  environment.   The  temperature of soil can  be well
below 0°C and be officially classified  as  permafrost,  but it may not be hard
frozen and may  be  structurally similar to unfrozen  ground.  This  is  caused
by  saline  pore  water and  is  a  common occurrence  along the  western  and
northern  coasts  of Alaska.   This  soil may  not be hard  frozen  until its tem-
perature is lowered  several degrees  below 0°C.

Although  the  entire Red  Dog  project  area  is underlain  by  permafrost,  the
vertical extent of the permafrost  and its  properties  at depth  are not well  de-
fined  at this time.    Permanent thaw  bulbs are  present  under the  beds of
major waterways  such as the Wulik and Kivalina  Rivers and Ikalukrok Creek.

Mineral  Resources

Weathering sulfide  minerals  have been  reported  in  a 259 km2 (100  mi2) area
in the northwestern  Brooks  Range.   The most significant area  of mineraliza-
tion  within this  region is the Red Dog prospect (Tailleur, 1970; Jansons  and
Bottge,  1977).   Outcroppings  containing  high concentrations of lead, zinc,
silver and barite are present at  this  mine site,  and the subsurface ore body
is thought to  contain 77 million Mg  (85 million tons)  of high  grade  ore (17.1
percent zinc,  5.6 percent  lead, 75.0  g/Mg  [2.4  oz/ton]  silver).  There  are
indications  that  these minerals  may  extend  at shallow  depths throughout
much  of the northwestern Brooks Range region (WGM, Inc.,  1978).   Other
minerals  reported in the De  Long Mountains  region,  but outside the  project
area include:   copper, chromium,  nickel and chrysotile serpentine (asbestos).

Nonmetallic mineral  resources in  the project area consist of deposits  of sand
and  gravel along the Kivalina  and Wulik Rivers  and  at the coast (Selkregg,
1974).

Vegetation and Wetlands

Using the classification  system of Viereck et  al. (1981), 13 vegetation types
were  described  for the  project area   (Dames & Moore,   1982a).  Vegetation


                                   IV - 8

-------
types at the  mine  site, along the transportation corridors  and at the alter-
nate  port  sites  range from  xerophytic*,  upland mat  and cushion tundra to
wet,  lowland  sedge-grass  marsh.   Vegetation consists primarily  of cotton-
grass tussock tundra, low shrublands  and herbaceous meadows,  in  order of
relative  abundance.   Complexes of  up to  three vegetation types  are  also
common throughout the project area  (Dames &  Moore,  1982a).

Vegetation Type Descriptions

     Shrubland

Both  closed and open  tall  shrub vegetation types (greater  than 1.5  m [5 ft]
tall)  occur  in the study  area.   Closed (more than  75 percent foliar  cover)
tall shrub communities occur in relatively  few locations, primarily as riparian
or snowbank  vegetation along streams.   Grayleaf willow (Salix glauca)  domin-
ates  this vegetation  type,  which  usually contains  an  understory  of sweet
coltsfoot (Petasites frigidus)  and moss.  Open (25 to  75 percent foliar  cover)
tall shrub communities are more abundant  and more variable in species com-
position  throughout  the  study  area.   Diamondleaf  willow  (Salix   planifolia
pulchra), feltleaf willow (S. alexensis),  or a  mixture of  both occur along
most  stream  terraces  in the  area,  usually  with an  understory of  bluejoint
(Calamagrostis canadensis).

Low  shrub vegetation (20 cm  [8 in]  to  1.5 m [5 ft] tall) is  very abundant in
the study area  and  includes tundra as well  as closed and open  low shrub
types.  Low shrub tundra  communities are dominated by such species as four-
angled cassiope  (Cassiope tetragona), crowberry (Empetrum  nigrum)  and bog
blueberry (Vaccinium  uliginosum).   Other woody plants such as dwarf Arctic
birch (Betula  nana) and willow species may be present as codominants  in  this
community.    Low shrub tundra vegetation is quite  common on  the  upland
rolling  hills   where  it often  forms  a  complex  with cottongrass (Eriophorum
spp.) tussock tundra.

Closed low shrub communities occur sporadically along the two transportation
corridors,  but  are prevalent  near  the coast  on slopes directly  above  the
beach.   Dominant  species  in  this  community  include dwarf   Arctic  birch,
diamondleaf  willow,  bog  blueberry  and  narrow-leaf  Labradoi—tea   (Ledum
decumbens).

Open  low shrub communities  are common on upland rolling  hills and  riparian
stream terraces  located along the transportation corridors.  This  vegetation
type  consists  primarily of  a  codominance  of willow  and assorted  heath
species.   Dwarf Arctic birch,   bog  blueberry, moss  and herbaceous species
may also codominate this vegetation type.

Dwarf shrub  mat  and  cushion  tundra  communities are primarily  associated
with  upland  ridges  and  bedrock  outcroppings located  above 244 m  (800  ft)
elevation in the  De  Long  Mountains.  This vegetation  type  typically  contains
white mountain-avens  (Dryas  octopetala)   in  association with  a  variety  of
willow,  heath  and  lichen  forms, depending on  the  moisture content  of  the
soil.  On more  mesic* sites,  dwarf Arctic  birch and narrow-leaf Labradoi—tea
may also describe a  community.
* Defined in  Glossary.

                                  IV  - 9

-------
     Herbaceous

Herbaceous  tall  grass (greater than 1 m  [3 ft] tall) communities occur along
the coastal  dune  regions of the  study area.   This vegetation  type is domi-
nated by  lyme grass (Elymus  arenarius mollis) in  association with  beach pea
(Lathyrus maritimus pubescens).

Sedge-grass tundra  communities  typically  occur  in  lake  basins or  infilled
backwater  areas  along  streams where there  is  no surface water  and water
inundation  of the  soil profile may occur for only part of the growing season.
This  vegetation type is usually composed  of  various  combinations  of  cotton-
grass  (Eriophorum  vaginatum,  E.  angustifolium)  and   the  sedge   Carex
aquatilis  aquatilis,  although willow and moss species, may also occur.

Tussock  tundra  is by far the  most prevalent  vegetation  type  along  the
transportation  corridors,   typically  occurring  on  rolling  upland   slopes.
Cottongrass  is the  principal   species of tussock  tundra,  but the  community
usually  contains codominant species of various other sedges (Carex bigelowii,
C_.  microchaeta),   bog   blueberry,   narrow-leaf  Labrador-tea,  dwarf  Arctic
birch, and  Sphagnum moss.

Sedge-grass marsh communities usually occur  near lakes and in  historic  lake
beds  which contain  at  least 15 cm  (6 in)  of  surface  water.  This  vegetation
type  usually  contains  pendent  grass (Arctophilia fulva)  or  sedge  ( Carex
aquatilis)   in  association  with  a  codominant  such  as mare's  tail  (Hippuris
vulgaris).

Sedge-grass wet  meadow communities  are  similar to  sedge-grass marsh com-
munities  but occur in historic, infilled lake basins and high- or  low-centered
polygonal  ground  having  less  than 15 cm (6 in) of  surface  water.   Carex
species  dominate  this  vegetation type,  although  common  associates  include
cottongrass species,  bog blueberry  and mosses.

Sedge-grass bog meadow communities are  similar  to  sedge-grass wet  meadow
communities but occur  only  in poorly drained lake basins  which  have   peat
soil   at least 30 cm  (12 in) deep.   As with wet meadow communities,  domin-
ant species of this vegetation  type include  Carex species, cottongrass,  bog
blueberry,  narrow-leaf Labrador-tea and Sphagnum species.

Wetland herbaceous communities  occur in  small  ephemeral  ponds  located be-
tween sand  dunes  and  along  some  coastal  lagoons.    Halophytic*  (salt-
adapted)   herb  wet meadows are  dominated  by  arrow  grass  (Triglochin
maritimum),  though  mare's  tail  may  also  be present.  In more  freshwater
habitats,  this  vegetation  type is dominated  by horsetail  (Equisetum spp.).

Wetlands

Development in  wetland areas is  regulated by federal law  to  the extent that
any  discharge of dredged or  fill  material may  require  a  Department of the
Army (DA) permit.   The Corps defines wetlands as "areas  that are inundated
or  saturated  by surface or groundwater  at a frequency and  duration suffi-
* Defined in Glossary.
                                   IV  -  10

-------
cient  to  support ...  a  prevalence  of vegetation typically adapted for life in
saturated  soil  conditions.   Wetlands  generally  include  swamps,  marshes,
bogs,  and   similar areas"  (Federal  Register  47[141 ] :31811).   Vegetation,
though,  is  only one  indication  of a wetland system.  Other  parameters in-
clude the  hydrologic  regime and  soil  characteristics.   All three  parameters
should be considered  in determining wetlands.  The identification of  wetlands
in Arctic areas  is complicated  by the  fact that  permafrost  can  impede the
drainage of  soils,  and  large  areas  not considered typical  wetlands  may be-
come  water-saturated as thawing progresses through a growing season.

Wetlands were set aside for special  consideration because  they may  provide
valuable  habitat  and  perform important natural  functions.   Therefore,  a  wet-
lands evaluation  must  go beyond identification and take into consideration the
ecological contribution  made by  the  defined communities.   In addition to  pro-
viding habitat,  important functions  of the  wetland  system of the project area
include  flood control,  particularly in the  major  wetland area  near Kivalina;
nutrient  and detrital  movement,  particularly  in  wetland  areas  adjacent to
lagoons   and  other  aquatic  systems;  filtration;  erosion  control  and  runoff
retardation.

Several   vegetation types  identified  in  the project area satisfy the technical
wetland  criteria  (i.e., plant species are either facultative or obligate hydro-
phytes*, soil has hydric* characteristics,  and  the soil  is saturated  or inun-
dated during a  portion  of  the  growing  season).  These wetland vegetation
types include sedge-grass  marsh, sedge-grass  wet meadow, sedge-grass bog
meadow,  wetland  herbaceous,  sedge-grass  tundra, tussock tundra and  open
low shrub communities.

In  general,  riparian  tall  and  low shrub vegetation  types are  classified as
wetlands when they occur  along low terraces and river  bars that are flooded
during  spring runoff  and periods  of  intense  rainfall  and are vegetated  by
willows or  river  beauty  (Epilobium latifolium) (Dames  &  Moore,  1982a).

Threatened  or Endangered  Species

Three candidate threatened or endangered species have  potential  for  occur-
rence  in the project  area  (Murray,   1980).    These  are Kobuk  locoweed
(Oxytropis  kobukensis), the  kokrines  oxytrope (Oxytropis  kokrinensis)  and
fleabane  (Erigeron  grandiflorus  muirii).   However,  none of  these  species
were  found  during extensive field surveys  from  1981  to 1983 (Dames  & Moore,
1982a, 1983a,b).   Thus,  it appears unlikely  that candidate threatened or
endangered species occur in areas proposed for  development.

Terrestrial Wildlife

Birds

Three groups of  birds  are of particular  concern in the  project area:   water-
fowl,  shorebirds and raptors.
* Defined in Glossary.
                                   IV -  11

-------
     Waterfowl  and Shorebirds

Waterfowl  and  shorebird  use of the project  area  is centered  along  the coast
during the  spring and fall  migrations, although coastal  and  inland breeding
occurs.  The  areas  of  primary importance  to  waterfowl  and shorebirds are
the  river  delta  habitats  along the  coast,  especially those  associated with
coastal  lagoons.   The  total number of  birds  staging  in  these areas  is not
high  in comparison to other  areas  of the Kotzebue Sound region  (Dames &
Moore, 1983a).   Figure  IV-3 shows the most important spring and fall  migra-
tion  staging areas.

During  spring  migration,  the staging  areas  most  heavily used  by  water-
orientated   birds  are  the  delta  areas  of  the  Singoalik  River  (Singoalik
Lagoon),   Asikpak  River  (Asikpak   Lagoon),   Kivalina  and Wulik   Rivers
(Kivalina   Lagoon),  Imikruk  Creek   (Imikruk   Lagoon),   Omikviorok   River
(Ipiavik Lagoon)  and  Tugak Lagoon.   During  the fall migration,  major stag-
ing  areas  are the  deltas  of  the  Kivalina  River (Kivalina  Lagoon)  and the
Omikviorok  River  (Ipiavik Lagoon).

Inland habitats for this species  group are found  in  the extensive riparian
low shrub  areas,  and in the  sedge-grass marsh  areas  associated with ponds
in the  lowlands  of  the Kivalina, Wulik and Omikviorok  River drainages.   A
combination of emergent vegetation  and  open water  make  these  ponds high
quality  habitat for  breeding  and molting Canada  geese (Branta canadensis).

     Raptors

Portions  of the  project area  provide  good  habitat for cliff  nesting  raptors
including   the  peregrine  falcon  (Falco  peregrinus),  golden eagle  (Aquila
chrysaetos), gyrfalcon (Falco rusticolus)  and  the rough-legged hawk  (Buteo
lagopus).    The   peregrine  falcon  is   classified  as a  federally  endangered
species under  the Endangered Species Act, and  golden eagle nest sites are
protected   by the  Bald  Eagle  Protection Act.    Peregrine  falcon  and  golden
eagle nest sites  which have been  reported in the vicinity of potential project
impact areas (Dames &  Moore, 1983a)  are shown  on Figure IV-4.  Additional
information  on  peregrine  falcons  is  included  in  Appendix  3,   Endangered
Species Biological Assessment.

Mammals

Five large terrestrial  mammal  species  are found in  the project  area;  caribou
( Rangifer  tarandus),  muskoxen  (Ovibos moschatus),  moose ( Alces alces),
Dall  sheep  ( Ovis  dalli)  and  brown bear ( Ursus arctos).    Other  important
terrestrial  mammal species  in the project  area include  the  wolf (Canis  lupus),
wolverine  (Gulp gulo) and  red  fox (Vulpes vulpes).

     Caribou

The  western  Arctic caribou herd,  numbering  approximately  190,000 animals
and  the  largest  herd in North America,  encompasses the  project area within
its  range.   A  small  portion  of  this  herd  uses the  Singoalik,  Asikpak,
Kivalina,  Wulik and Omikviorok River  drainages for winter range,  while the
large majority  of  the  herd moves  further south and  eastward to  overwinter.
                                   IV  -  12

-------
FIGURE IV-3
SPRING & FALL WATERFOWL
STAGING AREAS

-------
   PUSIGRAK
   LAGOOH
                                                                                                                       DEADLOCK
                                                                                                                       MTN.
        SINGOALIK
        LAGOON
SINGOALIK
LAGOON
PORT SITE
     TUGAK LAGOON
    TUGAK  LAGOON
       PORT SITE
           KAVRORAK LAGOON
                     KIVALINA
                     LAGOON
                                      IMIKRUK
                                      LAGOON
                LEGEND
                                          VABM 17
                                          PORT SITE
                                                IPIAVIK
                                                LAGOON
                                               VABM 28
                                               PORT SITE
POSSIBLE CONNECTION
TO GCO'S  LIK PROSPECT
MONUMENT BOUNDARY
TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR
PEREGRINE FALCON NEST
GOLDEN EAGLE NEST
 CAPE)
NATIONAL
KRUSENSTERN

-------
Winter  distribution  in the  project  area,  both  in  numbers  and  location,  is
highly  variable and  probably  dependent on  local  weather conditions  (e.g.,
snow depth).  Winter numbers in these drainages  may reach 10,000 individ-
uals in some  years  (Dames &  Moore, 1983a).   Figure IV-5 shows the  histor-
ical  caribou  winter  range within  the project  area  since  1966  (Ott,  1983),  as
well as the  more specific  primary  and secondary  habitats  used by  caribou
from 1981 to 1983 (Dames & Moore, 1983a).

In  the spring, caribou  leave  winter ranges  in the  project area and  migrate
north  through the De Long Mountains  to their  traditional calving grounds  on
the  Arctic  Slope.   Relatively  few animals normally  remain in the vicinity  of
the  project area during late spring  and early summer, but in early  July 1982
approximately  10,000  bulls  were observed there (Ott, 1983).   In early July a
large  movement  of  caribou   numbering  in   the  tens-of-thousands  normally
enters  the  project  area  from  the northwest, and passes through the upper
drainages  of  the  Kivalina  and   Wulik Rivers  in   the  traditional  counter-
clockwise post-calving aggregation.   These animals then return to the Arctic
Slope  to  spend the  remainder of the  summer.   Caribou  normally  enter the
Wulik  and Kivalina drainages again in late fall,  primarily from the northwest.
In  some  years this  movement may  involve  a  large portion  of the western
Arctic herd  (e.g.,  in 1975 an  estimated two-thirds of the  entire herd passed
through the  project area  during the fall on their migration to wintering  areas
to the south and east).

     Muskoxen

Muskoxen appear  to  be  slowly increasing  in  numbers in the  region following
introductions  at  several  locations during  the  past  13 years.   A herd  of  at
least eight  animals appears to be established on  winter  range  in the  Rabbit
Creek  valley  south of the Mulgrave Hills.   A larger herd is established  to
the northwest  in the Cape Thompson area, and  some individuals probably use
the  Singoalik  River  Valley  as part  of their home  range.   During  the late
spring, summer and fall, the animals appear to range widely along the coast,
and inland  in the Singoalik,  Asikpak, Kivalina  and Wulik River drainages.

     Moose

Moose  are found  in  the  region  closely  associated  with  riparian tall  shrub
communities along major rivers and  streams,  particularly during  the  winter.
In  late spring, moose  disperse  to shrub habitats at higher elevations,  though
riparian tall  shrub  habitats probably still support most moose.   This  disper-
sal  continues  through the summer and  autumn,  until the  approach  of winter
when moose concentrate along  the waterways again.

Population densities in the project area do not appear high.   A 1980 survey
by  ADF&G estimated a total population of about 150 moose in  the drainages  of
the Wulik and Kivalina Rivers.   Another area of apparent significant  winter
range  use is the Rabbit Creek  valley south of the Mulgrave Hills.

     Dall  Sheep

Dall sheep  in  the  region are  near  the western limit of their Brooks  Range
distribution.   Sheep  habitat  in the  project  vicinity is  limited  to the  Wulik
                                   IV  - 15

-------
                                                                                                                        DEADLOCK
                                                                                                                        MTN
SINGOALIK
LAGOON
PORT SITE
     TUGAK LAGOON
    TUGAK LAGOON
       PORT SITE
            KAVRORAK LAGOON
                     KIVALINA
                     LAGOON
                                       IMIKRUK
                                       LAGOON
                LEGEND
                                          VABM 17
                                          PORT SITE
                                                 IPIAVIK
                                                 LAGOON
                                                VABM  28
                                                PORT SITE
POSSIBLE CONNECTION
TO GCO'S LIK PROSPECT
MONUMENT BOUNDARY
TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR
                   HISTORICAL WINTER RANGE
                   SINCE 1966
                   PRIMARY RANGE 1981-83
        
-------
Peaks  and the mountains  bordering the  headwaters of the Wulik River and
Ikalukrok Creek  (Fig.  IV-6).   Sheep are generally found in low  to moderate
numbers in these areas.

     Brown  (Grizzly) Bears

Brown bears  are  found throughout the project area.   They occupy  several
different  habitats  depending  on the  season and  availability  of food.   In
spring the upper mountainous  areas appear to be favored, while the lowland/
coastal  areas  are favored  in the summer  and fall.   The bears  tend  to move
toward  spawning streams  when  fish are  present,  and  bears have been ob-
served  along  the  Wulik  River,  Ikalukrok  Creek  and  the  Asikpak   River.
Denning  probably occurs throughout the region at higher elevations, and the
Siaktak Hills  area  on  the Asikpak  River  is known to support  several dens.

     Wolf

Wolves occur  throughout  the  project area in moderate numbers  and  are an
important  ungulate* predator  in  the  region.  They  are eagerly  hunted and
trapped by  local residents for their pelts.   Single  animals  and packs of up
to 12  wolves  have been  reported  by  Red  Dog  Camp personnel (Dames  &
Moore, 1983a).

     Wolverine

The  wolverine is  a wide-ranging  species that presently  occurs  throughout
the project  area in moderate numbers.   They are  also  important to hunters
and trappers in  the region for their pelts.

     Red  Fox

Red  fox  are found throughout the region and occur in a variety  of habitats.
Their  abundance   fluctuates   and  the  population  within  the  project area
appears  to  be  low to  moderate at present.  They  are also  an important
species for local trappers.

Threatened or Endangered Species

The  only  threatened or endangered terrestrial animal  species within the pro-
ject  area is  the  endangered  peregrine falcon.    Dames  & Moore  (1983a)
reported  seven  nest  sites (Fig.  IV-4)  and  several other  observations  of
birds  not associated  with nests.   During 1983,  a survey  of the previously
identified  peregrine  nest  sites  did  not  find  any  active  peregrine  nests
(Dames & Moore, 1983b).  Additional information may be found in  Appendix 3
(Endangered Species Biological Assessment).

Groundwater  Resources

The  volume and  distribution of  groundwater is  dependent  upon  the geology
and  soils of  an  area  and  is  controlled  by seasonal  permafrost  depths.
Groundwater  may  occur above  (suprapermafrost water), within (intraperma-
frost  water)  or below  (subpermafrost water) the  permafrost layer  (Muller,
* Defined in  Glossary.
                                  IV - 17

-------
                                                                                                           mmemm
AK LAGOON
 PORT SITE
     KAVRORAK LAGOON
         i POSSIBLE CONNECTION    PORT SITE-
           TO SCO'S LIK PROSPECT
           MONUMENT BOUNDARY          VABM 28
           TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR     PORT SITE
           RANGE
  CAPEJKRUSENSTERN
!  NATIONAL MONUMENT

-------
1947).   At  this  time,  permafrost  depths  in the  project area have  not been
ascertained.  Sources of groundwater include surface  recharge by percolation
through   unfrozen   bedrock  fractures,  and  infiltration  of surface   runoff
through thawed surficial soils.

Relatively small quantities  of groundwater exist within  the bedrock and soil
deposits  in  the  Red  Dog  Creek  valley.  It is  estimated that groundwater
wells would  produce less than  83  2/min  (10 gal/min)  (Balding,  1976; Fuelner
et al., 1971).   Groundwater  flows through unfrozen  bedrock fractures gen-
erally follow topographic  slopes.   Groundwater  movements  through unfrozen,
suprapermafrost  soils are  closely  associated with surface water  flows,  and
eventually discharge into Red Dog  Creek.

Most of the groundwater  encountered in  the  project area is ephemeral  and
occurs only during  warmer  months  when the active soil  layer  is thawed.
The  availability of  year-round  groundwater is  likely to  depend on the  thick-
ness of the alluvial layer  beneath streams in relation to the depth of winter
freezing  and the top of the permafrost layer.   Small quantities of ground-
water may  exist throughout  the  year as  evidenced  by  icings and  pressure
ridges  observed on  the ice-covered creeks  (Dames & Moore, 1983a).

Groundwater samples  have  been collected from  two  small  seeps  located along
Red  Dog  Creek.   In general,  these seep  samples had substantially  lower pH
and  temperature,  and higher  levels of conductivity than  Red  Dog  Creek.
Water samples  from  the  seeps were worse than  EPA aquatic life water  quality
standards for  cadmium, copper,  iron,  lead,  nickel,  phosphorous  and zinc.
The  high  metals content of  these seeps indicates  that their source is from
within  the ore  zone.  The  mechanism of  groundwater  movement  and residence
time  within  the ore zone is  not  known.

Freshwater  Resources

Hydrology

The  project area  is  located primarily  within  the  drainage  basins  of three
major rivers:   the  Kivalina,  Wulik and Omikviorok  (Fig.  III-2).   A  small
portion of the  area is also located in the  upper reaches of the  Noatak River
drainage   basin.  The Kivalina  River, in the western portion of the  project
area,  originates  in the  Wulik  Peaks  at  the  western  end  of the  De  Long
Mountains and  flows southwest  to enter the Chukchi Sea  approximately  10 km
(6 mi) northwest of  the Native community of  Kivalina.   River crossings of
the Kivalina would  be required at three locations along  the  northern trans-
portation  corridor.   The northern corridor also crosses the Asikpak  River,
which  is  a  much  smaller  drainage  entering the Chukchi Sea  northwest of
Kivalina Lagoon.

Most of the project area  is located within  the  Wulik River basin.  The Wulik
River drains the western De Long Mountains and flows  approximately  128 km
(80 mi) southwest before entering  the Chukchi  Sea at  Kivalina.

The proposed mine  and mill facilities are  located in the drainage  basin  of  Red
Dog  Creek.   This  creek is a tributary of Ikalukrok  Creek which is a major
                                  IV - 19

-------
tributary  of  the  Wulik  River (Fig.  IV-2).  The northern transportation cor-
ridor crosses both  Ikalukrok  Creek and  the  Wulik River.  The eastern  end
of the southern transportation  corridor crosses small tributaries of Ikalukrok
Creek,  and small  portions  of the upper Wulik and Noatak River watersheds.

The  western  end  of  the   southern  transportation corridor  traverses  the
Omikviorok  River basin, and  may  require a  major bridge  across  this river
depending  on  the  final  routing.   The   Omikviorok   River is considerably
smaller  than the Wulik  River.   It  drains the  coastal  uplands  on  the north
side  of the Mulgrave Hills before flowing west to enter the Chukchi Sea at
Ipiavik  Lagoon.

Limited  flow  data are available  for these  rivers and  their  tributaries.   The
USGS has  published  data  for  two streams which  provide representative sea-
sonal flow characteristics  in the De  Long Mountains region.   These are the
Noatak  River, whose much larger river basin is  east of the Wulik River,  and
Ogotoruk  Creek, which  is  located approximately 65 km (40 mi) northwest of
Kivalina.   Table  IV-1  summarizes  the  estimated  annual flow  characteristics
for streams in the project  area  based upon  these records and  other sources
of information on precipitation.

Mean annual  runoff  for  streams in  the  project area varies  from 0.01 to 0.02
m3/sec/km2 (1.1  to  1.9  ft3/sec/mi2).  This corresponds to basin runoff of 30
to 64 cm/yr  (12  to  25  in/yr)  and mean basin precipitation  of 38 to 76  cm/yr
(15  to  30  in/yr).   The lowest  annual  runoff is  in coastal lowland locations
and  the highest in the  De Long  Mountains.

Seasonal flow changes in Arctic streams  are  much greater than those typical
of temperate climates.   Virtually all streamflow occurs between breakup  and
freezeup,   a  period   of  approximately five months from  the middle of  May
through  the middle  of  October.  Streams generally  exhibit  two periods of
high  flow:   at  spring   breakup and  during  summer and fall  storm events.
Typical  proportions  of  mean monthly  runoff for  rivers in the study area are
shown  in Table IV-2.

Smaller  tributaries  freeze  to the bottom in winter.  Some springs continue to
flow  during  the  winter months, but generally form icings a  short  distance
away.   Major rivers  continue  to flow through the winter,  but  accurate  flow
measurements are difficult  to determine because of the imprecision  associated
with  determining  undei—ice flow.

The  presence of shallow  permafrost  and  saturated soils results  in a rapid
response  between snowmelt or  rainfall  and  the resulting  stream discharge.
Over 80 percent of  annual peak floods  occur during the  breakup  period in
May  and  June.  All other floods  result  from intense  summer rain events.
The  100-year recurrence flood  is 0.547 to 1.641  m3/s/km2  (50 to  150  ft3/s/
mi2)  for drainage areas of 2,589 to  259  km2  (1000 to 100  rni2)  (Childers et
al.,  1979).   Smaller tributaries in  the  De Long Mountains  have larger peak
runoff  rates  per square  mile than  major streams.  Ten-year  and 100-year
recurrence flood peaks  for locations  in Red  Dog  Valley are shown in Table
IV-3.
                                  IV  - 20

-------
Table IV-1
MEAN ANNUAL FLOW DATA FOR SOME STREAMS
IN THE RED DOG MINE PROJECT AREA
Drainage Area
Location
Kivalina River at Chukchi Sea
Wulik River at Chukchi Sea
Omikviorok River at Chukchi Sea
Ikalukrok Creek at Wulik River
Ikalukrok Creek above Red Dog Creek
Red Dog Creek at Ikalukrok Creek
North Fork Red Dog Creek at Main Fork
Main Fork Red Dog Creek above South Fork
South Fork Red Dog Creek at Main Fork
Main Fork Red Dog Creek above North Fork
Bons Creek at Water Supply Dam Site
km2
1,740
2,339
469
492
153
65
36
13
8
23
10
mi2
672
903
181
190
59
25
14
5
3
9
4
cm
41
46
38
48
61
48
48
51
48
48
48
in
16
18
15
19
24
19
19
20
19
19
19
Mean Annual Runoff
m3/s
22.6
34.0
5.7
7.6
3.1
1.0
0.6
0.2
0.1
0.4
0.2
ft3/s
800
1,200
200
270
110
35
20
7
4
13
6
m3/s/km2
0.013
0.014
0.012
0.015
0.020
0.015
0.017
0.015
0.012
0.017
0.020
ft3/s/mi2
1 .2
1.3
1.1
1 .4
1.9
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.3
1 .4
1.5

-------
                                 Table IV-2


            TYPICAL MEAN MONTHLY FLOW PROPORTIONS FOR

                 RED DOG  PROJECT STUDY AREA STREAMS
Month
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
Mean Monthly
Flow Proportion
3.0%
1.0%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
1.0%
7.0%
32.0%
22.0%
17.0%
15.0%
Water Quality

Water quality in the Kivalina  and Wulik  Rivers  is typical of unpolluted fresh
water in the Arctic.  Both  of these rivers  are  clear  water streams with low
levels  of color, suspended solids,  turbidity and  nutrients.   The water  is
highly  oxygenated,  moderately hard  to  hard,   and  classified  as  a calcium
bicarbonate type.   The pH  level  of  these  rivers is  essentially  neutral (7.0  to
8.2), and   levels of  most  trace  elements fall  within  ranges  acceptable for
freshwater aquatic  life.   Ikalukrok Creek  has  similar water  quality character-
istics to the Kivalina and Wulik  Rivers,  except  below its confluence with the
lower quality waters of the  Red Dog Creek (Fig. IV-7).

The  waters  of  Red  Dog  Creek are  atypical  of   most  undeveloped  Arctic
streams  because of  the  toxic  concentrations of  dissolved elements  that enter
the  main stem  of the  creek  as  it  flows  through the  highly  mineralized ore
body.   Waters  in the upper portion of  the  main stem, the  North  Fork,  and
                                   IV  -  22

-------
                                Table IV-3


             TEN-  AND 100-YEAR RECURRENCE FLOOD  FLOWS

              FOR  STREAM LOCATIONS IN RED DOG VALLEY


Flood
10-year
Location
North Fork Red Dog Creek
at Main Fork
South Fork Red Dog Creek
at Main Fork
Main Fork Red Dog Creek
above South Fork
Bons Creek at Water
Supply Dam Site
m3/s
25.5
7.1
11.3
8.5
ft3/s
900
250
400
300
Event

100-year
m3/s
62.3
21.2
28.3
24.1
ft3/s
2,700
750
1,000
850
most  of  the South  Fork exhibit high  water quality.   However,  the middle
portion  of the main stem has  high  concentrations of cadmium,  lead, zinc and
iron.   This water also has decreased  levels of dissolved oxygen and alkalin-
ity,  and  increased  levels of  turbidity, suspended solids  and  sulfate.   The
pH  turns slightly acidic, and  water type changes from calcium bicarbonate to
a mixture of  calcium-magnesium bicarbonate  and  magnesium-sodium  sulfate
water.  Dilution  from  North and South Fork waters improves the water  qual-
ity  of the  main  stem further  downstream,  but  Red  Dog Creek adversely
affects the water quality  of Ikalukrok Creek below their confluence.

     Kivalina  River

Water in  the  Kivalina River  is of the calcium bicarbonate type  with  high
alkalinity.   Both major forks  of the river are highly oxygenated,  clear, and
have  neutral  pH.   Zinc  concentrations  occur  in  moderate levels,  but boron
and  cadmium  concentrations in  both forks exceed  EPA water  quality  stan-
dards for aquatic life.

     Wulik River

The  Wulik River is a clear  water system  typified by  high  dissolved  oxygen
and  low   levels of  color, suspended  solids, turbidity and  nutrients.   The
                                  IV - 23

-------
 LEGEND
          CONCENTRATION
            (MG/L)
DESIGNATION ELEMENT
ZINC

LEAD

CADMIUM
                   0.02   -  0.05

                   0.0004 -  0.01

                   0.001   -  0.004
CLEAN
WATER:
OOOO
ZINC

LEAD

CADMIUM
                   0.2    -  I.I

                   0.01   -  0.05

                   0.005  -  0.02
SOMEWHAT
DEGRADED:
  A A
ZINC

LEAD

CADMIUM
HIGHLY
DEGRADED
D D D D
                                       FIGURE IV-7  IKALUKROK
                                  CREEK DRAINAGE AREA SHOWING
                                        EXISTING WATER QUALITY    ,

-------
water  is  moderately  hard,  and  of the  calcium  bicarbonate  type, with  pH
ranging  from 7.0  to  8.1.   Winter water  quality values are similar to those
measured during open water periods with minor  exceptions.  Concentrations
of barium,  cadmium and  silver are slightly higher  in  the  winter than  in the
summer, while iron, sodium  and zinc levels are  lower in the winter.

     Ikalukrok Creek

Except  for  a  short period during  breakup, Ikalukrok Creek is a highly oxy-
genated,  clear  water  stream  that exhibits low  levels of  color,   suspended
solids,  turbidity,  ammonia  and orthophosphate  throughout the year.   The
water is moderately hard to  hard except during breakup when it is soft,  and
of the calcium bicarbonate type with pH near neutral.

Ikalukrok  Creek water quality  is  significantly affected by Red  Dog  Creek
waters  for  a  considerable  distance  below their confluence.   Water  quality
parameters  such as  pH, carbon dioxide,  cadmium,  lead and zinc  show high
concentrations at the  confluence of the two streams, but  gradually decrease
to typical  low levels  downstream  of  the  confluence as a  result of tributary
and  groundwater  dilution.   Seasonal  flows and  concentrations of  total zinc,
lead and  cadmium  are shown  in Tables  IV-4,  IV-5 and  IV-6.   Figure IV-7
shows  the  extent  of  degraded water  quality due  to  high concentrations of
zinc, lead and cadmium.

     Dudd,  Buddy  and Bons Creeks

Water quality in  these creeks  is  generally very good  during  breakup,  sum-
mer  and early winter.  Water  is of the calcium  bicarbonate type,  low  in tur-
bidity  and  settleable  solids  and  highly oxygenated.   With the exception of
cadmium levels  in  Bons  Creek during breakup,  concentrations  of  aluminum,
copper,  lead,  silver  and zinc are better than  EPA water  quality standards
for aquatic  life in all three creeks throughout the year.

     North  Fork Red Dog Creek

This creek  is a high  quality,  clear water stream with  high dissolved oxygen
levels during summer  and breakup, and  low levels  of suspended solids, tui—
bidity  and  settleable  solids  throughout  the year.  Water  is of the calcium-
magnesium  bicarbonate  type  with elevated  levels  of sulfate,  and  normal
ranges  of pH, alkalinity  and conductivity.  Concentrations of cadmium,  lead
and  silver  are  slightly  above recommended  EPA water quality criteria for
aquatic  life, but much lower than concentrations  observed  in the  South  and
Main Forks  of Red  Dog Creek.  Typical concentrations  of total zinc, lead  and
cadmium are shown in  Tables  IV-4, IV-5  and  IV-6.  Figure IV-7  shows that
the North  Fork is  a clean,  uncontaminated stream similar  to Ikalukrok  Creek
upstream of Red Dog Creek.

     South  Fork Red Dog Creek

The  water  of this  fork  is  generally a mixture of  calcium-magnesium  bicar-
bonate  type  with  sodium sulfate  type water.    Concentrations  of cadmium,
lead  and  zinc reach  highly toxic  levels,  while  concentrations  of mercury,
chromium  and  silver  slightly  exceed  EPA water  quality criteria for aquatic
life.   Alkalinity and pH are  generally depressed in  this creek,  and total dis-

                                  IV - 25

-------
                                                                           Table IV-4


                                   SEASONAL FLOWS AND CONCENTRATIONS AND  LOADS OF ZINC1 IN PROJECT  AREA STREAMS
                                SUMMER  LOW FLOWS	  	STORM EVENTS	WINTER  FLOWS	  	SPRING FLOWS
                             Flow     Cone.       Load         Flow     Cone.	Load	Flow     Cone.  	Load	    Flow     Cone.  	Load
     DRAINAGE BASIN     m3/s  ft3/s  mg/Jt  kg/day  Ib/day  m3/s  ft3/s mg/2   kg/day  Ib/day  m3/s  ft3/s  mg/l   kg/day  Ib/day  m3/s  ftVs  mg/t   kg/day  Ib/day

   Middle Fork Red Dog
      Creek Above
      South Fork           0.2     7   19.0   326     718     0.9   30  12.0   882      1,944  0.01   0.5  50.0    61      135     0.7    25   6.0    368      810




   South Fork Red Dog
      Creek               0.1     4    0.9     8.6     19     0.6   20   1.1    54        119  0.01   0.5   1.0     1.4     3     0.4    15   0.2      7.3     16


<

 i  North Fork Red Dog
,v)    Creek and Lower
CT)    Basin               0.7    24    0.02    1.4     3     2.1   75   0.04    7.3       16  0.08   3.0   0.02    0.5     1     2.2    77   0.05      9.5     21




   Red Dog Creek         1.0    35    4.0   343     756     3.5   125   3.0   919      2,025  0.11   4.0   7.0    68      151     3.5   125   1.3    398      878




   Ikalukrok Creek
      Above Red  Dog
      Creek               3.1   110    0.02    5.4     12    11.6   410   0.025  25         55  0.3   11.0   0.05    1.4     3     8.5   300   0.025   18       41




   Ikalukrok Creek
      Below Red Dog
      Creek               4.1   145    1.0   355     783    15.2   535   0.7   918      2,022  0.4   15.0   1.7    63      138    12.0   425   0.4    416      918




   Ore Zone Load In
      Ikalukrok Creek                          93 percent                        93 percent                       89  percent                          88 percent




   Source:  Dames & Moore, 1983a

   1 EPA Water Quality  Criteria for Aquatic Life:  0.047  mg/t

-------
                                                                           Table IV-5


                                   SEASONAL FLOWS  AND  CONCENTRATIONS AND LOADS  OF LEAD1 IN PROJECT AREA STREAMS
                                SUMMER LOW FLOWS
                             Flow    Cone.       Load
                                                                    STORM EVENTS
                                                                                                     WINTER  FLOWS
                                                                                                                                        SPRING FLOWS
                                                              Flow    Cone.       Load
                                                                                               Flow     Cone.       Load
                                                                                                                                 Flow     Cone.
                                                                                                                                                      Load
    DRAINAGE BASIN	   m3/s  ft3/s mg/t  kg/day Ib/day  m3/s  ft3/s mg/£  kg/day  Ib/day m3/s ft3/s mg/t   kg/day  Ib/day  m3/s fta/s mg/t   kg/day  Ib/day
  Middle Fork Red Dog
     Creek Above
     South Fork           0.2     7   0.1     1.7     3.8     0.9   30  0.3    22       49     0.01   0.5  0.05    0.05     0.1    0.7    25  0.5     31
                                                                                                                                68
  South Fork Red Dog
     Creek
                          0.1     4   0.02    0.2     0.4     0.6   20  0.04    2.0      4.3   0.01   0.5  0.01     0.01     0.03   0.4    15  0.05     1.9      4.1
  North Fork Red Dog
 1    Creek and  Lower
rx>   Basin
                          0.7   24   0.001   0.05    0.1     2.1    75  0.0005  0.09     0.2   0.08   3.0  0.001    0.01     0.02   2.2    77  0.0005  0.09     0.2
  Red  Dog Creek
1.0    35   0.007   0.6     1.3     3.5   125  0.04   12       27     0.11   4.0  0.004   0.05     0.1    3.5   125  0.03    9.2     20
  Ikalukrok Creek
     Above  Red Dog
     Creek
                          3.1    110   0.0004 0.09    0.2    11.6   410  0.001   1.0     2.2   0.3   11.0  0.0005  0.01     0.03   8.5   300  0.001    0.7      1.6
  Ikalukrok Creek
     Below Red Dog
     Creek
                          4.1   145   0.002  0.7     1.6    15.2   535  0.01   13       29     0.4   15.0  0.001    0.05     0.1   12.0   425  0.01    10       23
  Ore Zone Load In
     Ikalukrok Creek
                                             88 percent
                                                     92 percent
90 percent
88 percent
  Source:   Dames & Moore, 1983a

  1  EPA Water Quality  Criteria  for Aquatic Life:  0.00075 mg/t

-------
                                                                           Table IV-6


                                 SEASONAL FLOWS AND CONCENTRATIONS  AND LOADS OF CADMIUM1 IN PROJECT AREA STREAMS
                                SUMMER LOW FLOWS
                                                                    STORM EVENTS
                                                                                                     WINTER FLOWS
                             Flow    Cone.       Load
                                                                                                                                        SPRING  FLOWS
                                                                                                Flow     Cone.       Load
                                                                                                                                  Flow    Cone.        Load
                                   	 	     Flow 	 Cone.  	Load	    	    	 	  	
  DRAINAGE BASIN     m3/s  ft3/s mg/l   kg/day Ib/day  m3/s  fts/s mg/l  kg/day Ib/day m3/s ft37s mg/l  kg/day  Ib/day  m3/s ft3/s ma/'I  kg/day   Ib/dav
Middle Fork Red Dog                                              ~	  	   		    ~^	*
   Creek Above
   South Fork           0.2     7   0.14    2.4     5.3     0.9   30 0.1     7.4     16    0.01   0.5  0.5     0.6      1.4   0.7    25  0.05     3.1      6.8
  South Fork Red Dog
     Creek                0.1     4   0.008   0.09   0.2     0.6    20  0.005   0.2
                                                                                     0.5   0.01   0.5  0.007   0.05     0.1    0.4    15  0.01     0.4     0.8
*^ North Fork Red Dog
 ,    Creek and  Lower
     Basin
oo
                        0.7    24   0.003   0.2     0.4     2.1    75  0.002   0.4      0.8   0.08   3.0  0.004   0.05     0.1    2.2    77  0.002    0.4      0.8
  Red  Dog Creek
                        1.0   35   0.03    2.6     5.7     3.5   125  0.025   7.7     17     0.11   4.0  0.08    0.8      1.7    3.5   125  0.01     3.1      6.8
  Ikalukrok Creek
     Above  Red Dog
     Creek
                        3.1    110   0.001   0.3     0.6    11.6   410  0.001   1.0     2.2   0.3   11.0  0.002   0.05    0.1    8.5   300  0.001     0.7      1.6
  Ikalukrok Creek
     Below Red Dog
     Creek
                          4.1    145   0.008   2.9     6.3    15.2  535  0.007   9.2     20     0.4   15.0  0.02    0.7      1.6   12.0   425  0.0035   3.6      8.0
  Ore Zone Load In
     Ikalukrok Creek
                                              84 percent
                                                                             85 percent
82 percent
81 percent
  Source:  Dames & Moore,  1983a

  1 EPA  Water Quality Criteria for Aquatic Life:  0.000012 mg/4

-------
solved  solids  are  elevated compared to other  streams outside of Red Dog
Valley.  Seasonal flows  and concentrations of total  zinc,  lead  and cadmium
are shown in Tables  IV-4,  IV-5 and IV-6.  Figure IV-7 shows that  the  South
Fork  is moderately degraded and does not support fish  life.

     Main Stem Red Dog  Creek

Water  in the main  stem is  of the calcium-magnesium-sodium sulfate  type with
very  high concentrations of dissolved toxic metals.   Concentrations of the
metals cadmium,  lead,  silver and  zinc greatly exceed EPA  water quality cri-
teria  for  aquatic life.  Concentrations of aluminum,  chromium,  copper,  iron,
manganese,   mercury  and nickel also exceed those criteria.   Metal concentra-
tions  in late winter  are  particularly high, sometimes an  order of magnitude
greater than during the  open  water  period.   Water in  this  creek has un-
usually low  pH,  low  alkalinity  and high acidity.  Seasonal flows and concen-
trations of total  zinc,  lead  and cadmium  are shown in Tables IV-4, IV-5 and
IV-6.   Figure IV-7  shows that all of the  main  stem  is highly degraded  down-
stream of the ore body and  supports no  significant aquatic life.

The upper section of the creek, which lies above the ore body, is  relatively
uncontaminated with  dissolved  metals.   However,  a zone of  water  quality
degradation  begins  at  the  upper end of the  ore body  and  extends  down-
stream  to  the  confluence  of the  main   stem  with  the  South  Fork.    Water
quality improves somewhat  below  this confluence,  but downstream levels  of
metals, turbidity,  suspended  solids and  sulfate continue  to remain higher
than those found in adjacent streams.

One cause of  water  quality degradation  of the  main stem  is that the  creek
flows   directly over  heavily .mineralized  rocks.  The  creek  also  receives
surface and   groundwater  draining  from the  ore body  area  which  contains
high metals  and  sulfide concentrations.   All parts of the ore  body will pro-
duce  soluble  metals  by simple dissolution  of previously oxidized mineralized
zones  without  significant acid production.  These effects  are  stronger  in the
main stem of Red Dog  Creek  compared to the  South Fork due to the relative
exposure  of  the ore body  to  surface runoff.   Tables  IV-4,  IV-5  and IV-6
indicate that 82  to  93 percent of  the metal loads in Ikalukrok  Creek  below
the confluence with  Red Dog Creek originate from the ore body zone.

     Red Dog Creek at Mouth

By the time  it enters  Ikalukrok Creek,  the water quality of Red Dog  Creek
represents a  mixture of  the three  upstream forks,  with  the  greater flow  of
the relatively clean North Fork diluting the poorer water quality of  the  other
two forks.   The water is a  calcium-magnesium  bicarbonate type with elevated
levels  of  sulfate,  normal  pH  and  alkalinity,  and  elevated  total  dissolved
solids.   Very  toxic  concentrations  of  cadmium, lead,   silver  and  zinc are
present, and concentrations of aluminum,  chromium,  mercury and nickel also
exceed  EPA   criteria  for  aquatic  life.   Levels  of  total  suspended  solids,
settleable  solids and  turbidity  are  generally low  except during breakup and
storm  events.   Alkalinity,  carbon dioxide,  hardness  and conductivity  levels
are lowest  at breakup, and gradually increase throughout the year to  reach
maximum levels in late winter.
                                  IV - 29

-------
Biology

     Invertebrates

Benthic invertebrate  fauna in  the project area  was studied  by  E.V.S. Con-
sultants in  1982  (E.V.S. Consultants Ltd., 1983).  They found that aquatic
invertebrate communities  typical of cold  fast streams occurred on  sections of
Ikalukrok  Creek  (sites  corresponding to Dames &  Moore Stations 8 and  9;
Fig.  IV-8),  on the North and South  Forks of Red Dog Creek (Dames & Moore
Stations 12  and 22),  and  in the headwaters of Red  Dog Creek above the main
ore body  (Dames &  Moore Station  43).   These stations generally had high
abundances  of organisms, and  contributed 70 percent of the total number of
individuals  sampled  at all  stations (Fig. IV-8).   Midgefly  larvae  (Chirono-
midae;  subfamilies Diamesinae  and  Orthocladiinae) were  most  abundant  in
these  communities.    Other   abundant  taxa   included   stonefly   nymphs
(Plecoptera),  segmented   worms  (Oligochaeta*),  mayfly nymphs  (Ephemer-
optera),   caddisfly  larvae  (Trichoptera),  blackflies  (Simuliidae),  dancefly
larvae (Empididae),  biting  midges (Ceratopogonidae),  water mites (Hydra-
carina), seed shrimp  (Ostracoda)  and roundworms (Nematoda).

The  lowest  number  of individuals was  collected along the  main  stem of Red
Dog  Creek  below the ore body (sites corresponding to Dames  &  Moore  Sta-
tions  47,  40, 30,  20  and  10; Fig.  IV-8).  Although  numbers were  reduced at
these stations, taxa  collected   were  generally similar  to those found at  sta-
tions  with greater abundance,  and included stoneflies, mayflies,  oligochaetes,
midgeflies and water  mites.   Taxa absent at those sites  in Red  Dog Creek
with  reduced abundance  included  roundworms,  seed shrimp,  mayflies (Family
Heptageniidae) and oligochaetes (Family Tubificidae).

The  distribution  of  sites with reduced  numerical  abundance along  Red  Dog
Creek  coincided  with areas of elevated  heavy  metal concentrations  near  the
ore body.   The  most severely  stressed  area in terms of reduced  numbers of
benthic invertebrate  individuals and  taxa extended from  the ore  body (Dames
&  Moore   Station  47) downstream   nearly to the  confluence of   Red Dog and
Ikalukrok   Creeks  (Dames  &  Moore   Station  10).   The  site with  the least
numerical  abundance of invertebrates occurred  at  Dames &  Moore Station  30
near  the  confluence  of  the main stem  and  South  Fork of  Red  Dog Creek
(Fig. IV-8).

Toxic  metal  effects  on  aquatic invertebrate  populations may be  a  result of
direct physiological  toxicity, or an indirect result of the elimination of  food
sources (algae,  bacteria,  zooplankton)  or microhabitat (algal mats,  mosses).
Specht (1973) found  a significant inverse  correlation  between the concentra-
tion  of toxic metals  and  numbers  of  taxa  and individuals  in a  receiving
stream.  Data from Red Dog Creek show a  similar trend  of decreased numeri-
cal abundance as metals concentrations increase  in the stream.
* Defined in Glossary.
                                  IV - 30

-------
                                      o
                                      ro
                                      CD
                                      o
                                       _
                                      LJO.
                                      22
                                      «
                                      QCO
                               FIGURE IV-8

     BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE & FISH SAMPLING

STATIONS IN IKALUKROK & RED DOG DRAINAGES

-------
Further evidence of the deleterious  effect of Red  Dog Creek  water on ben-
thic  invertebrate populations  was observed at the confluence of Red Dog and
Ikalukrok  Creeks.   Transects  running  perpendicular  to  streamflow  were
sampled just above  the confluence of the two creeks, and at five  locations
downstream of  their  confluence  (Dames  & Moore,  1983a).   Numerical abun-
dance  in  July  1982  was  an order of  magnitude greater  in Ikalukrok Creek
just  above the  confluence  as  compared  to  Red  Dog Creek.   Downstream  of
the confluence,  transects  consistently showed lower invertebrate abundance
on the southeast side of Ikalukrok Creek.  This side visually and chemically
shows  evidence  of Red Dog  Creek  water for  approximately 500  m (547 yd)
downstream of the confluence.

     Fish

All of the major  rivers  in the Red  Dog project area (Asikpak,  Kivalina,  Wulik
and Omikviorok  Rivers) provide habitat  for fish  (Dames &  Moore,  1983a, b).
However,   the  Kivalina  and  Wulik  Rivers  are  by  far the  most  important
streams in  the  area and  have  been designated as  "major anadromous fish
streams"  (Selkregg,  1974).  The Red Dog ore  body is located  on a tributary
of the  Wulik  River.

The  most  important  fish  species  in the  area  is  Arctic char  (Salvelinus
alpinus).   It is  the  primary subsistence  fish for  the  area as well  as a prized
sport fish.   Other major fish  species present  in the project area include,  in
probable  order  of abundance:   Arctic  grayling  (Thymallus arcticus), pink
salmon (Oncorhynchus  gorbuscha), chum salmon  (O. keta), coho salmon (O.
kisutch),  king salmon  (O.  tshawytscha) and sockeye  salmon (O. nerka) (Alt,
1978,  1983a;  Dames & Moore, 1983a,b; De Cicco,  in press).

Initial  studies of the Wulik and  Kivalina Rivers  indicated that the  Wulik  River
was more  important for  char  overwintering,  whereas the  Kivalina was viewed
as more   important for char  spawning  (Alt, 1978;  Bendock  and  Alt,  1981;
Winslow,  1968).   More  recent information  obtained as a result of a multi-year
study  begun in  1980  by ADF&G has confirmed the greater importance of the
Wulik River for  char overwintering (Table IV-7).  This study  has  also indi-
cated that the  Wulik  River may be the  more  important  spawning  stream  as
well  (Table IV-8) (Alt,  1983b;  De Cicco, 1982,  in press).   Identified Arctic
char overwintering and  spawning  areas within  the Red Dog project area are
shown  on  Fig. IV-9.
The  general  life  history  of  Arctic  char in the  Wulik  and  Kivalina  River
drainages  is that spawning occurs  from late  July to late August  (summer
spawners)  and  during  September (fall spawners).  Char juveniles are known
to remain  in their natal*  streams  for two to four  years  before entering the
sea.   Once these fish  have  gone to sea they return to freshwater  streams
each year to overwinter.

De Cicco  (in press)  has  found that  char exhibit homing tendencies to natal
streams for  spawning  but that  they may overwinter in  other than  natal
streams.    In  particular,  char from  the Noatak  River  have  been found  to
overwinter in the Wulik  River,  further  emphasizing  the  value of  the  Wulik
River to  the  maintenance  of the very  important char  resource.
* Defined in Glossary.

                                  IV - 32

-------
                               Table  IV-7


               RESULTS OF AERIAL SURVEY COUNTS FOR

      OVERWINTERING ARCTIC CHAR  IN THE WULIK  AND KIVALINA

                          RIVERS,  1968 TO 1982
Year
1968
1969
1976
1979
1980
1981
1982
Wulik River
90,236
297,257
68,300
55,030
113,553
101,826
65,581
Kivalina River
27,640
--
12,600
15,744
39,692
45,355
10,932
Source:  De Cicco, in  press.
The  major  char spawning  areas in the Wulik  drainage  are the West  Fork,
Main  Fork,  and  main  stem  of  the Wulik down to the  confluence of  Tutak
Creek,  Ikalukrok  Creek and Tutak  Creek  (Figure  IV-9).   The  major char
spawning  areas  in  the Kivalina  drainage  are the Main  Fork and  Grayling,
Baqhalik and  Fivefingered  Creeks (Fig.  IV-9), even  though lower Grayling
Creek  can  be dry during  the summer  months  (Dames & Moore,  1983b).
Juvenile  Arctic char have  been captured  in  Rabbit and  Fivefingered  Creeks
by E.V.S.  Consultants  (1983).

In addition  to Arctic  char  occurrence throughout the  Wulik  River,  salmon
species  spawn in the lower  portions  of the Wulik.   Pink salmon  spawn  in the
lower 8 to  9.6  km  (5  to  6 mi) of the  river;  sockeye  salmon spawn below
Wulik Forks;  and  chum salmon  spawn  in  the  lower 19 to 22.4  km (12 to 14
mi) of the  river,  and  for approximately 32  km (20  mi) up  Ikalukrok  Creek
(Dames  & Moore, 1983a).   Coho  and  king salmon  have also been reported in
the river (Alt,  1978,   1983a).  Non-migratory  species  present  in  the Wulik
include   slimy   sculpin  (Cottus   cognatus),  round  whitefish  (Prosopium
cylindraceum),  humpback  whitefish  (Coregonus pidschian), least  Cisco  (C_.
sardinella),   Bering  Cisco   ( C_.   laurettae)  and  Alaska  blackfish  (Pallia
pectoralis).


                                  IV  - 33

-------
                               Table IV-8


   SUMMARY OF NUMBER OF FISH COUNTED IN ADF&G  ARCTIC CHAR

                    SPAWNING SURVEYS, 1981  to 1983
Survey Date
Wulik River System
Main Fork above Sheep Creek
Sheep Creek
Main Fork, Sheep Creek to Lik Camp
Main Fork, Lik Camp to Forks
Main Fork
West Fork, Falls to Forks
Main Stem, Forks to Ikalukrok Mouth
Main Stem
Wulik below Ikalukrok Creek
Ikalukrok Creek
Dudd Creek
Tutak Creek
Total
Kivalina River System
Kivalina River
Main Fork
West Fork
Grayling Creek
Main Stem below Forks
Baqhalik Creek
Total
Omikviorok River
8/20/81
--
44
--
--
--
--
--
129
--
89
--
--
262

__
331
--
106
40
51**
528
-\ -\ 4***
8/6-8/82
--
28
--
--
73
133
--
184
--
60
--
--
478

299
--
7
146
--
--
452
- —
9/30/82
--
59
--
--
2
30
--
20
--
--
--
--
111

40
--
0
--
--
--
40
_ _
8/24/83
12
123
158
53
--
196
386
--
8
185*
16
43
1,180

--
412
10
183
90
--
695
138
    Not distinguished or not  counted.
*    26 of  these  were above  Red Dog Creek;  19  were between Dudd  and Red
     Dog Creeks.
**   245 char  were observed  in  Baqhalik Creek on 9/25/81
***  Surveyed 7/26/81

Sources:  Alt, 1983b;  De Cicco, 1982,  in press.
                                 IV - 34

-------
              FIGURE IV-9 FISH
OCCURRENCE IN PROJECT AREA
MOORE, l»83o,b;
1982, 1983, IN PRESS

-------
In addition  to char occurrence throughout  the  Kivalina, a few  chum  salmon
(Dames  & Moore, 1983b)  and about 26,000 pink salmon  (De Cicco,  in  press)
have been  observed spawning  downstream of the forks  in the Kivalina  River.
Other  species  commonly  reported in  the Kivalina  drainage system  include
Arctic  grayling, round  and humpback  whitefish,  least and Bering  Cisco,
Alaska blackfish and ninespine stickleback (Pungitius pungitius).

Studies by  Dames & Moore (1983,a,  b) and  E.V.S. Consultants (1983) indi-
cate  that  Red  Dog Creek and  its tributaries  are  devoid  of fish  with one
exception:   Arctic  grayling  appear to  ascend to the North Fork during high
spring flows to spawn.   The general absence of fish species in  the Red Dog
Creek  system  is  probably  due  to  low  pH  and the high  concentrations  of
dissolved  metals that enter the main stem as  it flows past the main ore body
in Red  Dog Valley.   The North  Fork of the creek  is unaffected by the ore
body  and   is,  therefore,   able  to  support  a  small  population   of  Arctic
grayling.

It is not  known what  percentage of  juvenile and  adult  grayling survive the
downstream migration  from the  North  Fork of  Red  Dog  Creek,  through the
main  stem,  to the  relatively uncontaminated  water  of  Ikalukrok  Creek.
Dying  juvenile grayling were observed  in Red  Dog  Creek  subsequent to the
high spring flow period  (Dames  & Moore, 1983a).   The North Fork is  known
to be  frozen  to its bed in some areas during  the  winter,  although some
Arctic  grayling have been captured there which appear to be in  their  second
year of life.

Baseline  water  quality   characteristics  and   caged-fish  studies   (E.V.S.
Consultants, 1983) at  the  mouth  of  Red Dog Creek show  that  these  waters
are toxic  to  fish during  the summer.   Analysis  for dissolved  metals indicated
that,  of the  metals examined,  only  zinc was  in  the range  expected to  be
acutely lethal  without  the  interaction  of other toxicants  (Gregory,  1974).
However,  dissolved  cadmium values  were above those found to cause sub-
lethal  effects  to brook trout  ( Salvelinus fontinalis)  (Benoit et al.,  1976).
Water quality  analyses  of Ikalukrok  Creek just downstream  of the  mouths  of
Red  Dog  and  Dudd Creeks  indicate  that, for these sites,  existing  levels  of
dissolved  zinc  would be  expected  to be  acutely lethal  to fish or cause sub-
lethal effects,  and  levels  of dissolved  cadmium  could cause sublethal effects.

Ikalukrok Creek is  used  by Arctic char, Arctic grayling and salmon species
for spawning,  rearing  and migration.   Char  use  the  stream  in  its  lower
reaches up  to  the  vicinity of  its confluence with  Red Dog  Creek, with a few
spawners  passing  further upstream (Table  IV-8,  Fig.  IV-9).  Grayling have
been  found  in good   numbers  throughout  the stream.   Chum salmon are
known to  spawn as far  upstream  as  Dudd  Creek,  but  have not been found
above  this point.   Benthic organisms in  Ikalukrok  Creek downstream  of Red
Dog  Creek  have shown both a reduction in  diversity and  numbers resulting
from the influence of Red Dog Creek.

It is  not known whether Red  Dog  Creek actually  causes  a partial chemical
barrier to char moving  up Ikalukrok  Creek.   However, the fact that other
biological  responses  have  been   detected (benthic  invertebrates),   and  that
char  are  uncommon  near Red  Dog  Creek  while  grayling  are  present,  may
                                  IV - 36

-------
indicate  a greater  sensitivity  by  char  and  possible  avoidance  of the area
influenced by the creek.   The possible  differential avoidance of the affected
area by  these two fish  species may in part be due to  migration timing (i.e.,
grayling  migrate during spring  high water flow  when  lower  metal  concentra-
tions  are  found;  char  migrate  during  summer  low flow when higher  metal
concentrations exist).  Zinc is known to cause avoidance by salmonid fish  at
concentrations of  0.054 mg/£ (Salmo salar) (Sprague et al., 1965) and 0.0056
mg/£  (S. gairdneri)  (Clarke,  1974).  Avoidance  reactions to  other metals are
not well  known.

Dudd  Creek  is a tributary to  Ikalukrok  Creek and  supports  both  Arctic char
and  Arctic grayling  in  its  lower   reaches  (Dames & Moore,  1983a).   This
stream provides spawning habitat for char which were  enumerated  in 1983 by
ADF&G (Table  IV-8).  The 16 adult char counted  made up about  one to two
percent of the known spawning population in the Wulik drainage.

Tutak Creek enters  the  Wulik  River approximately  5 km (3 mi)  downstream  of
the mouth of Ikalukrok  Creek.   This  stream supports  populations  of  slimy
sculpin,   Arctic  grayling   and  juvenile  Arctic  char  (E.V.S.  Consultants,
1983).    Char spawning  was  observed  by De Cicco (in  press)  to occur  in
locations  indicated on Figure  IV-9.

Metals  in fish tissues from the entire project area  were investigated.  It was
found that cadmium,  zinc and copper were elevated in fish  captured in the
Wulik  River  drainage.  The  extent of elevation was related to proximity  to
Red  Dog Creek and  probable duration  of exposure  to  that creek over the
summer.    Other metals examined did not demonstrate  elevated levels in fish
tissues,  and fish  from other  drainages did not exhibit elevated metals levels.
Guidelines for  human consumption  have  not  been  established for  any of the
three  metals  which showed  accumulation in fish flesh.

Accumulation of  metals  in fish tissues  is  a direct result  of metals  being
absorbed more  rapidly than they can be excreted.   The rate of accumulation
is  dependent on  the ambient  level  of  biologically available metals.   These
levels vary with proximity to  the source  of metals, other water quality  char-
acteristics, season and the particular metals  and fish  species  under consid-
eration.   Metals found to  be elevated in  Wulik River fish (cadmium,  zinc and
copper)  do not  accumulate in fish  through the food web, but  instead  enter
fish  in   a free  ionic  state,  primarily by passing   directly across gill  mem-
branes.    Apparently,  conditions   required  for  the  accumulation of metals
other  than cadmium, zinc and  copper  do not occur  because  the  excretion
rates  of  fish species  involved do not allow accumulation, the metals are not
biologically available,  or a combination of these two reasons.

Marine Biology

Much  of  the  coastline from Mapsorak Lagoon in the north to  Kotlik Lagoon  in
the south  is characterized  by a series of open or  closed  lagoons fronted by
barrier  beaches.  These lagoons tend to  be  larger in areas where  the land
slopes gently to the  Chukchi  Sea (such as at Kivalina and Imikruk Lagoons),
and smaller in  areas of  steep  slope  (such as at Kavrorak and Tugak Lagoons
at  the base of the  Siaktak  Hills).  Four  rivers  (the  Singoalik,  Kivalina,
Wulik  and  Omikviorok Rivers) enter  the  Chukchi Sea through  lagoons in the
study area.

                                   IV - 37

-------
The  15  m (50 ft) depth contour  extends approximately  8 km (5 mi) offshore
at the southern end of the study area, and approximately 6.4 km (4 mi) off-
shore in the north near Asikpak Lagoon.   The sea floor in  the project area
is predominantly  muds  and  sands  with a mixture  of  gravel  and  angular
rocks.  In general, sands predominate in shallow  areas  less than 5 m (16 ft)
deep, while gravel, angular  rock and boulders overlain by finer  sands and
mud  are found in deeper 15  m (50 ft) areas.  Attached  macroscopic algae are
scarce in  the area.

Marine Invertebrates

During  the  open  water  period in 1982,  infaunal* communities were  sampled
along five transects in the study area (Fig. IV-10) (Dames & Moore,  1983a).
In late  July and late  August, the infaunal community  was numerically domin-
ated  by  polychaetes (segmented  worms),  followed by crustaceans (amphipods
and  cumaceans), nematodes  (roundworms),  tunicates (sea squirts), bivalves
(clams)   and ophiuroides  (brittle stars).  The  distribution  and  numerical
densities  of  taxa  varied  over the  study  area,  but certain patterns  were
apparent.   In  general,  polychaete  species  tended to dominate  both  shallow
(5 m  [16  ft])  and deeper water (15 m  [50 ft])  areas.  Cumaceans,  nematodes
and  tunicates occurred  primarily  in  shallow water depths,  while  ophiuroids
and  bivalves tended to occur in  deeper water.  Amphipods  were collected at
both shallow and deeper depths.

Numerical densities throughout the study area ranged from 267 organisms/m2
(11 ft2) to  over  24,000 organisms/m2 (11 ft2).   In  general,  the  number of
species  and  organisms  per   square  meter  increased  with increasing  depth
throughout  the  area.   This  pattern was probably due  to differences in sea
floor  disturbance  and sediment  type  between shallow  and  deep water sta-
tions.

Epibenthic*  invertebrates  in  the study  area  were also  sampled by Dames  &
Moore (1983a).   Dominant organisms  captured in  epibenthic sled  tows  were
gammarid  amphipod crustaceans.  Mysids (opposum shrimp)  and  crangonid
shrimp  also  comprised a  large  portion  of  the catch.   Gammarid  amphipods
were  abundant at all  depths  sampled,  while mysids were most abundant be-
tween 0  and 5 m (16  ft).  Crangonid and  pandalid shrimp  were collected in
large numbers between  10 and  15 m  (33 and  50 ft.)  depth.   Brittle stars
were  locally abundant at deeper  stations where mud and silt sediments pre-
dominated.

Species  diversity of  epibenthic  sled  catches  was  generally high throughout
the study area  and tended to increase  with increasing  depth.  The  number
of species  as  well as  numerical  abundance  also increased  with  increasing
depth.   The  lowest  diversity occurred at Transect  8  where  the gammarid
amphipod  Monoculodes sp.  made  up over 89  percent of the organisms col-
lected (Fig. IV-10).

Otter trawl  catches  were  dominated  by seastars, particularly the  species
Asterias amurensis.   Other  common  seastar species  were  Lethasterias  nani-
mensis,   Leptasterias  sp. and Crossaster papposus.  Crangonid shrimp  were
* Defined in Glossary.

                                  IV - 38

-------

FIGURE IV-10 MARINE BENTHIC INFAUNA
            SAMPLING STATIONS

-------
also   commonly  collected  in  otter  trawls  (Crangon   spp.,   Sclerocrangon
boreas),  as  was  one  species  of  pandalid  shrimp  (Pandalus  goniurus).   A
helmet crab (Telmessus cheiragonus)  was the only  species of crab taken  by
otter  trawl.

Results of diver  transects  indicated  that densities of  benthic invertebrates
were  considerably higher than  those  estimated  by trawls.   Seastar and crab
species  predominated,  and  increased  in   number  with  increasing  depth.
Sessile  species of anthozoans  (sea  anemones) and sponges  were  particularly
abundant  at  15  m (50  ft),  especially  offshore at Ipiavik Lagoon (Transect 4)
and  Pusaluk Lagoon  (Transect 7).   Species compositions  between transects
were  generally similar  (though  densities varied), except at the 15 m  (50  ft)
depth  at  Transect 7  (Fig.  IV-10), where the bottom consisted of rock rather
than fine  sediments and species diversity was greater.

Marine Fish

Concurrent  with the  benthic invertebrate sampling  program, marine fish were
sampled in the study area using beach seines, fyke net sets and  otter trawls
in  the open  water period  of  1982  (Dames  & Moore, 1983a).  A  total  of 626
individuals representing 20  species was  captured  by all the sampling efforts.
Otter trawls  captured the greatest number of fish  (74  percent of the  total).
Starry flounder (Platichthys stellatus),  Arctic  flounder  (Liopsetta glacialis),
rainbow  smelt  (Osmerus mordax dentex) and saffron  cod (Eleginus gracilis)
were  captured by all  of the  sampling  methods.   Arctic  cod  (Boreogadus
saida), which  is  probably  common  in  the  area, was  not captured  by  any
method used  (Table  IV-9).

Beach seine  catches  were  dominated  by saffron cod,  followed in decreasing
order  by starry  flounder,  Pacific herring (Clupea  harengus  pallasi),  Arctic
flounder,  rainbow smelt and surf  smelt (Hypomesus  pretiosus).

The  most abundant  species  captured  in  fyke net catches was  saffron cod (65
percent of total).   Other species captured  included Atka mackerel (Pleuro-
grammus monopterygius), Pacific herring, starry flounder and rainbow  smelt.

Otter  trawl catches were  dominated  by  saffron cod, yellowfin sole  (Limanda
aspera) and  Alaska  plaice (Pleuronectes  quadrituberculatus).  Other species,
in  order of decreasing abundance,  included Arctic  shanny  (Stichaeus  punc-
tatus  , slender  eelblenny  (Lumpenus  fabricii),  Arctic flounder, longhead dab
(Limanda  proboscidea),  starry flounder  and  rainbow  smelt.   Numbers  of
species and  individuals captured  in  otter trawls increased  with increasing
depth.   The otter trawl catches did  not present any unexpected findings.
Data  using comparable  sampling methods  is not available for this area.

Although  overall  abundances were low (110  individuals), a total of six anad-
romous fish species  was collected  in  beach seine  hauls  throughout  the samp-
ling  period.   Pink salmon  and Bering  cisco (Coregonus laurettae) were  by
far the most  numerous species collected.   Other  species taken  infrequently
were  humpback whitefish,  chum  salmon, Arctic char  and Arctic grayling.
                                  IV - 40

-------
                                              Table IV-9

              NUMBERS AND PERCENT OCCURRENCE OF MARINE  FISH  SPECIES COLLECTED
                            DURING SUMMER  1982 BY  VARIOUS GEAR  TYPES
Species
Starry flounder - Platichthys stellatus
Arctic flounder - Liopsetta glacialis
Yellowfin sole - Limanda aspera
Longhead dab - Limanda proboscidea
Alaska plaice - Pleuronectes quadrituberculatus
Pacific sand lance - Ammodytes hexapterus
Rainbow smelt - Osmerus mordax dentex
Pacific herring - Clupea harengus pai'asi
Saffron cod - Eleginus gracilis
Tubenose poacher - Pallasina barbata aix
Sturgeon poacher - Agonus acipenserinus
Atka mackerel - Pleurogrammus monopterygius
Fourhorn sculpin - Myoxocephalus quadricornis
Slender eelblenny - Lumpenus fabric!!
Arctic shanny - Stichaeus punctatus
Bering poacher - Occella dodecaedron
Surf smelt - Hypomesus pretiosus
Larval smelt - Family Osmeridae
Ringtail snailfish - Liparis rutteri
Nine-spine stickleback - Pungitius pungitius

Beach Seine
No. % of Total
7 15.2
2 4.4
2 4.4
5 10.8
24 52.2
2 4.4
4 8.7
46 100.0%
Gear Type
Fyke Net
No. % of Total
7 5.9
1 0.8
1 0.8
4 3.4
8 6.8
77 65.3
19 16.1
1 0.8
118 100.0%

Otter
No. %
14
17
94
16
87
3
10
143
11
9
9
6
20
21
1
1
462

Trawl
of Total
3.0
3.7
20.4
3.5
18.8
0.7
2.2
30.9
2.4
1.9
1.9
1.4
4.3
4.5
0.2
0.2
100.0%
Source:   Dames & Moore,  1983a

-------
Beach  seines were  used to sample several lagoons in  the study area (Dames
&  Moore,  1983a).   At the  time  of  sampling,  Ipiavik Lagoon  was  the  only
water  body  open to the  sea.   This lagoon contained three  marine species
(Arctic flounder,  starry  flounder and  Pacific herring)  and the  fry  of  two
anadromous species (humpback whitefish  and pink salmon).   Kavrorak  Lagoon
was  also sampled by beach  seine and contained landlocked Arctic char.  Both
lagoons  also contained nine-spine stickleback,  a  typical estuarine species.

Marine Birds and Mammals

Marine birds in the vicinity of the project area would  generally be  associated
with the  colonies at Cape  Thompson.   In the early 1960's  these  cliffs sup-
ported over 400,000 seabirds (Swartz,  1966), although  numbers have steadily
declined  since  then  (Springer  and  Roseneau,   1977,  1982).   Marine  birds
generally forage  well offshore to the south of  Cape Thompson and  would  not
normally  be  found  in  significant numbers  nearshore in the  project area.

Marine mammals of  the Chukchi  Sea  have  received considerable attention  be-
cause  of their importance  to  Native subsistence lifestyles  as  well as their
ecological significance  (Johnson et al.,  1966;  Burns and  Harbo, 1972;  Burns
and  Eley,  1978).   Depending upon the time of  year and  ice conditions,  the
eastern  Chukchi  Sea/Kotzebue Sound region supports  four  species  of seals:
the  ringed seal  (Phoca  hispida),  spotted seal   (P.  largha),  bearded   seal
(Erignathus  barbatus) and  ribbon  seal  (P. fasciata).   Of these,  only  the
ringed, spotted and bearded seals may be  considered common.

The ringed seal is  a winter  inhibitant of Kotzebue Sound, being most common
in the eastern  sound  where fast ice predominates.   It is less  common along
the  coast  near  Kivalina  which  is  dominated  by  a persistent  polynya*.
Pupping  occurs primarily  in the  limited  fast ice  along the shore during  late
March/early April (Burns, personal communication).

The ringed seal  is replaced by  the  spotted  seal  during  the ice-free summer
period.  Bearded seals may be found during the periods  of  ice formation  and
breakup.  The northern  fur seal (Callorhinus  ursinus) has  occasionally been
reported in the region.

Four  species of  cetaceans  (whales and  porpoises)  are found  in  the region.
These  are the belukha or white whale  (Delphinapterus  leucas),  Gray whale
(Eschrichtius robustus),  bowhead whale (Balaena mysticetus) and  the  harbor
porpoise  (Phocoena  phocoena).   Only  the  belukha  and  Gray whales  can be
considered common.   Gray  and bowhead whales are classified  as endangered
species  under  the  federal  Endangered  Species   Act.   Harbor  porpoise  are
common,  but occur  in  low numbers.

A large  group  of belukhas numbering over 10,000 winters in the  Bering  Sea.
While  a  majority of  these  animals moves north  in the  spring through  the
Bering  Straits, past Point  Hope and into the Beaufort Sea,  a  group number-
ing between  500  and  1,800  enters eastern  Kotzebue Sound  about  mid  to  late
June.   Most of  these individuals  stay in  the  area  between  Kotzebue  and
Eschscholtz Bay,  but  others  may be found  throughout  the   sound.  Some
  Defined in Glossary.
                                  IV - 42

-------
calving  occurs.   In  early  to mid  July  many of the belukhas apparently move
out of the sound, possibly to and past Point  Hope (Frost,  personal commun-
ication) .

From  their  wintering  grounds in the  western and  central  Bering Sea, the
western  Arctic  population of  bowhead  whales usually  begins its  northward
(spring) migration in  early April.  After passing through  the  Bering Strait
and into the Chukchi  Sea, generally west of  Big  Diomede Island,  the whales
follow  ice  leads  seaward  of landfast ice.   These  leads  usually  bring  them
across outer Kotzebue Sound  in  a  northeasterly direction  to the  vicinity of
Cape   Thompson   (McVey,  personal  communication).   Some  whales  move
through  the polynya  that forms  west  of the  project area  between  Kivalina
and Point Hope  (Braham  and  Krogman,  1977;  Braham et al., 1980).   During
the past  three  years, National Marine  Fisheries  Service  (NMFS)  data  show
very  few bowheads  east of approximately 167° W longitude, well  away from
the project  area (Johnson, personal communication).   From  Cape Thompson
open  leads are again followed  past Cape Lisburne to  Point Barrow (Braham et
al., 1980;  Rugh  and Cubbage, 1980) and northeastward toward Banks Island
in the  Canadian  Beaufort Sea where the  majority of the  whales  arrive  by
mid-June  to spend the summer.  The fall  migration toward the Bering Strait,
after  passing  Point  Barrow, is believed to occur in  the  western  Chukchi Sea
well to  the west of the  project  area  (Braham  and  Krogman, 1977;  Cowles,
1981).

Gray  whales migrating  north from their  wintering grounds enter the Bering
Sea in  April or  May  with  many  moving  through  the Bering Strait  into the
Chukchi  Sea by  June.   During  the summer  most of the  population  concen-
trates in  shallow  waters  around  St.  Lawrence  Island  north to  the  Chukchi
Sea (McVey, personal  communication).   Sightings  suggest that they occur in
low densities in  nearshore areas  in Kotzebue  Sound and north  of 69°N lati-
tude  (Marquette  and  Braham,  1982).    Southward  migrations appear to  be
through the western Chukchi Sea.

Walrus (Odobenus rosemarus)  are also  found  in the area during the ice-free
season, but they are uncommon or only  occasional  visitors to the area.

Polar  bears  (Ursus  maritimus) occur along the coast of the project area dur-
ing the winter.   Their numbers  vary greatly  between years  depending  upon
the timing and  direction of ice  movements.   In most years  very few bears
are normally found  between  Kivalina and Point Hope,  but when northwest
winds  drive the  ice  southeast  along this  coast, polar bear  numbers can in-
crease significantly.

Threatened  or Endangered Species

Two species of marine  mammals are listed as  endangered:  the bowhead and
Gray  whales.  These species  are  primarily migrants  through the project area
during their northern  movements  in  the spring,  normally  staying well to the
west  in  the Chukchi  Sea  during  their  southward  migrations  in  the fall.
Additional information  may be found in the preceding section  on marine birds
and mammals, and in Appendix 3 (Endangered  Species  Biological Assessment).
                                  IV -  43

-------
Physical  and Chemical Oceanography

The  coastline in  the study area between latitudes 67°39'N and 68°00'N/ has a
relatively straight  northwest  to southeast  orientation  with  a  land surface
consisting  of a  gently  sloping plain.   This plain  continues underwater so
that  the  15 m  (50 ft) depth contour  lies nearly 8 km (5 mi) offshore in most
locations.   The  area  is  also  characterized  by  a series of  open  or  closed
lagoons fronted by barrier  beaches  or islands.

Currents/Circulation

Oceanographic  conditions  in  the southeastern Chukchi  Sea were  shown  by
Barnes and  Thompson  (1938)  to be  primarily influenced by the  northward
flow  of water through the  Bering Strait.  Studies conducted  by Fleming and
Heggarty (1966)  showed that currents  along the coastline are strongest near
shore, generally  to the  north  or northwest,  and roughly equal  in velocity at
5 and 20 m  (16 and 66 ft) depths.  Current  speeds  range from approximately
0.5 to 1.0 m/s (1  to 2  knots)  through  summer.  Wind  and  winter  ice cover
movement can  retard or  reverse surface  currents.   Fleming  and  Heggarty
(1966) found  that water residence time in  the  Chukchi  Sea is short.   An
average  of  15 days is required for water  to move from the Bering Strait to
Point Hope.

Diurnal tides  occur in the Chukchi Sea, but the estimated tidal range  of 0.3
to 0.8 m (1.0 to  2.6 ft)  is quite small.    Published tidal  data for  Kiwalik
(southern  Kotzebue  Sound) shows  a mean  tidal range of  0.6 m  (2.0  ft).

Wind and Wave Climate

Wind  and wave conditions  have  a  significant  effect  on sediment  movements
along the  coast.    Due to a lack of consistent long-term data for  the study
area, it  is difficult to determine typical wind velocity and wave  height  values
and  therefore  make predictions about the  longshore transport of sediments.

Generalized data  indicate that prevailing summer  (June to October) winds are
from  the northwest to   west  and range  from   4 to 5  m/s   (8  to 10 knots).
These  winds  occur about 50 percent of the time.   The next most  prevalent
wind  direction is  from the  south to southeast and occurs about  25  percent of
the time.  Major  storms  with winds up to  35 m/s  (70 knots) generally come
from this direction.

Wave height is  directly related to  wind fetch and wind duration.   A  2.6 m
(8.5 ft)  wave could be  generated  in  one  hour by a 35 m/s  (70  knot) wind
blowing  over  a fetch of 320 km (200  mi),  while 3.3 m (11 ft) waves could be
expected  from  a  25 m/s  (50 knot) wind blowing for 4 hours.  Breaker  height
is dependent on  wave height,  wave  periodicity and  the slope of  the beach.
For  example,  a  3.3 m  (11  ft)  wave  could  run up  a 0.028 slope  beach (as
found  at the port  site)  to a  height of 3.6 m  (12  ft).  Storm surges may
raise the sea  level by as much  as 3 m (10  ft).   Waves under these conditions
could  cause  significant  erosion and  breaching of  coastal   barrier beaches
found  in  the project area.
                                  IV - 44

-------
Wind  and wave statistics  were  estimated for the  port sites using  Kotzebue
records of wind speeds and directions.   These statistics  were developed for
the  approximately  100  shipping  days  from the  end  of  June until  early
October (Table IV-10).
                                Table IV-10


 PERCENT  OCCURRENCE OF HIGH WINDS AND ASSOCIATED STORM WAVES

              (NOT INCLUDING SWELL)  AT THE PORT SITES
                                                     Percent
              	Event	   Occurrence

              Wind Speed
               6.5 to  8.5 m/s (13 to 17 knots)       16.0

               9.0 to 11.0 m/s (18 to 22 knots)        9.5
              11.5 to 13.5 m/s (23 to 27 knots)        2.5
              14.0 to 16.0 m/s (28 to 32 knots)        0.5

              Storm Wave Height

              >1.2 m (4 ft) and <1.5 m  (5 ft)          7.2

              >1.5 m (5 ft) and <1.8 m  (6 ft)          4.4

              >1.8 m (6 ft) and <2.1 m  (7 ft)          2.0
              >2.1  m (7 ft)                            3.0


Source:  National  Climatic  Center  Records,  1973 to  1982
Wave  statistics developed for the Northern  Pacific have shown  that the mag-
nitude and frequency of swell waves (generated by distant  storm  winds)  are
approximately the same as local  storm waves.   The  significant  storm wave
percent occurrence  (Table IV-10) should, therefore,  be doubled  to  account
for swell  waves  generated by  storms offshore  in the Chukchi Sea.   Thus,
lightering operations and  loading operations on unstable platforms would  be
difficult or dangerous  at wind speeds over  11 m/s (22 knots) (three  percent
of the time),  and during waves over 1.5 m (5 ft)  (18.8 percent of the time).
These combined adverse conditions  would occur approximately  20  to  22 per-
cent of the time at  the  port sites.
                                  IV - 45

-------
Coastal  Geologic Processes

Studies  by Moore (1966) and Hopkins  (1977)  indicate  that long-term net sedi-
ment transport is in a southeasterly  direction,  though average annual sedi-
ment movement takes place  perpendicularly to the shoreline.  Huge  quantities
of beach sand  (on  the order of millions of cubic meters) can be washed out
in a single storm  and deposited as a bar near the  wave  break point.   For
example, on  August 9, 1960, Ogotoruk Beach,  located 66  km (41  mi) north-
west of Kivalina, was  lowered  1.0  m (3.3 ft) by waves 15 m (50 ft) long  and
1.4 m (4.6 ft) high (Moore,  1966).   Sediments  subsequently are restored to
beaches by more  normal sea conditions.

In addition to  the  huge movement of beach  sediment perpendicular to shore,
a  small  component  of net  sediment  movement is directed  southeasterly  be-
tween Point  Hope  and Cape  Krusenstern.   Sediment movement can  thus be
pictured as a  zig-zag pattern with a small but  important  quantity displaced
southward  in  an  average year.  Over a long period, Moore  (1966) estimated
that about 22,000 m3 (28,780 yd3)  of  sediment are annually transported along
the shore to Sheshalik Spit,  43 km (27 mi)  east-southeast of  Cape  Krusen-
stern.    Quantities  of   sediment  moved  vary  considerably  each  year.
Woodward-Clyde  Consultants  (1983)  calculated that 82,580 m3  (108,000  yd3)
of sediment were transported southeast  along the  coast each year.  In  some
years a reverse movement of sediment may also occur.

Hopkins  (1977)  calculated  that  beach   erosion  between  Kivalina  and  Cape
Krusenstern  is of  the same  order of magnitude as  the  quantity  of  material
deposited  in  the Cape Krusenstern beach  ridge complex.   Apparently rivers
and  streams  (such  as the  Singoalik  and Wulik  Rivers and Agagrak, Rabbit
and  Kilikmak  Creeks) as  well  as submerged sand  bars  serve as sediment
sources.   Most sediment transport  probably occurs in  the summer  months
when winds are  predominantly from  the west and  northwest.   Sediment  dis-
placed in  the  winter by ice action  is probably insignificant compared to wind-
driven sediment transport (Moore,  1966).

Marine Water Quality

The Chukchi  Sea  typically has  relatively warm, low  salinity  water present
near  shore.   Following  ice breakup  in  late  June, freshwater  influence  near
shore is  high  due  to melting ice  and  high  stream  runoff.   Incoming fresh
water  dilutes  nearshore  surface  waters  in  summer  so that salinities  range
from  22 to  29 parts  per thousand  (ppt).   Colder,  deeper water  and water
farther  offshore  typically has salinities ranging  from 31 to 33 ppt.  There is
a  trend for salinity to increase  in surface waters from late June through late
August.  Seawater temperatures  along  the  coast are generally quite  warm
(11° to 14°C  [52°  to  57°F]).  No  significant cooling  or warming trend occurs
over  the  summer,   nor   are   seawater  temperatures  significantly   warmer
(greater than 0.5°C difference)  nearshore compared to offshore.

Temperature and salinity measurements were taken in  the study area during
the open  water period of 1982 (Dames &  Moore,  1983a).   In general, tempera-
ture and  salinity profiles showed  decreasing temperature and  increasing  sa-
linity values  with  depth.  At  deeper stations,  the  surface  water layer was
                                   IV  -  46

-------
well  mixed  to  a  depth of 6 to 8 m (20 to 26 ft),  and a  sharp thermocline*
was  present between  8  and  10  m (26 to 33  ft).  A thermocline occurs where
there is a  rapid  decrease in water  temperature with depth,  in  this case  a
2.1°C  (3.8°F) difference  in  2  m  (6.6 ft).  At  shallower, more nearshore
stations, a  less distinct thermocline  (1.1°C  [2.0°F]  temperature  change in  2
m  [6.6  ft]) occurred  between 4  and 8 m (13 and 26  ft) of depth.  Salinity
varied from  25 ppt at  the surface  to  31  ppt at a  depth of 12 m  (40 ft).
Lagoons  in the  study  area   are  highly  variable in  physical  and  chemical
parameters.   Closed  lagoons  tend  to  be  mostly freshwater  with  a  slight
brackish nature  near their  ocean  shorelines.   Open  lagoons are  normally
more  saline near the  opening  and fresher near  the  creek and  river mouths.

Ice Conditions

Sea ice generally begins to form on  the coast in early October, but periodic
high winds  and waves may delay formation of solid cover  until  January.  Sea
ice normally  reaches  a thickness  of 2 to  3 m (6.6  to  9.8  ft)  during the
course of the  winter,  but  can reach greater depths  when  it  is piled up due
to storm driven  currents.  Melt  pools  and cracks begin  to form  in  May and
June,  and  the ice cover  usually  disappears by  early  July.   The  edge  of
landfast  ice is usually 3 to 8 km (2 to 5 mi) offshore in an average winter.
The  edge of landfast  ice usually approximates  the  9.2 m  (30  ft) depth con-
tour where  it  can  contact  the bottom when  it is  piled into ridges.   Landfast
ice,  though stable through winter,  is  subject to movement during break-up.

Pack  ice generally  retreats north  of Point  Hope  in  August,   September and
October.   During  late  winter and  spring,   pack ice  and landfast ice are
usually  separated by  a  shear zone approximately 64  to 80  km  (40 to 50 mi)
wide with open leads present.

Shore ice pile-up has  been observed  on the  Chukchi and  Beaufort Sea  coasts
to heights  of  over 9.2 m  (30 ft)  up to 9.2 m  (30 ft)  onto the beach.   The
same  pile-up  heights  could occur  on offshore structures.  Ice  run-up has
been observed also when  relatively  thin  sheets  of ice (0.6 to  1.5 m [2 to  5
ft]  thick)  run up beaches as far as  92  m  (300 ft)  from the  water's edge.
Ice run-up reached heights  of  9.2  m (30  ft) above the  beach  water line.

Meteorology and Air Quality

Meteorology

When  the Chukchi Sea  is  generally  ice-free (late June  through  early Octo-
ber), the coast of the project area is  dominated  by a polar maritime climate,
with cooler air temperatures, more frequent fog  and  clouds,  and  stronger
westerly winds compared  to  the inland transportation  corridors  and the De
Long  Mountains.   The summer inland climate is more  continental with greater
sunshine, greater  daily temperature swings and variable winds.  In winter
months,  climate  is generally   similar  on the seacoast  and inland, with some
differences  in  wind,  precipitation  and temperature depending on proximity  to
* Defined in  Glossary.
                                  IV - 47

-------
the De  Long Mountains.   Mountain  locations would have more  variable winds,
greater precipitation and  warmer temperatures compared to coastal locations.

Meteorological data applicable to the  Red Dog  project area were available for
Kotzebue,  Point  Hope and  Cape Lisburne from  the National Climatic  Center.
Comprehensive  meteorological  records  were  also available  for a  two-year
period  from  Ogotoruk Valley (Project  Chariot)  at  Cape  Thompson,  65  km
(40 mi) northwest  of Kivalina.  A  compilation  of climatological data for the
coastal  regions was available in Brower et al.  (1977).

Near  the  seacoast, typical  summer  temperatures  range from 4° to  13°C (39°
to 55°F)  and winter  temperatures  range from  -26°  to  -15°C  (-15° to 5°F).
Seacoast temperature  extremes are  -47°C (-53°F)  in winter and  29°C (84°F)
in summer.  In  the  De  Long Mountain  foothills, summer temperatures typi-
cally  fluctuate  between 2°  and  18°C  (36° and  64°F),  with  extreme high tem-
peratures  near  32°C  (90°F).  The winter  inversion layer  usually  lies below
the higher hills  and ridges of the  De Long Mountains, so extreme winter low
temperatures occur less frequently  in the mountains.

Mean  monthly  cloudiness  over  the  seacoast ranges  from 50  to  80 percent,
with  most  clear  days occurring  in  winter.   Fog  occurs  about 10 percent of
the  time  on the coast.    The  sun  is  continuously  above the  horizon  for
approximately seven  weeks  centered  around June 22 (the summer solstice).
Due  to  orographic*  shading  by the  De Long Mountains, the  sun sets for a
few hours  in  Red Dog Valley,  even in June.  The sun  is continuously below
the horizon for approximately four  weeks  centered around December 22 (the
winter solstice).   A  minimum of 4 to  5 hours of twilight adequate for outdoor
activities occurs  during this time.

Mean  annual  precipitation  on the  seacoast  and  coastal  lowland is approxi-
mately 25 cm  (10 in).  Orographic  effects  cause precipitation  to increase to
38 cm (15  in)  on the coastal upland, and  precipitation  ranges from 51 to 76
cm  (20  to  30 in) in  the  De Long Mountains.  Nearly  half of the mean annual
precipitation  occurs  as   rain  during  the  three months  of  July  through
September.   August  is the wettest  month  of the  year, receiving one-quarter
of the  annual  precipitation.   Mean  annual  evaporation  from  lakes and wet-
lands in Arctic  conditions found in  the foothills of  the  De  Long  Mountains
varies from 15 to 23  cm  (6 to  9 in).  Most of this evaporation  occurs from
May through August.

Snowfall has been  recorded  every  month  of the  year,  but consistent snow
cover generally occurs only from the  middle of October to the middle  of May.
Maximum  snow depths have  reached   1.2 m (4  ft),  but  typical late winter
depths  are 0.6  m (2  ft).  Considerable blowing and  drifting  of snow occurs
in coastal locations and on  exposed  peaks and ridges.  In these windy areas,
strong  east to northeast  winds create bare  ground over 30 to 40 percent of
the area.  Snowdrifts 1.8  to 3.0 m (6 to  10 ft) deep accumulate in  depres-
sions  and in  the  lee of banks.
* Defined in Glossary.
                                  IV - 48

-------
There  are marked seasonal  differences  in  wind  regime,  particularly on the
seacoast.   In winter  the  Arctic  Front  and associated  storm tracks are nor-
mally far  to  the south.   The  Polar Cold  High  generates strong north to east
winds  with the  direction depending  on  local topography.   Predominate winds
on  the seacoast and  the  coastal upland  are easterly,  down the Wulik River
valley  and parallel to the southern  edge of the Brooks Range.  During win-
ter this direction  predominates over  60  percent of the time, with mean annual
wind  speeds  for  all  directions  of 5  to 6  m/s (10 to 12  knots).  When low
pressure  centers  are present in  the  Chukchi Sea, strong  southeast winds
blow parallel  to  the coast.

Summer winds in  the coastal areas are much  more  variable than during win-
ter, and  speeds decrease to a mean  of  4 to 5 m/s (8  to  10  knots).   West  to
northwest  winds occur  approximately  50 percent  of the  time, while  east  to
northeast winds occur 35 percent of the  time.  Most of the  west and east
winds  result  from a  sea  breeze  circulation  that develops  in  late spring  after
break-up.  The strongest summer winds  (south to southeast)  are associated
with low  pressure centers in  the Chukchi  Sea and may  have  maximum  wind
speeds of 35  m/s  (70  knots).

In  the  vicinity  of the  De Long Mountain  foothills and  in  Red Dog  Valley,
local topography strongly influences  wind direction and velocity.  Predomin-
ate winter winds  (north to northeast)  are channeled  by the  valleys of the
Wulik  River,  Ikalukrok  Creek,  and  the  North and South Forks of Red  Dog
Creek.   Mean annual wind  speeds average 2.5 to 3  m/s (5  to 6 knots)  in
Red Dog  Valley.   Near calm  conditions  can  be expected 20  percent of the
time on the valley floor  due  to local  cold  air pooling.

Summer winds in the De Long  Mountain  foothills are controlled  by local valley
circulation patterns.   Up-slope  winds occur during the day, and light down-
slope  or  down-valley  winds  typically  occur   at  night.   Occasional  strong
southerly  winds may occur  in  association  with  storm systems approaching
from the west.

Air Quality

There   are  no  significant  air  pollutant  sources  in  northwestern   Alaska.
Therefore, background  levels  in the  Red Dog  project area are  assumed to  be
negligible.   From  measurements  taken  in similar remote  areas,  air pollutant
concentrations are probably  less than follows:   particulates  30 ug/m3, nitro-
gen  dioxides 10 (jg/m3,  sulfur dioxide  3  pg/rn3, ozone 60 pg/m3 and carbon
monoxide  500 pg/m3.

Natural particulate levels  are  probably  high during strong winds due to lack
of soil-protecting  vegetation on  hilltops  and  ridge crests.  Observations  at
Cape Thompson  showed that  strong  winter winds  created large bare areas
which  generated surface dust deposits  on  snow cover downwind.  High con-
centrations of smoke particulates may also  occur as a  result of rare  summer
tundra fires.
                                  IV  - 49

-------
Visual  Resources

Basic  methods used  to determine  the  value of visual resources  have  been
developed  by the  U.S.  Forest  Service in  its  Visual Resources  Management
(VRM)  Program.   The  visual  characteristics of a  landscape include visual
variety,  the  number and interest  of viewers,  and the land's ability to vis-
ually  change  without losing its  inherent character.   Visual  variety  has  been
shown  to  be  a  good predictor of  viewer  preference.   The  number,  interest
and  location of viewers  are also factors  used  to identify  visually important
areas.

For any particular area,  visual  variety classes  are  determined based on the
relative  value of  the  surrounding area.   For example,   lands  with visual
variety typical  of  the  region are  classified as "common" or Class  B lands.
Areas  with special  patterns of vegetation, water or landforms are considered
"distinctive" or Class A  lands.  Areas  with  very little variety or  interest are
considered "minimal"  or Class  C  lands.

The  Red  Dog  project  area,  including  the De Long  Mountains, the  Mulgrave
Hills,  and the  Kivalina and  Wulik  River  basins, is  highly scenic relative to
the lower  48 states.  A majority of the project  area  is rated variety  Class  A.
Highly  rated  areas  include  the shoreline,  the larger  rivers and   adjacent
lakes,  notable hills,  and  the  more mountainous  areas to  the north and  east.
The  remainder  of  the  landscape is considered  Class B.    None of the  land-
scape  is considered variety Class C.

The  VRIVl  system  combines data on  the  number and interest  of viewers to
determine  a   sensitivity  rating   for any   particular  area.   Because of  its
remoteness and the  limited number of use  areas (those  being  the village of
Kivalina  and  Cape  Krusenstern  National   Monument),  the  general  visual
sensitivity of the  project area  is  considered to be  low.   Cape  Krusenstern
National Monument is  considered  an area of high  sensitivity based  on pro-
jections of future use.

The  VRM  program  combines data  on  visual variety  classes with sensitivity
ratings to determine  Visual  Quality  Objective  (VQO) zones.   Five general
VQO zones are defined as  follows:

     0  Preservation -  No  visual changes  permitted.

     0  Retention  -  Visual changes must blend with the form, line,  color and
        texture of  the  existing landscape.

     0  Partial  Retention  - Visual  changes  must be  subordinate  to  and bor-
        row visual  elements from the natural landscape.

     0  Modification  -  Major visual changes are allowed,  but changes  must
        borrow  from existing visual elements of  the  landscape.

     0  Maximum Modification  -  Major  visual  changes  allowed.   Conformity
        with the natural landscape is not  required.
                                   IV - 50

-------
VQO  zones defined in  the  study area are shown on  Figure IV-11.   The Wulik
and   Kivalina  River basins,  and  the Mulgrave Hills  in  Cape  Krusenstern
National Monument are classified  as retention level quality.  The remainder of
the project area is generally classified  as partial retention quality.  In gen-
eral,  the project area is  high in visual  variety but low in visual sensitivity.

Red   Dog project components occur  in  landscapes  with varying visual char-
acteristics.  The northern transportation  corridor  passes through areas of
both  high  and moderate visual variety.   The southern transportation  corridor
is located  predominantly in an area  of  moderate visual  variety,  but is  close
to viewers  in  Cape Krusenstern National Monument.  The northern transpor-
tation corridor passes through  retention quality areas,  while  the southern
corridor lies  within partial retention areas.  The  port  sites are  located in
areas of high visual variety and  partial  retention quality.

Sound

The   Red  Dog  project  area   is  located   in  a  remote region  of  northwestern
Alaska.   The  closest  communities are the  small Native villages at  Kivalina
(located on the  coast 32 km  [20  mi]  northwest of the proposed southern port
site), and at  Noatak  (located 42 km  [26  mi] south of Red Dog Valley).  Data
from  similar remote locations  indicate that typical natural  noise levels  usually
range from 15 to  45 dB(A),  which  is   considered  quiet  (see Table V-7 for
comparison  values).   Natural  noise  levels up  to  65  dB(A) may  be  associated
with  storms and wildlife.   Areas along the coast would have  the highest
noise  level due to  strong winds,   breaking  waves,  ice  movements,  marine
mammal cries and  bird calls.   Maximum natural noise levels along the pro-
posed transportation   corridors  and  in  the  De  Long Mountains  would  be
caused  by wind, rain,  wildlife and rare  thunder.

Noise  associated  with  the  Native communities  would  not be discernable in
most  of the  project  area, except  that resulting  from  subsistence  hunting
activities (use  of  snowmobiles,  outboard  motors  and  float  planes).   These
types of activities typically generate noise levels up to 85 dB(A) at 15 m (50
ft).   Noise  is  presently   being  generated  by temporary mining exploration
activities concentrated in  the De Long Mountains.   Infrequent helicopter and
light  plane overflights  at  low altitudes  may also occur in the  project area.
These flights  would generate ground level noise up to 90 dB(A).

Cultural Resources

It is  generally  accepted that  the first Asian immigrants  to the  North Ameri-
can continent crossed  the  Bering Strait  (Beringia),  arriving in  what is  now
Alaska  in  the  area of the  Seward   and Lisburne  peninsulas.   They  then
moved eastward, probably north  of the Brooks Range,  into the  Canadian
interior and southward  east  of the  Rocky Mountain  chain.   This movement is
generally thought to have occurred  toward  the close of the  Wisconsin glacial
advance,  perhaps  10,000  to  15,000 years ago,  although many  scholars  have
postulated  the  initial date  of  immigration  at 80,000 to 100,000 years.

The  Alaskan  link  between Asia  and  the early  human  sites in  the interior,
while  widely accepted  in  theory,  is  not well-documented  in fact.   Tangible
                                   IV -  51

-------
                                                                                                        D^DOG
                                                                                                     .MINE'SITE

                                                                                                     DEADLOCK
                                                                                                     MTN
            LEGEND
C ll     R    RETENTION

H      PP   PARTIAL RETENTION

-------
evidence  may  have been inundated  as  ocean levels  rose with the melting of
the continental ice  sheets.   If so, those data are likely  lost to bottom scour-
ing or  strong  ocean floor currents  in the  Bering Strait area.  Site evidence
may also have been  destroyed or  disseminated by  glacial action or natural
forces  associated with  land  elevation changes resulting  from glacial  retreat.
It may also be  that  evidence of  this  earliest  occupation has  not  been dis-
covered,  or perhaps  simply  not  recognized.   It  is  fair to conclude that  if
evidence  of  these first  immigrants is to be  found,  it will  likely be discovered
in the  region  where  earliest contact  was  possible.   This would  include the
Red Dog  project area.

The earliest prehistorical remains in the vicinity of the Red  Dog  project area
are located on a  series  of beach  ridges at Cape Krusenstern,  and  form the
core of the  Cape Krusenstern National Monument  and the Cape  Krusenstern
Archeological District (Fig.  1-1).   The latter classification requires  manage-
ment  consideration  for  any archeological resource  in  the District (there is a
presumed  eligibility to  the  National  Register of sites  for all  recorded and
unrecorded  sites  within the  Archeological  District).  The Cape  Krusenstern
Archeological  District  encompasses  approximately  809,000  ha  (2,000,000  ac)
and includes most of the proposed transportation corridors.

While the National  Monument  constitutes only approximately 25 percent of the
District,  its existence is predicated on the archeological  remains in the area
that depict every known cultural period in Arctic Alaska.  It is  the  purpose
of the  Monument to  preserve  and  interpret evidence  of prehistorical and
historical  Native  cultures.    The easily visible concentration  of house and
occupied  sites  in  the  Monument  are  often  used  as  a  diachronic*  model  of
human  life  in  northwestern  Alaska  (Giddings 1967;  Giddings and Anderson,
in press).

Archeological  sites  located  within the  Red  Dog  project  area  are typical  of
interior  northwestern  Alaska.  These  sites  consist of  surface scatters,  or
shallowly buried deposits of  lithic materials that were used  in making  stone
artifacts  (Hall, 1982a).   The localities served as prehistoric  flaking  stations
associated with  upland  game  procurement,  though some  may  have   been
ephemeral camps.   More  permanent settlements are  known  closer to the coast,
although  the majority of coastal  sites within the project  area  relate to recent
periods (Hall,  1982a,b;  1983a).

Four  archeological   sites are  located in the immediate area of the mine.   At
least a  dozen  more  archeological  localities  are within  a  3 km  (1.9 mi) radius
of the  mine, mill, tailings pond  and water storage facilities complex.

There  are 13  archeological  sites  along the southern transportation corridor
(Hall  1982a,b;  1983a).   Seven of these sites are  within the Cape Krusenstern
Archeological District,  with  six of those sites being  within Cape Krusenstern
National Monument.    The  other  sites  are  on  state  selected or tentatively
approved lands.   There are  23 archeological  sites along the  northern trans-
portation  corridor  (Hall  1982a,b;  1983a).   None  of these  sites are within
Cape  Krusenstern  National Monument or the  Cape Krusenstern Archeological
District.   All  23  sites  are on  state selected or tentatively  approved lands.
* Defined in Glossary.

                                   IV - 53

-------
Sites  related  to  coastal activities  are located  at  each port site.   There  is a
small  eroding  cabin  at  Tugak Lagoon of  which little remains (Hall, 1983a).  A
reindeer herding  facility is present on private land  at the VABM 28 port site
which  may provide  physical documentation  for the historical  reindeer herding
activity in this area.

The  upland  hunting sites  of  the  Red  Dog  project area may reflect  seasonal
use of  the interior  during months of  resource  unavailability  at the  coast.
Similar  sites  which  reflect  inland  travel  from Cape Krusenstern have been
noted for the De  Long  Mountains (Smith, 1982; Hall,  1982a,b;  1983a).

Subsistence

Subsistence is vital to the  economic well  being  and  nutrition  of most  of the
region's  residents.  The extent of  its importance is  indicated by the  findings
of a  1978  survey of about one-third of the  region's households.   Approxi-
mately 55  percent of all households estimated they  obtained  half or more  of
their  food  supply  by subsistence  hunting,  fishing and gathering   (Table
IV-11).   This survey  found   that  subsistence  dependence  was  widespread
throughout the region, but much  more  pronounced  in  the outlying villages,
including  Kivalina and Noatak, than in  Kotzebue.   In a region where im-
ported foodstuffs are  costly and cash income  depressed, the economic  impor-
tance of the subsistence food  supply is  evident.   Within this general reliance
on subsistence,  there  is a  great  deal of  variation from settlement to  settle-
ment,  season to  season,  and  year to  year in  subsistence  harvest  patterns
(Social  Research  Institute,  1982).

The  region encompasses a great diversity of terrestrial,  freshwater,  marine
and wetland  habitat  types  which support many  valuable subsistence  species.
Virtually  the  entire region and most of  its nearshore marine waters fall with-
in the subsistence use area of  one  or more villages (Fig. IV-12).

Among  the  most  important subsistence  food  resources  are  land  mammals
(caribou,  moose),  fish  (Arctic  char,   chum salmon,  sheefish,  whitefish,
tomcod,  smelt),   sea mammals  (bearded,  ringed  and spotted  seals;  belukha
whales)  and  waterfowl.   However,  nearly all edible animal  species  are used
to add  variety to the customary  diet or  in times of scarcity.   Berries and
other wild plant  foods  are  also extensively gathered  for  consumption.

Most  of these  subsistence resources  (e.g.,  caribou,   Arctic  char,  salmon,
marine  mammals,  plant foods)  are  either  migratory  or highly  seasonal; the
period of their peak availability is  often very brief and  localized.  Thus, the
yearly  cycle  of   subsistence  harvest activites  for   each  settlement reflects
closely  the timing and specific mix of locally available resources.  Figures
IV-13  and IV-14  show typical  annual subsistence activity  cycles for Kivalina,
Noatak,  and  other  selected  community  groups  in  the   region.   However,  it
should  be stressed  that the "typical year"  rarely occurs because the pattern
of resource  availability  is  so  unstable.   Adaptation to these  uncertain  cir-
cumstances has produced a highly  complex, diverse, and flexible pattern  of
subsistence activity that continually adapts  to harvest opportunities.
                                   IV - 54

-------
                                Table IV-11


                               NANA REGION

           HOUSEHOLD DEPENDENCY ON  SUBSISTENCE HARVEST1

                         PERCENT DISTRIBUTION
All
Most
Half
Some
None
TOTAL
NANA
Region
7.5
24.8
23.2
36.1
8.5
100.0
Kivalina
5.6
16.7
38.9
38.9
--
100.0
Noatak
--
57.1
28.6
14.3
--
100.0
Kotzebue
5.6
14.9
16.1
49.1
14.3
100.0
Other
Villages2
12.4
30.1
27.5
27.5
2.6
100.0
1  Reply  to  question:   How much of your  own food would  you say  you and
   your family gathered, hunted or fished for  this year?

2  Other  villages include Ambler,  Buckland,  Deering,  Kiana,  Kobuk,  Noor-
   vik, Selawik and Shungnak.

Source:   NANA Regional Strategy,  Community  Survey,  1978
In addition  to its economic importance,  subsistence is essential  in  structuring
and  sustaining the  region's cultural values and  social organization.   It sus-
tains the important  cultural practices of cooperative food-gathering and food-
sharing.  Subsistence   remains  a  strong,  positive thematic value that binds
families,  communities  and  northwest  Inupiat  people together  as distinctive
social groups.

The  current  subsistence  use  areas  of Kivalina and  Noatak  residents that
overlap the  project area  were recently described and mapped by Braund &
Associates (1983).   The two communities make common  use of some  subsist-
ence resource areas.   However, a  1972 survey (Mauneluk Association, 1974)
of overall  harvest  patterns found  distinctive differences  in the  subsistence
orientations of coastal  Kivalina  and inland Noatak  residents  (Table IV-12).
In general,  Kivalina was most heavily  dependent on  sea mammal and fisheries
                                  IV - 55

-------
                                                BROOKS     RANGE
               MOUNTAINS
                                            NOATAK N AT 10 N Ats.PJ^ ESEJWP*^
   ALASKA MARIT.IME
  v WILDLIFE REFUGE


          SLOPE
                                             PE KRUSENSTE/N
                                            RCHEOLOGICALDISTRICT
      CAPE KRUSENSTERN
      NATIONAL    \
      MONUMENT
50 kilometers
                       LEGEND
                                 LOWER KOBUKVALLEY VILLAGES (NORVIK,
                                   KIANA)
                                 SUBSISTENCE STUDY BOUNDARY
                                 SELAWIK
                                 VILLAGE LAND SELECTIONS
                                 Source. Mauneluk Association. 1979
                     FIGURE IV-12  SUBSISTENCE USE  BY
            NORTHWESTERN  ALASKA NATIVE VILLAGES^

-------
   •n
   5
   30
   m
   <
   CO
c>
go
gjm
23
>O
         ANNUAL SUBSISTENCE ACTIVITY CYCLE OF THE KUUVANMIIT OF
         THE UPPER KOBUK RIVER VILLAGES  (KOBUK, AMBLER AND
         SHUNGNAK)'
CARIBOU HUNTING
MOOSE HUNTING
BEAR HUNTING
FUR-ANIMAL
HUNTING AND
TRAPPING
          WATERFOWL
          HUNTING
          HARE SNARING
          AND HUNTING
          PTARMIGAN
          SNARING AND
          HUNTING
          GILL-NETTING
          FISH  HOOKING
          BERRY PICKING
EDIBLE  PLANT
GATHERING
          WOOD CUTTING
WAGE LABOR AND
COMMERCIAL
FISHING
                                                                   ANNUAL SUBSISTENCE ACTIVITY CYCLE OFTHE KUUVANMIIT OF
                                                                   THE LOWER  KOBUK RIVER VILLAGES (KIANA AND NORVIK)1
                                                                     CARIBOU HUNTING
                                                                     MOOSE HUNTING
                                                                     BEAR HUNTING
FUR-ANIMAL
HUNTING AND
TRAPPING
                                                                     WATERFOWL
                                                                     HUNTING
                                                                     HARE SNARING
                                                                     AND HUNTING
                                                                     PTARMIGAN
                                                                     SNARING AND
                                                                     HUNTING
                                                                               GILL-NETTING
                                                                               SEINING
                                                                               FISH HOOKING
                                                                               BERRY PICKING
EDIBLE PLANT
GATHERING
                                                                               WOOD CUTTING
WAGE LABOR AND
COMMERCIAL
FISHING
                                                                                        a:
                                                                                        a.
                                o  a.
                                3  u
                                4  in
t-
o
o
                                                                                                              o
o
111
o
a>
in
         I  SOURCE: MAUNELUK ASSOCIATION, 1979

-------
   avw
<
z
>
*:
u.
o

ui

o

o

>
o
<

UJ
o
z
UI
to
m
<
O
o
V
o
>

I-
o


UJ
o
z
UI
CO
m
z
z
                                                  o _
                                                  o <
                                                  o o
                                                  (0 O
                                                  
-------
                                Table IV-12
SUBSISTENCE  RESOURCES HARVESTED FOR  KIVALINA AND NOATAK,  1972
Land Mammals
Sea Mammals
Fish

kg
23,496
55,519
50,326
Kivalina
Ib
51,800
122,400
110,950

Percent
of Total
17.9
42.3
38.3

kg
61,620
7,666
60,653
Noatak
Ib
135,850
16,900
133,718

Percent
of Total
46.3
5.8
45.6
Other (water-
  fowl,  berries,
greens)
Total
1,988
131,329
4,382
289,532
1.5
100.0
3,057
132,996
6,740
293,208
1.3
100.0
Source:  Braund & Associates,  1983 from Mauneluk  Association,  1974
harvests,  with  land  mammals  seasonally important.   Noatak residents were
mostly dependent on land mammals and  fisheries;  sea mammals  were of rela-
tively minor importance.

As  shown  on  Figures IV-15 and  IV-16,  the proposed mine site is located on
the  fringe of the subsistence  areas used by Kivalina and Noatak residents.
In addition,  the various overland transportation corridors and the port sites
cross or fall  within  subsistence use  lands.   Numerous  coastal areas, the
Wulik and  Kivalina  River  drainages,  and the Mulgrave Hills are  used  inten-
sively  by  caribou hunters from both communities.   The  region is part of the
western  Arctic  caribou  herd's  range,  but changes  in the  herd's  migration
routes and winter range conditions greatly  influence hunting success.

Subsistence  fishing  is  important  to  both  Kivalina  and  Noatak  residents
throughout the  year.  The  fall run of  Arctic char  is especially important  to
both communities,  while the Noatak  River chum  salmon  and char  runs are
locally important.   Kivalina  marine mammal  hunters  intensively  search the
nearshore  areas  off  Kivalina and other  spots north and south of Kivalina  in
season.   Both  Kivalina and Noatak  residents  harvest  waterfowl in coastal
lagoons and wetlands.
                                   IV  -  59

-------
             CAPEvSEPPING

             L'AGOONX ^V-



                            ^^~__ 	 _	



          KIVA LIN A

SUBSISTENCE USE AREAS, 1977-1982
           SHEEP


         .  SEA MAMMALS ®EAL,USRUK,WALRUS ft 6ELU6A!
 I »  i 1 i i   INTENSIVE SEA MAMMAL HUNTING AREAS


           TRAPPING (FOX,WOLVERINE,WOLF!


    Q      HUNTING, FISHING 8 TRAPPING CABINS


    O      SPORT HUNTING a FISHING LODGE

     	—.
           SOWHEAO WHALING
    +•  -"•  INTENSIVE BOWHEAD WHALE HUNTING AREA

           INTENSIVE CARIBOU HUNTING AREAS
         *  OCCASIONAL CARIBOU HUNTING AREAS

           WATERFOWL

           WATERFOWL, GREENS 8 BERRIES
 . . . . .  MOOSE

           MAXIMUM USE AREA
FIGURE IV-15  SUBSISTENCE USE  AREAS,
                    KIVALINA VILLAGE
SOURCE  8RAUND S ASSOCIATES, 1983

-------
                                               PUNUPKAHROAK
                                               MOUNTAIN

              lOmiles
        SCALE
        PARTIAL1  NOATAK
SUBSISTENCE USE AREAS, 1977-1982

           LEGEND
    D


    O
-_-. SEA MAMMALS (SEAL,UGRUK,WALRUS 8 BELUGA)


  TRAPPING (FOX,WOLVERINE,WOLF)


  HUNTING, FISHING 8 TRAPPING CABINS


  SPORT HUNTING 8 FISHING LODGE
 HIIMII I I I I I  CHAR FISHING


           SHEEP
        ,	  INTENSIVE CARIBOU HUNTING AREAS

        _*.  OCCASIONAL CARIBOU HUNTING AREAS

        »_  WATERFOWL

        —  MAXIMUM USE
1 THIS RESEARCH ONLY ADDRESSED USE AREAS POTENTIALLY
 AFFECTED BY RED DOG PROJECT DEVELOPMENT a NOT ALL
 NOATAK RESOURCE USE AREAS.

       BRAUND 8 ASSOCIATES, 1983
                                             FIGURE IV-16
                                     SUBSISTENCE USE  AREAS,
                                          NOATAK  VILLAGE

-------
Socioeconomics

The  NANA  region encompasses approximately 93,000 km2  (36,000 mi2) and  11
settlements  with  a  population of 4,830 residents according to the 1980  cen-
sus.  Overall, the  region is sparsely populated, relatively undeveloped, and
lacking  a unifying  regional  government.   Nevertheless, the villages  comprise
a true region which is  linked by strong economic,  ethnic and  cultural  ties;
common   transportation  and  communications  systems;  and  governmental and
other important  institutional bonds.   The  coastal  community of Kotzebue is
the  largest settlement in  the region.   It  is the  natural  hub  of the region's
transportation  and  distributive  system,  and the  administrative and service
headquarters  for most  of the public agencies and  other  institutions serving
the region.

Population

Approximately  half  of the population of the NANA region lives  in Kotzebue,
with  the  rest  spread  among  10  smaller  villages (Table  IV-13).    Alaska
Natives,  mainly  Inupiat Eskimos, comprise  about 84 percent of the region's
population.   Most non-Native people in  the region  live  in  Kotzebue.

The region's population  is relatively young,  with a median age of 21.6 years.
The distribution  by age group  has become fairly  even  (Table IV-14),  indi-
cating that the  period  of  very  high  birth  rates  and rapid natural  increase
has  subsided.  Males  (53.7  percent) outnumber females (46.3  percent),  espe-
cially  through  the  post-school   age groups,  which suggests  a  pattern  of
selective  outmigration  by young  adult  females.   Average household size is
relatively large (4.2 persons per household).

The region's  population growth  rate from 1970  to 1980  was moderate,  aver-
aging about 1.8  percent annually.  Apparently,  natural  increase contributed
most to  the region's  growth.   All  of the  region's  communities  except Noatak
grew in  size.   Intraregional migration  is  common.   Population mobility  within
the  region  is high,  especially between  Kotzebue and the hinterland  villages.
Movement  into Kotzebue is  probably  in  response  to employment and  educa-
tional opportunities, and to  Kotzebue's superior  public services.

A base  case  (i.e.,  without the  Red Dog  project)  population  forecast for the
region as  a whole  and  for  the  individual communities of  Kotzebue,  Kivalina,
Noatak  and Point  Hope was  prepared to  serve as a  benchmark  for  impact
assessment (Kevin  Waring  Associates,  1983).   Based on a review  of  demo-
graphic  and economic trends  affecting the  region, an average  annual  growth
rate of  1.5 percent was chosen  for  purposes of forecasting  a future bench-
mark population.  Assuming this general  rate of  growth  and  using  the 1982
population  base,  the region's population was forecast to  increase to  6,019 by
1990, 6,985 by  2000  and  8,110  by 2010 (Table IV-15).   Kotzebue  is  expected
to  retain its role as the region's main settlement.
                                   IV - 62

-------
                          Table IV-13


              POPULATION TRENDS,  1960  TO 1982

                  STUDY  AREA COMMUNITIES

Ambler
Buckland
Deering
Kiana
Kivalina
Kobuk
Kotzebue
Noatak
Noorvik
Selawik
Shungnak
1960
70
87
95
253
142
54
1,290
275
384
348
135
1970
169
104
85
278
188
-
1,696
293
462
429
165
1980
192
177
150
345
241
62
2,054
273
492
535
202
1982
202
217
158
364
253
64
2,470
-
518
602
214
    Kobuk  Census
       Division        3,560     4,048      4,831
    Point Hope
324
386
461
544
Sources:  U.S. Census of Population;  Alaska  Department of Labor, 1983
                             IV  - 63

-------
                                Table IV-14


            DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION,  BY AGE AND SEX

                      KOBUK  CENSUS DIVISION, 1980
Male
Age
Less










Total
Group
than 5 years
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
45
55
65

Median
- 9
- 14
- 19
- 24
- 29
- 34
- 44
- 54
- 64
plus

Age
No.
293
293
287
332
247
270
199
238
193
115
127
2,594
21
%
11.
11.
11 .
12.
9.
10.
7.
9.
7.
4.
4.
100.
.7

3
3
1
8
5
4
7
2
4
4
9
0

Female
No.
278
244
242
276
263
193
152
177
184
106
122
2,237
21
%
12.
10.
10.
12.
11.
8.
6.
7.
8.
4.
5.
100.
.5

4
9
8
3
8
6
9
9
2
7
5
0

Total
No.
571
537
529
608
510
463
351
415
377
221
249
4,831
21
%
11
11
11
12
10
9
7
8
7
4
5
100
.6

.8
.1
.0
.6
.6
.6
.3
.6
.8
.6
.2
.0

  Source:  U.S.  Census of Population,  1980
In general, it is anticipated that the region's future population structure will
tend toward  a  more  normal  age distribution.  The ratio  of  minors will likely
decline  and the number of young adults and, especially, older residents will
rise  as a  share of the  total  population.   Corollaries of these trends  will  be
smaller  average family and household  sizes, lowered dependency ratios,  and,
potentially, a relatively  larger  resident workforce.
                                   IV -  64

-------
                               Table  IV-15


                    BASELINE POPULATION  FORECAST

                       NANA REGION,  1982  TO 2010
Kivalina
Kotzebue
Noatak
Rest of Region
Total
Point Hope
19821
253
2,470
2732
2,339
5,343
544
1990
285
2,782
317
2^635
6,019
612
2000
331
3,229
367
3,058
6,985
711
2010
384
3,749
427
3,550
8,110
826
         Source:   Kevin Waring Associates,  1983

         1  Actual values.
         2  1980 Census figure.
Economy

The  NANA  region has  a mixed  economy,  combining traditional  subsistence
economic activities  with  a growing cash  economy supported  by cash  employ-
ment and other sources of cash income.  Subsistence is vital  to the  region's
livelihood and  will continue to be  for  the  foreseeable future.  It  commands
significant expenditures  of funds and  time,  and  contributes importantly to
the food economy.

A  comparison of gross  employment and  income  data  for 1970  and 1980 indi-
cates  that there  has  been substantial  aggregate growth  in the cash economy
during  the past  decade.   Total employment grew about 124 percent over the
decade  while the region's population  grew by  about 19 percent.  The percent
of total population  employed nearly doubled from about  16 percent in 1970 to
about 30 percent by 1980.  However,  this aggregate growth  was accomplished
with very little change in the region's basic economic structure.   In  develop-
mental  terms, the region's economy  has  been static.

The  economic  multiplier  is  typically low for underdeveloped  rural  Alaskan
economies with little  basic private employment and  a  strong  subsistence com-
ponent.   The mix of goods and services provided  locally is limited  by small
regional  market size  and low purchasing power.   However,  this  mix has im-
proved  over  the past decade with the  maturation  of the region's cash  econ-
omy.   A low  economic multiplier suggests that, apart  from labor and  essential


                                  IV - 65

-------
transportation  services,  the region's  economy  may  have few  needed  goods
and services to supply to  new resource development projects.

Table  IV-16 compares  the distribution of employment by economic  sector in
1970 and  1980.   The outstanding constant feature was the dominance of pub-
lic  sector  employment  and the  negligible  importance  of  private  sector  basic
employment.   At both  times, the public sector  accounted for better than 60
percent of  all employment,  even though there was  a wholesale  shift  in the
balance between  federal and  state/local government employment.  Government
employment showed  the biggest  growth, and nearly all of that  growth was in
state  and  local government employment.   There  was  also strong but  lesser
growth  in  services  and minor growth  in  the  construction industry.  On the
other hand, the  share of employment held  by trade  and transportation fell
somewhat.   Overall, the  structure  of the  region's  basic economy  changed
little, despite substantial aggregate growth.

While job and real  income growth in  the  region greatly outpaced  population
growth  during  the  1970  to  1980 period, factors  that contributed to  these
trends  may be ending.   Chief  among  those  factors  were improved  resident
access  to  local employment opportunities,  rapid  expansion  of public  sector
employment,  rising  resident educational  and occupational  skill  levels,  in-
creased  female  labor  force participation,  and  the   emergence  of Native-
managed  business and public  service organizations.   In the  future,  it  is
plausible  that  the region's workforce will grow slightly faster than the  popu-
lation as a  whole,  mainly due to a shift in the age composition  of the popula-
tion.   It  is also  expected  that  residents will continue to adjust to shifts in
the economic outlook through migration within and  beyond the region.

Data  on  sources of personal income (Tables IV-17 and IV-18)  show there was
little  change  in  the sources of  earned  personal  income  by economic sector,
although there  was a  large shift within the governmental sector  as  state and
local  government  replaced  the federal government as  the single most  impor-
tant source of earned  income.   From  1970  to 1980, the share of personal  in-
come  derived  from  cash  employment,  dividends  and  transfer  payments
changed very little.   The  average  per  capita personal  income grew by  237
percent  from  approximately $2,142 to  about $7,225,   but still remained well
below the statewide average of $12,635.

According  to  the  1980 U.S. Census, the  median household  income for  the
Kobuk  region  was  $17,756,  with  wide  variations  among  the  communities.
Kotzebue  had by  far the highest median income ($23,371), consistent with its
more  fully  developed  economic  status  and the reduced  role  of  subsistence.

On the  other hand,  less  developed  communities  still heavily dependent on
subsistence resources  had  relatively  low median  incomes  (Kivalina, $8,304;
Selawik, $9,750; Noatak, $10,000).

Despite apparent economic improvements,  long term unemployment rates show
a  strong  seasonal  cycle,  but  remain  relatively  high  in the  region.   In 1981,
the official average  annual  unemployment  rate was 9.8 percent.   The  official
rate  is generally thought to understate actual  unemployment,  mainly because
the  labor force participation rate (and,  thus, the official unemployment rate)
                                   IV -  66

-------
                                Table  IV-16


                     DISTRIBUTION  OF EMPLOYMENT

                  KOBUK CENSUS DIVISION, 1970 & 1980
1970
Industry
Mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Transportation, Communication
& Utilities
Trade
Finance, Insurance & Real
Estate
Services
Federal Government
State & Local Government
Miscellaneous
Total
Number
*
*
*
106
100
*
17
300
104
*
641
Percent
*
*
*
16.6
15.6
*
2.7
46.7
16.3
*
100.0
1980
Number
*
81
*
125
133
18
168
218
692
*
1,438
Percent
*
5.6
*
8.7
9.2
1.3
11.7
15.2
48.1
*
100.0
^Withheld by Department of Labor  to avoid disclosure  or  not available.


Source:  Alaska Department of  Labor,  1970,  1980
is  depressed  by the  scarcity of employment possibilities.   This is offset to
some degree by unreported  subsistence activities and  other self-employment,
which are omitted  from official tallies.
                                  IV - 67

-------
                                Table  IV-17
SOURCES OF PERSONAL INCOME, BY SECTOR
KOBUK CENSUS
Industry
Agriculture
Mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Transportation & Public Utilities
Trade
Finance, Insurance & Real Estate
Services
Government
Federal
State & Local
Total
DIVISION, 1970 & 19801

$(000)
(L)
(L)
0
147
1,419
545
(L)
379
4,771
3,906
865
7,296
1970
Percent
N/A
N/A
0
2.0
19.4
7.5
N/A
5.2
65.4
53.5
11.9
100.0
1980
$(000)
(D)
(D)
1,609
(L)
4,244
2,044
(D)
2,852
17,141
5,006
12,135
28,527

Percent
N/A
N/A
5.6
N/A
14.9
7.2
N/A
10.0
60.1
17.5
42.5
100.0
(D)  Not shown  to avoid disclosure of confidential  information,
(L)  Less than $50,000.
 1   By Place of Work

Source:  U.S. Department of Commerce, 1982
                                  IV  -  68

-------
                                Table  IV-18


                     PERSONAL INCOME, BY  SOURCE

                  KOBUK CENSUS  DIVISION,  1970  & 1980
1970

Net Earned Income
Dividends
Transfer Payments
Total
$
6,761
216
1,708
$8,685
Percent
77.8
2.5
19.7
100.0
1980
$
26,261
1,178
7,544
$34,983
Percent
74.8
3.4
21.5
100.0
Per Capita Total  Personal  Income   $2,142                  $7,225
Source:  U.S.  Department of Commerce, 1982
Regular  cash  employment  does  not  preclude  subsistence  participation,  al-
though  some flexibility  in work schedules is helpful  to  adapt to the seasonal
cycle of subsistence  resources  availability.   Indeed,  some recent studies in
the  region   have found that  success  in the  cash  employment  economy is
associated with a high  level  of  subsistence success.

Community Facilities and Services

The  material  standard  of living in the  region's communities  has  risen  sub-
stantially over  the past decade  through  widespread  construction  of  basic
public facilities and improved public  services.   Most of the  settlements  have
benefited from ongoing  programs to provide better  housing,   improved water
supply  and  sewer  systems,  electrification,  local high  schools, health clinics,
improved airports  and  telecommunications.   Community  services  for public
safety,  fire  protection,  health  and social  welfare,  adult education and  job
training  have also generally been upgraded.
                                   IV -  69

-------
Nevertheless, while recognizing the advantages of improvements, the region's
communities  find it difficult to maintain basic community facilities  and  serv-
ices  to meet current needs.   The cost  of  public facilities and  services  is
high and  local public revenue sources are low in  the  absence of the tax  base
normally provided  by private economic development.   All of the NANA com-
munities are heavily dependent on non-local  sources of revenues or non-local
public  agencies for  construction  and operation of major community facilities
and  programs, even when  local  agencies  deliver  services.   As a result, the
localities,  including   Kotzebue,  usually  cannot  absorb  any  sudden,  large
population  influx without strain on available  resources for  housing and com-
munity  facilities  and  services,  especially without  a compensating  increase  in
public  revenues.   Similarly,  many households find it difficult to  afford the
higher cash  outlays  for utilities,  energy, house  payments  and other  factors
associated  with an  improved standard of living.

Local and Regional  Governance

The  proposed  Red  Dog mine site  and  related facilities fall  within  the juris-
diction  of  the  North Slope Borough.   The surface transportation route alter-
natives from the mine site  to the coast, as well as the port  site alternatives,
are  in  the  so-called  unorganized  borough,  outside  any established local  or
regional government.

All  of  the  communities of  the Kobuk  census region,  except Noatak which has
a  traditional  Indian  Reorganization  Act  (IRA) council,  are  incorporated  as
municipalities under  Alaska statutes.    There  is no regional  or borough gen-
eral  purpose  government encompassing the NANA region.   A  number  of key
functions   (education,   public  housing,  coastal  management)  are provided
through  special purpose regional agencies.

The  North  Slope  Borough  is a fully developed  home rule  regional govern-
ment.   Among  its area-wide powers, two are especially relevant to  the  mining
project:   land  use  planning,  and property  assessment  and  taxation.   The
Borough  is   also  the  primary provider of  education,  housing, utilities,
employment  and  other  basic services  to  residents of North  Slope villages.

Local governments  in the  NANA region have  very limited tax  bases and  thus
are  limited  in  their  resources  and  powers.   They  are supplemented  by  a
variety of regional, federal  and  state organizations  that provide  community
facilities and services for such functions as  education, transportation,  health
and  social  services,  housing,  manpower development  and  coastal management.

Recreation

There  is  little published information  on recreational  use of the project area.
Most of the  data presented in  this study were collected by:   interviews with
area  residents;  personal   communication  with  guides, charter services and
resource  personnel;  and  review  of  agency  files  and survey  records.  The
area of study is generally contained within  Game Management Unit 23,  which
is "...that  area drained  by all  streams  flowing  into the  Arctic  Ocean and
Kotzebue  Sound from  Cape  Lisburne  on the  north   to, and  including,  the
drainage  into  Goodhope River on  the south"  (ADF&G,  1981).   Since many
                                   IV - 70

-------
recreational  activities  occur primarily  within the  National  Park system,  the
primary  study  area is defined as  the western  portion  of the  Noatak Pre-
serve,  the  northern  portion  of  Cape  Krusenstern  National  Monument,  and
those portions of  Unit  23  in the vicinity of the proposed  project.

The  recreational  activities  under  study  include  hiking,  flying,  boating,
hunting,  fishing,  winter  sports  and sightseeing.  However, local residents
pursue  many of these  same activities for a  livelihood.  It is therefore neces-
sary  to  distinguish between  recreational  use and subsistence  use of local
resources.   For purposes  of this document,  recreational activities are defined
as those outdoor activities pursued  by  non-residents of the  region.

Recreational  opportunities in the study area are somewhat limited compared to
other areas  of the  state.   The restricted and costly access,  the lack of sup-
port  facilities,  the  fairly flat,  wet terrain, long  harsh winters  and short
summers  have  kept recreational  use to a  minimum.   In fact,   non-resident
winter sport activities such  as  dogsledding,  snowmobiling  and  skiing vir-
tually  do  not  exist.   Recreational  flying was also determined  to be  almost
nonexistent.    It is  estimated  that from 250 to 350  non-residents engaged  in
recreational  activities  in  the  primary  study area in  1982  (Comrnco Alaska,
Inc., 1983b).

People that do  visit the area generally engage in a variety  of activities,  and
it  is  often difficult to differentiate between individuals  who come for such
diverse  purposes  as  wildlife  viewing,  photography,  archeology,  ecological
observation  and backpacking.   However,  because boating  or rafting  is  the
usual means  of  travel in the study  area  outside Cape  Krusenstern,  it is
convenient to  use  boating as  the  recreational activity  common to  all  such
visitors.    Other major  recreational use includes hunting, fishing and visiting
Cape Krusenstern  National Monument.   Again, it  is  not  unusual for visitors
to engage in more  than one activity,  for example, sport fishing while on a
boating trip.

Boating

The Noatak  River  accommodates  the  greatest  number of boaters  using  the
primary  study  area.   Data collected from  area guides and air  taxi  services
suggest  that  up to 200 non-residents  may utilize the Noatak  for  recreational
boating  each  year.   Most  boaters disembark  before  leaving the  Noatak
National  Preserve;  the rest continue on the  river  to  the  village of Noatak.
Few boaters  continue  beyond  the village  because  of  the usual  high  winds
over the flats.

Boaters commonly take  a chartered plane from Kotzebue,  Ambler or Settles to
a  gravel  bar  landing   site on one  of the  Noatak  River  tributaries.    For
approximately $1,600 per  person, a  licensed guide will provide  a 14-day trip
with all  gear included.  Sport fishing  is allowed,  and  with  proper licensing,
sport hunting is allowed within the  Noatak Preserve.

Hunting/Fish ing

Non-resident  participation is  often  limited  to  professionally  guided hunting
and  fishing trips.   Licensed guides  use the project area primarily for hunt-


                                   IV - 71

-------
ing sheep,  bear, moose  and  caribou;  and for Arctic char,  Arctic grayling
and chum salmon fishing.   Approximately 150 people were flown into the area
in 1982,  fishermen outnumbering  hunters two to one.   Costs for guided  trips
range  from  $700 a  day for fishing up to an average  of  $4,800 for a single
game  hunt.   Some  local  residents  hunt  and  fish  for  recreation,  and cabin
and tent camp facilities also exist in the area.

ADF&G data  for  Game  Management  Unit 23 show total harvests of 680 caribou
in 1981-82 and 1,038 caribou  in  1982-83  (Ott, 1983).  The large  majority of
these  is  taken  by residents.  However, game  biologists  estimated that up to
4,000   caribou  may  actually  have  been harvested  from  Unit 23  (Cominco
Alaska,  Inc.,  1983b).   This  discrepancy  between reported and  probable
caribou  harvesting  indicates  that game harvest  records  probably do not
accurately represent the take.  Additional ADF&G  data  reported between 1962
and 1981  show the  total average  annual game  harvest  included 17 Dall  sheep
and 23 bear.  Moose harvest records are incomplete for  Unit 23,  but three
years   of  data  show a  yearly average  of 71  moose  taken from the Noatak,
Kobuk, Kukpuk, Kivalina  and Wulik  River  areas.   ADF&G records from 1982
show  a total fish harvest  of about  2,060  from  the Noatak,  2,840  from the
Kobuk, 805  from the Wulik  and  3,660 from  all other rivers  in Unit 23.   It is
often  difficult  to distinguish between  recreational harvest  and subsistence
harvest,  so harvest data may not  accurately reflect type of  use.   It is evi-
dent however,  that  a great deal  of resident hunting and fishing takes place,
and  that subsistence  use   greatly exceeds recreational  activities  (Cominco
Alaska, Inc.,  1983b).

Cape  Krusenstern National Monument

Cape  Krusenstern National  Monument was established,  and is  to be managed,
for the following  purposes:

     0 To protect  and interpret a  series  of archeological sites that depict
       every known cultural period in  Arctic Alaska.

     0 To provide for  scientific  study  of the process of human population of
       the area  from the Asian continent.

    0 To preserve and  interpret evidence of prehistoric and historic Native
       cultures.

     0 To protect habitat for seals and  other marine animals.

     0 To protect habitat  for, and populations of,  caribou  herds and other
       wildlife, and fish resources.

     0 To protect the  viability of subsistence  resources.

Park  Service statistics  estimate  1982  Cape  Krusenstern  users  at  10,200
people.   This  number  was derived  by  noting  snowmobile  and  three-wheel
vehicle tracks, periodic aerial surveys, reviewing camp records and conduct-
ing personal  interviews.   However, since the winter trail between  Kotzebue
and Kivalina  passes through  Cape Krusenstern,  this  number is assumed to
reflect largely  resident traffic.   Local  residents  and air taxi  service person-
                                  IV - 72

-------
nel  indicated  that few,  if  any,  non-residents visit  Cape  Krusenstern for
recreational purposes  as  there  are no rivers adequate for boating and sport
hunting is not allowed.   NPS  representatives estimate that only two percent
of users  currently visit  the  Monument for  recreational  purposes  (Shaver,
personal  communication).
                                  IV - 73

-------
	Chapter V
Environmental Consequences

-------
                   V.  ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
INTRODUCTION

This section contains the scientific  and analytical basis for the  comparison of
project  alternatives.  Potential  impacts of the components which  are  common
to all  alternatives, and  therefore not dependent upon  selection of a partic-
ular alternative  are  discussed  first on  a  discipline by  discipline  basis.
Beginning  on  page  V-36, the  impacts of each  project alternative are  dis-
cussed on  a  discipline by discipline  basis  where certain components differ for
each alternative.

Since for almost all disciplines  the  impact of  the  No Action  Alternative would
be  the  status quo,  impacts of the  No Action Alternative are  not discussed
for each of  the  individual disciplines.  Rather,  the No Action  Alternative is
discussed  in a  separate  section which deals  primarily  with  the socioeconomic
impacts of no project implementation.   The No Action Alternative would result
from denial of at least one  of the permits  necessary for project development,
or it could result if the  project sponsor  chose not to  undertake the project.

Potential project impacts  on  each  discipline have been  quantified where  pos-
sible.  Qualitative descriptions of effects  are  provided to  identify  differences
in  magnitude,  significance  or  duration  among  alternatives.   Unless noted
differently,  the  discipline criteria  which were used to initially screen project
options,  as discussed in  Chapter  III  (Table 111-5),  are the  same criteria  that
were used to evaluate  the impacts of project components  on  each discipline.

Throughout  the  individual discipline  analyses  references  are  made to mitiga-
tion, monitoring  and  reclamation  measures.   The impacts  discussed for  a
given  discipline assume  implementation of  those  specific measures.  Later in
this chapter  all mitigation,  monitoring and reclamation measures  are briefly
summarized.
COMPONENTS COMMON  TO  ALL ALTERNATIVES

Eight  components  of  the project  are  common  to  each alternative:  the  mine
location, the tailings  pond  in  the  South Fork  of  Red Dog Creek, South  Fork
mill  site,  South  Fork location  for  worker housing,  a campsite housing type,
Bons Creek  water supply  reservoir, diesel  power generation  and year-round
road.   With  the  exception  of the  year-round road,  these common components
are discussed here  together in a separate section  because they are not de-
pendent upon selection of the Preferred Alternative.  They  were  not open to
alternative development either  because their locations  would be  fixed  (e.g.,
                                   V - 1

-------
the mine  location),  or because they  clearly represented the  best  option for
that component.   As  it would not be logical  to  discuss  the  consequences of
the road  unless  it was tied  to a  specific location,  the environmental conse-
quences  of the year-round  road  are  discussed later  in  conjunction with the
location of the transportation corridor  as a component specific to some alter-
natives.   The Component  Specific to  Some  Alternatives  section  (p.  V-36)
discusses environmental consequences of  the three components that differ for
each  alternative,  i.e., the  transportation corridor  location, the  port site
location and the marine transfer facilities.

Vegetation and Wetlands

The mine  area  facilities  (mine and overburden  storage  area, tailings pond,
mill  site, worker  housing,  water supply,  airstrip  and  all associated access
roads) would  directly disturb a total  of  approximately  541 ha (1,336 ac) in
Red Dog  Valley.  The mine, overburden  storage area and supporting access
road  system   would   eventually  eliminate  a  total  of approximately  235 ha
(580 ac)  of ground  cover, including  152 ha (375 ac) of  dwarf shrub tundra
and 83 ha  (205 ac)  of low  shrub tundra.   The tailings  pond  would  cover
approximately  237 ha  (585 ac),  including 68 ha  (168 ac)  of  low shrub tun-
dra,  62  ha (152 ac)  of dwarf shrub tundra  and 107 ha  (265 ac) of sedge-
grass tundra.   Depending on the final contour,  an  additional  8 ha (20 ac) of
open  low  shrubland  may also be disturbed.

Construction of the mill  site, worker housing  structures and  the access road
between  the two would directly disturb 26 ha  (65 ac) of  sedge-grass tundra.
The Sons  Creek water supply reservoir and access road would disturb  about
31  ha  (76 ac)  of  dwarf shrub (mat  and  cushion) tundra.  The airstrip and
associated service  roads  would  disturb about 12 ha  (30 ac),  including 6 ha
(15 ac) of dwarf  shrub tundra,  2 ha (6 ac)  of  open low shrubland and 4 ha
(9  ac) of sedge-grass  tundra.

Because  of the considerable  amount of human  activity associated with a large
scale mining operation, disturbance from  foot traffic,  off-road vehicle traffic
and dust  may  affect additional   acreage of  vegetation  in Red Dog  Valley.
Sensitive plants  such  as lichen species may exhibit a loss  of  vigor caused by
pollutants emitted  at the  mine  site.   There  might  also  be a  loss caused by
pollution  from metal  sulfides in  dust  mobilized in the mining  and transport of
ore.  Some elements  (e.g.  lead) might bioaccumulate in  plant  tissues  (Olson,
1982).   Communities  adjacent to  access roads would  be  contaminated  by any
fuel,  chemical or concentrate spill.   The degree of impact would  depend on
the nature of the site and spill,  time of year and cleanup  procedures (Brown
et  al.,  1980).   The following vegetation types could be indirectly affected by
the project:   low  shrub  tundra; open low shrubland;  dwarf shrub  tundra;
and sedge-grass  tundra.   The  total vegetation and  wetland loss however,
would not be  significant on more than a local basis.

Wetlands  in the mine area  include   sedge-grass  tundra and  open low  shrub
communities.   Regulation  of wetlands  in  most of the area would be  covered
under a  Nationwide   404  Permit,  pending water  quality  certification  by DEC
(see  Appendix  5,   Section  404(b)(1)  Evaluation).   The nationwide permit
would not be  valid  for the  tailings  pond dam or for  the  road from the mine
                                   V - 2

-------
pit to  the dam.   These  discharges of  dredged  or  fill  material  would  be
included in the DA permit review.

Terrestrial Wildlife

The discussion below primarily addresses  four impacts  upon  major  wildlife
species or  groups:   first, direct  habitat loss,  which is the actual physical
destruction of  habitat; second, indirect  habitat loss, which  is the effective
loss of  habitat use  because  of noise,  human  contact or other  disturbance
directly  associated with project construction and operation; third, the effects
on  animal  movements;  and fourth,  construction  impacts.   A  fifth  wildlife
impact,  long-term  increased public  access  to  the  project  area,  is  discussed
separately in  a general  manner under  "Other  Project Impacts"  later  in this
chapter.   It  is also  described more specifically  here for components where
increased access impacts would  likely be of  major significance.

Direct habitat loss  from  construction  of  the mine  area  facilities would total
approximately  541 ha  (1,336 ac).   On a local basis this  loss  could  be signi-
ficant  for  song bird and  small  mammal  species,  but it would not be  signifi-
cant on  a  greater  than local basis.  For  other  wildlife such as  birds of prey
or  larger  mammal  species,  direct  habitat loss  would  not be  significant even
on a local  basis.

Indirect habitat loss,  however,  could  be significant  on  a greater than local
basis.    While  local  song  bird  and small  mammal  populations   would  likely
accommodate to the presence of the  facilities  and  associated  activities,  birds
of prey and  larger  mammals  would  generally  tend to avoid  the area.   The
degree of avoidance cannot be  accurately  predicted.

At  least  two  inactive golden  eagle nests  were identified within  the South
Fork  Valley  (Dames  &  Moore,   1983b),  and  other  raptor  nests  might exist.
Both  nests  are within 1.6 km  (1 mi)  of proposed  mine  area  facilities and
birds  attempting  to   breed there  would  probably  be affected  by  activities
associated  with construction and operation of the  project.  This  disturbance
would  likely  cause  abandonment of  the nests.   The valley might  also serve  as
hunting  territory  for other birds  nesting outside  the valley, thus  indirectly
limiting their  habitat use of the area.

The South  Fork Valley is  generally to the northeast of the currently used
caribou wintering  grounds in  the  lower Kivalina and  Wulik drainages.  This
area was  not used by caribou  during the 1981-82 or 1982-83 winters  (Dames
&  Moore,  1983a).   However,  caribou are  capricious  animals  and the  valley
may have  been used  many times in the  past.   Thus,  development and opera-
tion  of mine facilities in the South Fork Valley  might  have an indirect  impact
upon  caribou  by displacing a  few animals  from this area  during  winter.   The
major  portion  of the  annual post-calving  migration  in July  appears to pass
just to the northwest of  Red  Dog  Valley  and  would probably not be  signifi-
cantly  affected by mine  area  development.   However,  some  animals would
likely have to  alter their movements  to avoid the valley.

Bears,  wolves, wolverines and  foxes would also be impacted  by disturbance
and  human contacts.   While not significant on  a greater than local  basis,
individuals  would  be  displaced  from the general area  unless  attracted  by


                                   V -  3

-------
improper disposal of garbage  or  outright  feeding.   To minimize such attrac-
tion,  garbage  collection  sites and  incinerators  would be  fenced using ade-
quately  high,  deep  and  strong  Cyclone-type  "bear proof"  fencing,  and
workers  involved  with garbage disposal would  be instructed  in proper collec-
tion,  handling  and  incineration techniques.   Incinerator wastes and unburn-
able solid  wastes would  be buried  in the tailings pond  to eliminate landfills
and their associated wildlife attraction problems.

Feeding  of animals would be prohibited  and this would be strictly  enforced.
The ADF&G  regulation prohibiting  such  feeding  (5 AAC  81.218)  would  be
posted  conspicuously  throughout  the  camp.   AM   workers  would  receive
environmental training which would  stress the importance of this prohibition,
the usual  consequences  to  the  animals  themselves  from  being fed, and  the
potential  danger  to  employees  (e.g., bear/human  contacts,  rabid  foxes).
These  safeguards of  proper garbage handling, fencing,  feeding prohibition
and worker environmental training  would:  increase  worker  safety by reduc-
ing exposure  to  bears, foxes and other carnivores;  reduce  worker/carnivore
contacts  that  would  detract  from  job  performance;  and  reduce   the  time,
effort  and expense for  the  applicant and/or  ADF&G  to trap,  immoblize and
relocate  nuisance animals,  or to  kill animals in defense of  life or  property.

The mine area facilities  appear to  be near the southern limit of present Dall
sheep  range in the De Long Mountains.   However,  a  group of  five ewes and
lambs  was  reported in the South Fork Valley in June 1982  (Dames & Moore,
1983a).  Development in  the valley  would initially displace most sheep activ-
ity in  the vicinity.   In  time,  depending  upon  human contacts in their pri-
mary mountain  habitats,  sheep might adjust to the project.

Indirect  habitat  loss  in  the South  Fork Valley would not be significant for
moose, muskoxen  or waterfowl.

Construction activities, aside  from  direct  habitat  loss, would  have relatively
little  impact upon song  bird or  small mammal species.  They would displace
larger  mammals to a  greater  degree than during operation of  the  facilities.
This would probably  not be  of  greater than  local  significance, except  pos-
sibly for caribou.

Groundwater Resources

Project impacts  related to groundwater concerns can be  generally inferred
from   established  theories  of  groundwater  movement  in  Arctic  regions.
Groundwater movement in  the project area  is  restricted  by the presence of
permafrost and tightly bedded shales.  Movement becomes  significant only in
thawed substrate such as that  found in thaw bulbs under stream surfaces
and in the active layer  above permafrost during  the summer.   Groundwater
concerns can  be related  to  design  of the  ore zone  runoff collection ditch;
collection of seepage  from  the tailings pond;  and containment of fuel  and/or
chemical spills  in  the  vicinity  of the  mill site.

To control  sediment,  a diversion ditch, possibly lined with  plastic,  would be
constructed between the ore zone  and the main  stem of Red Dog Creek.  In
addition  to  its  specific  purpose of  controlling  sediment,  the ditch  would
likely  intercept much of the natural ore zone seepage presently entering the


                                   V - 4

-------
creek.  If this  were to occur, it  would be  reasonable to assume that mining
activities  would  improve existing  water quality conditions  in the main stem of
Red  Dog Creek  and  downstream.

Some potential  exists  for  seepage from  the  tailings  pond through  the abut-
ments or  foundation of the  dam embankment.  Although the highly fractured
shale is currently impermeable due to  ice-filled  fractures, permeability  and
resultant  seepage rates might increase  should these fractures thaw during
construction  and operation of the pond.  A  seepage control facility would be
included  as  part of the  tailings  pond  embankment construction  and  would
largely  eliminate the risk  of seepage entering Red Dog  Creek.  Any seepage
intercepted would be pumped back into the tailings pond.
Fuel or chemical spills  would  pose a high risk for groundwater contamination
because  of  the  shallow  water table  depth   in the  project area.   Although
groundwater   resources are  not  significant,  soils  containing groundwater
serve as  conduits for  contaminant migration  to nearby  streams.  The  travel
time between  a  spill  site and  nearby  streams  would  depend on the depth of
the  thawed  layer,  soil  permeability, hydraulic gradient and  travel  distance.
Significant spills  could cause surface  water contamination  within days or
weeks  following the spill occurrence.   However,  the most likely location for
potential  spills  would  be  in  the  tailings pond drainage  area  where no  risk
would  exist  to  streams.   The Spill Prevention Control  and Countermeasure
(SPCC) Plan  (Appendix  2)  would  limit impacts  of  spills  both there and in
other areas.

It should be noted that because  of the presence  of permafrost  at  shallow
depths,  potential  groundwater contamination  likely  would occur only in the
active  thaw  layer and  would  not impact deeper  aquifers as  could occur in
nonpermafrost areas.

Freshwater Resources

Hydrology and Water Quality
A  description  of the  water  balance  of the tailings pond was required to
determine the quantity and  quality of  water that  would  enter the tailings
pond so that pond capacity  and treatment requirements  could  be established.
The average  annual  water  balance  for  the  tailings  pond  is shown in Table
V-1.

Water quality data  for the  main  stem of  Red Dog  Creek above South  Fork
were analyzed to determine  the  loads of  toxic  metals  coming  from  the ore
zone.   The  analysis was  done for  the  toxic  metals zinc, lead and  cadmium
which would  be of primary  concern.   Ninety-five  percent of  the  metal loads
in the main  stem  above South  Fork come from the  area  bounded  by the ex-
posed  ore zone.  A diversion ditch would  be constructed between Red  Dog
Creek  and the  open  pit to  collect runoff from the mine area.   Since approx-
imately  10 percent of  the  area of exposed ore occurs across  the  creek from
the  proposed diversion ditch, the ditch  would have  the potential to intercept
about 85  percent  of the total toxic  metal loads.   This would  represent a 75
percent reduction of zinc, lead and  cadmium  loads reaching Ikalukrok Creek.
                                  V  - 5

-------
                                Table  V-1
                     TAILINGS POND WATER BALANCE
          Source
Surface runoff and net
  precipitation on pond
Net mill discharge to pond
Mine drainage pumped to pond
Water trapped in tailings
Volume of water displaced
  by dry tailings
Free water on top of tailings
Volume of tailings and water
  after treatment
Treated water (annual average)
May to October discharge
  (six  months)
Initial  Production
	Phase
H/mirt
                                                       Expanded Production
                                                              Phase
 6,529
   878
   594
   314

   450
 7,687

 1,014
 7,123
14,246
gal/min

 1,725
   232
   157
    83

   119
 2,031

   268
 1,882
 3,764
£/min

 6,529
 1,514
 1,188
   655

   946
 8,577

 1,805
 7,718
15,436
gal/min

 1,725
   400
   314
   173

   250
 2,266

   477
 2,039
 4,078
If  the diversion  ditch  were fully  effective  at  collecting  the  ore  zone runoff,
it  would annually  divert  54 Mg  (60 tons)  of  zinc,  1.8  Mg  (2 tons) of lead
and  0.4 Mg  (0.5  ton) of  cadmium  to  the tailings pond during  the  initial
phase  of production.   This would represent an annual flow of 594  £/min (157
gal/min) of water containing 87 mg/£ of  zinc, 3 mg/£ of  lead and 0.8 mg/£ of
cadmium to the pond.   Although the ditch  might  not  be completely  effective
at  diverting these toxic metal loads initially,  eventually the open pit  would
reach  across  Red  Dog  Creek,  and  the  entire  stream would  be  diverted
around the  open  pit  or  isolated  from   ore contact during mine  operation.
With this  diversion,  a  95  percent reduction in toxic metal  loads to  Red Dog
Creek above  the South Fork might  be   attained.   A  monitoring program  on
Red  Dog  Creek  at its  mouth would allow  determination of  improvements  in
water quality as  the  open  pit  enlarged.
The   drainage  area  to  the tailings  pond  would  be  7.12  km2  (2.75  mi2).
Approximately  1.8  km2 (0.7  mi2)  of  drainage would  be  diverted  to Bons
                                  V -  6

-------
Creek  to avoid having  to treat  additional  clean  water and  to  replace water
removed  from  the  Sons  Creek water supply  reservoir.   The  tailings  pond
water surface  area would  eventually  reach  2.6 km2  (1.0  mi2).   Precipitation
over the drainage  area  would be 64  to 71 cm/yr  (25 to 28 in/yr).  Evapora-
tion  from either  water or land would  be  15 to 23 cm/yr (6 to 9 in/yr).  Net
runoff would  be 48  cm (19  in)  or 0.015 m3/s/km2  (1.4  ft3/s/mi2) or 6,529
£/min (1,725 gal/min).

EPA  regulations  issued  in December  of 1982 established  discharge limitation
New  Source  Performance  Standards  (NSPS)  for  ore mining and  processing
facilities  (40 CFR  440).   The standards that specifically apply  to  the  Red
Dog  facility include no discharge of  process (mill)  wastewater,  restriction  of
discharge to net precipitation over evaporation from the  mine  and mill areas
during the mine life, and  limitations on mine drainage.   Specific requirements
for metals and  other  parameters in discharged  waters also apply (Table V-2).

The  allowable  discharge  (net precipitation)  is  determined for  an  annual
volume of precipitation and  evaporation,  not the  excess that may occur over
a few  days or weeks.  Short-term  excesses  would be handled by the  free
board of the facility.  Both  precipitation and  evaporation vary from  year  to
                                Table V-2
                 TREATED WATER QUALITY PROJECTIONS
Parameter
Zinc (Zn)
Lead (Pb)
Cadmium (Cd)
Copper (Cu)
Mercury (Hg)
Total suspended
solids (TSS)
pH (units)
Typical Case
(mg/£)
0.86
0.010
0.020
<0.015
<0. 00005
4.6
10.5
Worst Case
(mg/£)
1.87
0.015
0.020
<0.015
<0. 00005
4.5
10.5
1 Day
EPA Standard1
(mg/£)
1.50
0.600
0.100
0.300
0.002
30.0
6.0 to 9.0
30-Day
EPA Standard1
(mg/£)
0.75
0.300
0.050
0.150
0.001
20.0
6.0 to 9.0
1 EPA  Standards from 40 CFR 440.l04(a)  Mine Drainage Standards.
                                  V  - 7

-------
year.  Normal  average precipitation and  evaporation  are  used in  determining
net  precipitation  at  a  facility.   Additional  discharge would be  allowed  to
account for  wet years  and heavy snow  packs.   The  volume of  annual  net
precipitation would  be discharged  so that daily discharge  volume over  the
discharge season would  equal  the  total  annual volume of excess precipitation.

At the  Red  Dog project,  as  previously discussed,  some  water would be  im-
ported into  the  basin  for process uses.   Of  this imported  water a  portion
would  be tied  up  in  voids of the settled tailings.   The  remaining  portion
would  be water  that  cannot be  discharged  in accordance  with  the EPA  net
precipitation regulations.   This would  amount  to an  equivalent of  563  £/min
(149 gal/min) accumulation in  the tailings pond.   Reclamation of the  tailings
pond would  not be possible unless dewatering could occur.   Interpretations
by  EPA  indicate  that the  tailings pond could  be  dewatered  through  the
treatment plant after  the  mining  operations  were permanently closed.  This
would  be  regulated  by a  separate  NPDES permit.  Present regulations  would
result  in an  accumulation of water during the mine life.

Net  mill  discharge to  the tailings pond would  include 45 £/min  (12 gal/min)
of domestic  wastewater.   This wastewater  would effectively  be treated   by
conditions  in the tailings  pond.    Bacteria levels in the pond would not  be
significant since dilution,  toxic metal concentrations and  low pH  would lead
to rapid  bacteria die-off.

During  the  initial  five  years of production,  approximately 1,496  Mg/day
(1,650 tons/day)  (dry  weight)  of tailings  would enter  the tailings  pond.
This would  increase to  3,129  Mg/day  (3,450  tons/day) during the expanded
phase  of production.    The  wet  tailings  would  have  60 percent  solids   by
weight, which  would reduce to 70 percent solids  by weight  after settling in
the pond.

The  tailings pond  would  be  built in  stages,  with the  maximum sized dam
constructed  by the fifth  year of  production.  Maximum dam elevation  would
be 289  m  (950 ft)  with the  spillway at 288 m (944.6 ft).   Staging of dam
construction would  allow  for  the  accumulated  volume of dry  tailings,  water
trapped  in  tailings  voids, inflows in  excess of natural runoff, and  the  10-
year  recurrence  24-hour  storm  runoff  event.  A  1.5  m  (5 ft)  freeboard
would  be  maintained  to  prevent  overtopping  during  the probable maximum
flood.

The  Red  Dog   mine  plan  schedule for construction of  the tailings  dam in
stages would consider the influence of  wet years.   During the five-year con-
struction  period,  because of the  limited  capacity of the  tailings  pond,  there
would  be a  significant risk that  if a 50-year recurrence wet year occurred,
the  dam  might be overtopped.  To prevent this, adequate capacity would be
maintained during the  construction period to contain this  event.   Probability
analysis of  Kotzebue annual precipitation  data indicated that a 50-year recur-
rence  would be  approximately 1.8 times the annual mean.    Precipitation in
the  project area (mean  annual  64  cm  [25 in]) would  therefore have a  50-year
recurrence  of  114 cm  (45 in).  Capacity to handle  an additional 51  cm  (20
in)  of  runoff  would  be  maintained  in the  pond at  the  beginning  of each
runoff season  (May).   Treatment  rates  would be  increased when it became
obvious that an  unusually wet year (50-year recurrence interval or greater)


                                   V  -  8

-------
was  in  progress,  and treatment would  continue,  if necessary,  into winter
months  until  the  extra  runoff was treated.   The  increased  discharge of
treated  effluent and  spring melt of  accumulated  icings would further improve
the water quality of Red  Dog Creek  compared to an average year.

The  10-year recurrence 24-hour storm  event at Red Dog  Valley would be at
least  10 cm  (4 in).   This  value  was derived  by using  the  ratio of annual
precipitation at Red Dog  Valley  (51  to 64 cm  [20 to 25 in]) to annual precip-
itation at Kotzebue (21 cm  [8.4 in]) in  order to adjust the Kotzebue 10-year
24-hour storm event which  was 4.3  cm (1.7 in).

Natural   inflows  (South  Fork  and  ore zone runoff)  to  the tailings  pond
(7,114 £/min  [1,882  gal/min])  would mix  with the mill  discharge  and  be
treated  before discharge  to Red Dog Creek.   Discharge would  occur during
the  six-month period  from May to  October  when  the creek  would be  un-
frozen.   Any discharge of treated  water during winter months would not be
expected  to  be of environmental concern  as long as the icing  accumulation
would completely melt in  spring and summer.   The  discharge point would be
on the  main  stem of  Red  Dog Creek 19 m (62 ft)  below the confluence with
the  South  Fork.   The average annual treated  water discharge  over that
six-month  period  would be 14,246  £/min  (3,764 gal/min)  or  0.23 m3/s (8.4
ft3/s).   The treatment facility would be  designed to  handle greater treatment
rates during wet years.

The  High  Density Sludge  (HDS)  process would  be used  to  remove  toxic
metals from the tailings pond  water.  The process would  use  lime treatment
to precipitate  metals  as  hydroxides, and  then  increase the densities of the
precipitated  hydroxides to  give a  sludge with  good  handling  and filtration
characteristics.   The  process plant  would draw feed water from  the  pond,
discharge a clean  effluent to Red Dog Creek and recover the sludge.

In order  to  design the treatment process, the predicted water quality of the
tailings   pond  water  was  forecast.    Table  V-3  shows typical  and  projected
worst case  scenarios  of anticipated  tailings pond water quality as calculated
from baseline water quality data (Dames  &  Moore, 1983a).

Other chemicals used  in  the milling  process may be  present in tailings  pond
water.   IVIost flotation  process  suppressant  reagents  would remain with the
tailings and  would settle  in the tailings pond.   Flotation aids  would remain
with the ore  concentrate.   However, small  fractions  might  accumulate in the
tailings  pond water and might impact treatment plant design.   Projected con-
centrations of the toxic process  chemicals are shown  below:

                                 Typical Case      Worst Case
                                     (mg/l)           (mg/A)
        Free Cyanide  (CM"1)         0.01              0.03

        Total  Cyanide                0.02             0.05

        Xanthate                     0.005            0.01
These  chemicals are oxidized  in the presence of sunlight,  decompose, or form
complexes in conditions that  would be  prevalent  in the tailings pond.   They


                                  V  -  9

-------
                                Table V-3
              TAILINGS POND WATER QUALITY  PROJECTIONS

                        (Assuming  Complete Mixing)
Parameter
Zinc (Zn)
Lead (Pb)
Cadmium (Cd)
Calcium (Ca)
Manganese (Mn)
Magnesium (Mg)
Iron (Fe)
Barium (Ba)
Aluminum (Al)
Copper (Cu)
Mercury (Hg)
pH (units)
Typical Case
(mg/A)
238.0
1.2
2.2
54.0
13.7
15.1
2.3
0.1
0.4
0.1
0.002
4.0
Worst Case
(mg/A)
586.0
1.3
4.0
70.0
17.8
19.4
2.8
0.4
0.7
0.1
0.002
4.0
should, therefore,  not present an  impact.   Treatment plant design would  be
modified  if  necessary  to reduce  effluent  concentrations  of these  chemical
parameters to non-toxic levels.

Pilot  testing  was used to estimate the efficiency  of the treatment  process
(Cominco  Engineering  Services,   Ltd.,  1983a).   Typical  and  worst  case
scenarios of water quality concentrations of the treated effluent are compared
to EPA effluent standards in  Table  V-2.

The  treatment process would  work most efficiently at pH  10.5.  This would
be higher  than  the  EPA pH  limitation of  9.0.   However, since  the natural
surface waters would  usually  be slightly acidic,  a basic  effluent discharge of
pH  10.5 should  serve  as a  buffer and  might  ameliorate conditions down-
                                  V -  10

-------
stream.  In the worst case test zinc would  be the only metal which would not
satisfy  EPA  regulations  for  mine discharge.   The  high concentrations  pre-
dicted  result from  high  zinc  concentrations  in  the  total suspended solids
(TSS) remaining in the effluent after treatment.   In actual practice,  effluent
might  contain  lower TSS  levels or  additional dilution  water  so  zinc levels
might  be  more closely in compliance  with  EPA  standards.   The projected
worst case zinc concentration of 1.87 mg/£  would still  represent  a substantial
improvement  over  natural  conditions (6 to 19  mg/2).

Zinc  found in  pilot test  work  was mostly  in the  form  of  a  finely  divided
precipitate that was not removed totally by  conventional  settling.   Laboratory
tests  using filtered  test effluent indicated the soluble  portion (non-filterable)
was projected to be less than 0.15 mg/H.

In  many  tailings  pond   environments,  additional  surface  runoff  dilution,
aging,  mixing  of  pond  water,  and other  conditions  that  cannot  be  fully
simulated  result  in treatment plant  operations  different  from laboratory
results.  The full  scale operation of the tailings pond  water treatment facility
would allow optimization of the  treatment process.   The tailings  impoundment
would  not  fill  during  the first  years  of operation, so the operators would
have  sufficient time to operate  the treatment plant  in  a  closed loop  (dis-
charging  back  to  the tailings  pond)  until  the  process performance   was
proven.   If in actual on-site,  full scale treatment  tests clarification could not
remove   zinc  to acceptable  concentrations,  other  unit processes  such  as
filtration could be added  to assure  compliance with  EPA standards.

Anticipated effluent  water quality  compared  to pre-mining seasonally occui—
ring  water quality  in Red  Dog Creek  above South  Fork is shown below:
              Parameter
            Zinc (Zn)

            Lead (Pb)
            Cadmium (Cd)
           Effluent (mg/l)
            0.75  to  1.50

            0.010 to  0.015

            0.02
                  Red Dog Creek
                      (mg/l)

                   6.0  to  19.0

                   0.1  to  0.5

                   0.05  to  0.14
A  comparison of anticipated total  annual  loads  to  Red  Dog Creek  before and
during  mining  is  shown  below for downstream of  the confluence of  South
Fork with the main stem of Red Dog Creek:
    Parameter

  Zinc (Zn)

  Lead (Pb)

  Cadmium (Cd)
Pre-mining Condition
 Mg/yr      tons/yr
 66.21

  2.36

  0.77
73.00

 2.60

 0.85
                                               During  Mining Operations
Mg/yr
10.6 to 12.0
0.35 to 0.36
0.24 to 0.48
tons/yr
11.8 to 13.3
0.39 to 0.40
0.27 to 0.53
These  anticipated figures show that lead  and zinc loads would be reduced by
approximately 80 percent and cadmium loads by  50  percent.   Corresponding
                                  V - 11

-------
reductions in  Ikalukrok Creek  would be 75  percent for lead and zinc and 45
percent for cadmium.   Water quality  in  Red Dog  Creek and Ikalukrok Creek
could,  therefore, be significantly improved.

Since the  treated effluent would be  steadily discharged during  a  six-month
period  between  May  and  October (no  winter  discharge),  flows  in Red  Dog
Creek  below the South  Fork confluence would change somewhat  compared to
natural  seasonal conditions as shown below:

                                                 During Mining
                            Natural Condition       Operations
             Season          m3/s      ft3/s     m3/s      ft3/s
          Summer low        0.31       11.0      0.48      17.0

          Storm events      1.42       50.0      1.13      40.0
          Winter            0.03        1.0      0.03       1.0
          Spring            1.13       40.0      0.99      35.0


The  most significant  changes to  flow would  occur during low flow  periods in
summer.   During drought conditions  the treated  effluent could represent 60
to 75 percent of the flow in Red Dog  Creek at the point of discharge below
the South  Fork.  Flows in Ikalukrok Creek  below Red Dog Creek would have
corresponding treated effluent proportions of seven to 10 percent.   This  flow
increase would  be expected to  improve water quality in  Ikalukrok  Creek.

Overflows  of  untreated tailings  pond water  would occur only in  the  highly
unlikely  combination of the following events:

     0   a wet year with a recurrence interval over 50 years;

     0   during  the first five years of construction or the last  year of opera-
        tion;

     0   during  a runoff  event  of  sufficient magnitude  to  also  fill  capacity
        allocated to the 10-year,  24-hour storm;

     0   and when inflow to the tailings pond  exceeded the emergency treat-
        ment capacity of the treatment plant (0.57 m3/s [20 ft3/s]).

Dilution  of such  an  overflow  would  occur from  simultaneous natural  flood
flows in  Red Dog  and  Ikalukrok Creeks.   These  natural  flood flows would
reduce  concentrations   of  lead,  cadmium and TSS  to  levels below  normal
natural  flow  conditions.   The  only  significant concentration  that  would
exceed  normal  natural   flow conditions  would be  zinc.  The concentration of
zinc in tailings  pond overflow  water,  after  dilution  due to precipitation and
local runoff,  would approximate  100  mg/£.   Based on a real  runoff propor-
tion,  dilution of an  overflow by the  time  it reached  the  mouth of Red  Dog
Creek   would  be nine  to  one.   However,  actual  dilution would be  much
greater  since the overflow would be  reduced by the emergency capacity of
the treatment plant.   The highest possible  zinc concentration  at the mouth of
                                  V - 12

-------
Red  Dog  Creek  would therefore be  less than  11  mg/iL.   The  maximum  ob-
served  zinc  concentration  at the  mouth  of  Red  Dog  Creek was 5.0 mg/£
(Dames  and  Moore,  1983a).  However,  higher  winter concentrations  at  the
mouth were known to exist  based on upstream measurements.

At the  mill site, spill hazards  would exist  from the storage and  use  of  mill
process chemicals and oil.   Spillage  control  plans and  rapid  response to
spills would  be  the  primary mitigative measures utilized.  Appendix 2 (SPCC
Plan) outlines the proposed draft plan for spill reaction.

If  the  dam foundation were to thaw there would be a potential for  dam seep-
age through  cracks  and fissures in the foundation  rock.   A seepage contain-
ment dam  and pumpback  system  would be  installed downstream of the  dam to
pump back any  seepage to the tailings pond without significant impact.

To protect the  water  quality of streams during construction,  an erosion  and
sediment  control plan  would  be followed.   This  plan  would describe  pro-
cedures for removal  of tundra vegetation, topsoil stockpiling and reestablish-
ment of vegetation on  cleared areas.  Sediment would be controlled  in cleared
areas by  sedimentation ponds.  These ponds would be constructed  in the  mill
and  accommodation areas,  and would  be designed  to retain runoff from a 10-
year  recurrence 24-hour  storm  event.   After construction was  completed,
runoff would be directed  to the  tailings pond.

Water quality protection  in  the  vicinity of the worker accommodations,  air-
strip  and  access  roads  would  require  control of sediment during construc-
tion,  and  revegetation  of disturbed areas as soon as possible after construc-
tion  was  completed.   Spill  hazard  control  procedures for these  areas  are
described  in  the SPCC Plan (Appendix 2).

The  Bons  Creek water  supply  would be  used for mill operations, domestic
purposes  and for dust suppression.   Since  1.8  km2  (0.7 mi2)  of  the  South
Fork drainage would be directed to Bons  Creek,  this drainage  would  have a
net gain in water.   An annual average of 1,703 2/min (450 gal/min) would be
directed to Bons Creek  via diversion  ditches and  1,136  £/min (300 gal/min)
would  be  pumped back  for use  in  mine operations.   Flows in  Bons Creek
below the  reservoir  would  be  reduced during  low flow periods and increased
during  high  flow periods.   Reductions to flow in Dudd Creek where it enters
Ikalukrok   Creek  would  be  approximately  two  percent  during   low   flow
periods.  There would be no  significant changes to water quality.

Biology

     Invertebrates

Operation  of the mine  and tailings pond is  expected to decrease  the naturally
occurring   metals content of  Red Dog Creek.   Depending on the  amount of
metals   reduced,  the  chemical  speciation of  the  remaining metals, and  the
concentration  of residual metals from past  deposition,  benthic  production
could increase in the main  stem of  the creek.   Sensitive taxonomic groups
presently   absent  from the most degraded  areas  (Nematoda,  Neptageniidae,
Tubificidae  and  Ostracoda)  could return,  and  presently  depressed numbers
increase.   However,  this  potential increase in benthic production would
                                  V - 13

-------
probably not have a significant beneficial impact on Ikalukrok Creek  fisheries
because of the offsetting  loss of benthic habitat from the South Fork of Red
Dog  Creek.

Construction of the tailings pond  in  South  Fork Valley would remove 83  per-
cent of the creek, or  approximately  5.3 km  (3.3 mi)  of clear water, gravel-
bottomed  stream  habitat.   Benthic macroinvertebrate  production  is  moderate
in this  stream,  with  densities approximately  half of those found  in  the  most
productive streams  of  the project area (Dames & Moore,  1983a).   While the
removal of this stream  section would represent a significant benthic habitat
loss  to the  entire  Red  Dog  Creek  system (12 percent),  direct  impacts  to
downstream fish  species  in terms  of  reduced food availability are negligible.
Closer and  more productive drift  food  sources  in the  North  Fork of  Red Dog
Creek  and Ikalukrok Creek should  not  be affected by  the South  Fork tailings
pond.

Construction  of  a water supply  reservoir on  Bons  Creek  would  result  in
temporary  decreases in the downstream benthic productivity of Dudd Creek
due  to  altered stream  flows and  increased  sedimentation.   Flow changes may
affect  overall productivity in  Dudd Creek, but should not result in  any sig-
nificant changes  in  Ikalukrok Creek  fisheries.   Bons Creek  presently contri-
butes  a relatively small portion  of  the total  Ikalukrok  Creek system  flow.

During  the construction of mine area  facilities, sediment  loads may increase
in Red Dog  Valley  streams.   If care were taken  to  control  or treat erosion
with  diversion  ditches,  sedimentation   basins  and  revegetation  techniques,
construction  impacts would be minimal  and transitory.   However,  if erosion
were not  controlled,  benthic  productivity would decrease, especially in  clear
water  streams (tributaries  of the  South  Fork and  main  stem of  Red Dog
Creek)  located adjacent to project components.

     Fish

Currently  Red  Dog  Creek, and  perhaps  part  of  Ikalukrok  Creek below the
confluence of  Red Dog  Creek,  are  toxic  to  fish  at  most times  of the  year.
Toxic  metal  loadings to  Red  Dog  Creek would  decrease as a result  of diver-
sion ditch construction at the mine and water treatment.   The combination of
a  possible significant  improvement of  water  quality  in  Red  Dog Creek,  and
the  potential that a  chemical  barrier  currently exists in   Ikalukrok Creek,
could  lead  to the  utilization  of  the  upper  Ikalukrok  Creek by  char  and
salmon,  as  well  as  utilization  of Red Dog Creek  by  grayling,  char  and
salmon.   This has raised the concern  for both Red  Dog Creek and  Ikalukrok
Creek  that  metal  accumulation in  fish tissue could  increase  and  thereby
affect humans consuming these fish.
Baseline studies indicate  that even with high metal  loadings occurring at the
present time, only cadmium, zinc  and  copper accumulate  in  fish  tissue.  With
decreased  metal  loadings  expected,   it would   be  highly unlikely for other
metals  to emerge as fish tissue contaminants.   This is because in the  lower
metal  loadings scenario  predicted, natural metal chelation*  and  precipitation
mechanisms  would  occur  as  they do now, but closer  to the  source.   These
chelation  and  precipitation mechanisms are currently overloaded in  Red  Dog
 *  Defined  in Glossary.

                                   V  - 14

-------
Creek  and  at the  present  time  occur over  a relatively  short  distance  in
Ikalukrok  Creek.   Long-term exposure of  fish  to waters  with  low  metal
concentration  levels  currently exists in Ikalukrok  Creek downstream of Red
Dog  Creek,  and  only  small  metal  accumulations  in  fish  tissues  have been
found.  Further,  cadmium,  zinc and copper vary seasonally in tissue concen-
tration,  which  indicates  that metals  excretion occurs  when  fish are  not
directly  exposed to metals  (i.e.,  during migration  or other movements away
from the metal source).  This same migration or movement phenomenon would
occur in the mining  situation and  should not  allow increased accumulation of
any of the three metals.
Presently,  no guidelines exist which set dangerous  levels for  zinc,  copper  or
cadmium in fish  tissues used for human consumption.   Zinc  and copper  are
essential trace elements for  humans, whereas cadmium  is  considered  a toxic
chemical to  humans.    Cadmium   would have  to be ingested  at  a rate  of
350 (jg/day  for  50 years to  reach a critical  poisoning  level  (Reeder et al.,
1979).   Based on  the  highest fish  tissue levels of cadmium  reported  in  the
baseline study, a  person  would   have  to  daily  ingest  6.4 kg  (14.1 Ib) wet
weight (1.1 kg [2.4 Ib] dry  weight) of the  muscle tissue of char for cadmium
poisoning to occur in 50 years.  Based on the average  tissue levels found in
the study,  a person  would  have to daily  ingest  over 11.6 kg  (25 Ib) wet
weight  (2.0  kg  [4.5  Ib]  dry weight)  of char  for 50  years  before  critical
levels  were reached.   These high consumption  rates,  especially  considering
the seasonal  usage of these  fish, clearly demonstrate that the  normal  inges-
tion  of  fish  containing  small  amounts  of cadmium should not be of concern.

Initial  development of the mine site would include  establishment of collection
ditches,  preproduction  stripping  and road construction.   Blasting activities,
initial  stripping  and  road  construction should  not impact Red Dog  Creek.
Collection ditches  and berms would be  constructed quickly so that suspended
solids escaping  to  Red Dog Creek would be low.  The  effect of any increase
of small suspended solids on  fish  should not  be detectable.

Eventual diversion of the main stem of Red Dog Creek around the ore body
would be expected to cause  increased  suspended solids loadings during con-
struction and upon  initiation of discharge in the new channel.   This increase
would be unavoidable and might cause  some short-term  downstream impacts on
fish.   Suspended  solids loading  during construction  and initiation of  dis-
charge  in the new channel  would  be analogous to suspended solids associated
with a  major  storm event.   Any effects would  be felt primarily within Red
Dog  Creek  with  limited amounts  of fine sediment reaching Ikalukrok Creek.
Increased suspended solids loadings from this source subsequent to stabiliza-
tion  should only occur during the first subsequent annual high flow periods
and should not cause undue stress to fish populations.

Reclamation of all  disturbed  areas  should occur as soon as  practicable after
the completion  of  construction activities. This procedure  would aid substan-
tially  in  the  reduction  of  suspended solids   loadings  to  surface waters.
Diversion  and collection ditches  should also  undergo some  reclamation  to
assist  in  erosion  control.   In addition,  it might  be necessary to armor  or
otherwise protect these ditches from erosion.
                                  V  -  15

-------
Operation of the mine, other than  the  implementation of the creek diversion,
should not  cause rapid changes in water  quality.  Surface water  collection
ditches for the open  pit should continue to  capture suspended solids.   Metals
entering  Red  Dog  Creek should  diminish over  time  as  ore removal occurred
and groundwater flow to the creek  was  altered.

Post-mining pit  reclamation  should ensure  improved  water quality  and thus
fisheries values.  The remaining pit  would be flooded to stop further  oxida-
tion  of  low  grade mineralization.  It  is presumed  that  flooding of the  pit
would  be carried out in  a manner that would maintain adequate  downstream
flow  during  the period of  filling.  This  approach would  protect  downstream
fish resources.

The  tailings pond  would be located  on  the  South Fork  of  Red  Dog  Creek.
No fish  have been  found  in  this  creek.   Construction  of  the  tailings dam
would  result in  some unavoidable increases  in  suspended  solids.   These  in-
creased  loadings should  be of  short duration.   Because  of the  distance  to
fish  bearing  streams and  rapid stabilization of  disturbed areas, these  in-
creased  loadings should have limited effects on  downstream fish.  The  diver-
sion  of clear water surface  runoff  to Sons  Creek could  contribute some sedi-
ment  to  the  water   supply  reservoir,  but  should  be  of  short  duration  if
proper protection works were employed  in the ditches.  This should cause  no
discernible downstream effect in Bons Creek below the pond.

Water leaving the tailings pond would  be treated  to  adequate  levels to pro-
tect  downstream fish resources.   In the extreme event when  treatment was
not possible  (as discussed under  Hydrology  and Water  Quality;  see page
V-12),  surface  runoff would  assist in  dilution  of tailings pond  overflow  to
prevent  or reduce downstream effects on  fishery resources.

Alteration  of the  hydraulic regime  in both  Bons  Creek (and  thus  Dudd
Creek)  and  Red Dog Creek (and thus  Ikalukrok  Creek)  would  be possible.
These  changes  would be  minimal  in  Dudd Creek where  low flows  would  be
reduced  by two  percent  and high  flows  would  be slightly increased.   These
changes  would be no more than expected annual variation in stream flow and
would  not  affect downstream   fishery  resources.   Stream flow  in  Red Dog
Creek  would  be decreased  a  small amount,  but  since no fish occur  in the
main stem  of this creek there  would  be  no  impact on this aquatic  resource.
The  effects  of  this  small  change  on  the larger  Ikalukrok  Creek  would  be
small  and  should not affect this creek's aquatic  resources.   Instream flow
studies have been  carried  out  in both  Dudd  and Ikalukrok Creeks.  Further
interpretation of these data  could be employed  to  mitigate any effects  of
hydraulic changes.

Construction of  the  mill  site  and  worker  housing facilities should  have  no
effect  on fish  as the facilities  would be  located away from most  streams and
drainage would  be diverted to  the  tailings  impoundment.   The  same would  be
true of  the operation and reclamation  phases of the  mine.   The  greatest
effect  on  local  fish populations  would likely  be  the  result  of  increased
fishing  pressure from mine employees.  This impact could  cause significant
depletion of local fish populations  and probably  would require some  regula-
tion of sport fishing  effort.
                                   V - 16

-------
Construction and  operation of the  Bons Creek water  supply reservoir should
cause  minimal  hydrologic  regime interruption.   Fish  are  not  present at or
above  the  reservoir site, so the only expected impact would be  some increase
in suspended solids during  construction  of the  dam.   This impact should be
small  because of the distance downstream to  known fish  populations and the
short-term nature of the increased  suspended solids loadings.

Reclamation of the  water  supply  reservoir might take place upon  abandon-
ment,  depending  on the wishes  of the  landowner (NANA)  and federal  and
state  agencies.   Cominco is  committed to satisfactory  resolution  of a  reclama-
tion  procedure,  if necessary, during  the life of the mine  (see Appendix 1,
Reclamation Plan).

Air Quality

Because  of its  remote  location,  the project area is designated  by  EPA as a
clean   air,  or  "attainment  area",   for  the pollutants sulfur  dioxide (SO2),
nitrogen  oxides  (NO   [as NO2]),  carbon monoxide (CO),  particulate matter
(PM),  ozone (O3)  and  lead  (Pb).   This means  that the area has  attained
(i.e.,  is  better  than)  the  National  Ambient Air Quality Standards  (NAAQS)
for these  pollutants.    The  NAAQS are  shown  in  Table V-4.   Any project
must  meet these standards  before  it  can be permitted.   The  Red  Dog mine
area facilities would emit all  six of these  pollutants.

Even  if a  project would otherwise  meet these standards, if any of the indi-
vidual  pollutants would be  emitted above  certain  rates,  pollution  control
equipment  qualifying as Best Available  Control  Technology (BACT)  must be
installed  to  minimize  that  pollutant's  emission  rate.   The EPA  Significant
Emission  Rates are shown in Table V-5.

Potential  emissions  in  Red  Dog  Valley  were  analyzed to  determine  whether
any would  cause  or  contribute to pollution in  violation of any:

     0  National Ambient Air  Quality Standards  (NAAQS); or,

     0  Prevention  of  Significant  Deterioration  (PSD)  increment concentra-
       tions (SO2 and PM only).

Major  point sources (e.g.,  power  plant) and nonpoint sources  (e.g., roads)
of emissions  in  Red Dog Valley would  be the  mine area,  the mill crusher and
dryer  facilities,  and the diesel power plant (Table V-6).   Gaseous  emissions
from the  open pit  mine would come from diesel-powered equipment such as
ore haul  trucks, dozers and front-end  loaders.   The primary source of dust
emissions  would be  from trucks hauling  ore from the  mine.  Other sources of
dust  emissions  would  include drilling  and blasting  operations, ore  loading
operations, ore and waste  rock  unloading, and losses  from the  waste rock
stockpile  due to wind  erosion.   Dust  particulate emissions would  be minor
from  blasting  and  ore  production  operations  if  these  operations  were re-
stricted  in strong wind and  water  sprays were used to  control dust in the
pit staging areas.  The floor  of  the  pit would be relatively sheltered from
wind most  of the year.
                                  V  -  17

-------
                               Table V-4

        NATIONAL AMBIENT  AIR QUALITY  STANDARDS (NAAQS),
ESTIMATED PREVENTION OF  SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION INCREMENTS,
            AND WORST CASE PROJECTED CONCENTRATIONS

Pollutant and
Averaging Time
Sulfur Dioxide
3-hr
24-hr
Annual

NAAQS
(|jg/m3)

1,300
365
80

PSD Increment
(ug/rn3)1

512
91
20
Worst Case
Projected
Concentrations
(Mg/m3)1

80
20
17
     Nitrogen Dioxide
        Annual              100
     Carbon Monoxide
        1 hr             40,000
        8-hr             10,000
     Particulate Matter3
        24-hr               150
        Annual               60
     Ozone
        1 hr                235
     Lead
        Calendar Quarter    1.5
NE2

NE
NE

37
19

NE

NE
74

NE
NE

13
13

NE

1.2
     1  Source:  Dames & Moore, 1983c.
     2  Has not been established.
     3  Fugitive  particulate matter emissions were not  included in
        calculations of  concentrations.
                                 V  -  18

-------
                                 Table V-5
                    EPA SIGNIFICANT  EMISSION RATES
Pollutant
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)
Nitrogen Oxides (as NO2)
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Particulate Matter (PM)
Ozone (O3)
Lead (Pb)
Significant
Mg/yr
36.3
36.3
90.7
22.7
36.3
0.5
Emission Rate
tons/yr
40.0
40.0
100.0
25.0
40.0
0.6
Dust  controls  would be  most effective  on the ore  haul  road and  the  waste
rock  storage  piles.   Adequate  controls on  the ore haul road could  be  water
sprays  (once  or twice  a day in dry weather), and an annual application of a
suitable  stabilizer.   Dust  generation  would be  a potential problem 30  to  60
days  a year,  primarily  from June through August.

Control of dust from the waste rock  storage  pile would  require aerodynamic
shaping  and  orientation  to the  prevailing  wind  (north to  south).   Wind
screen berms  of rock and water sprays could be  used to  protect fine grained
material.   Revegetation would be attempted on those areas which had reached
their  final  configuration.

Significant point sources of  emissions at the mill  site would  include concen-
trate  dryers,  the  crusher baghouse and the power plant (Table V-6).   Minor
and insignificant sources would be from  utility and passenger  vehicles, fuel
storage and aircraft operations.

Based on  the  significant emission  rates  in Table V-5, the  Red Dog project
would  be  a significant  pollutant source  for  SO2,  NO ,  PM,  O3 (calculated
from  volatile  organic  compound  [VOC]   emissions)  and  Pb,  but   not  CO.
Therefore,  BACT  would  have  to  be  demonstrated  for  all five pollutants.

The type of power  plant engines  proposed for this project would be capable
of meeting BACT requirements.   NO   emissions would  be  within the proposed
                                  V  -  19

-------
                                                                         Table V-6
ESTIMATED SOURCES AND AMOUNTS OF EMISSIONS FROM PROJECT COMPONENTS1
EMISSION SOURCES
Power Plant
Zinc Concentrate Dryer3
Lead Concentrate Dryer3
Barite Concentrate Dryer3
Crusher Baghouse
Drilling, Blasting
ro Ore Loading and Hauling
O
Crusher Feed
Waste Ore Stockpile
Fuel Storage
TOTAL

Mg/yr
5.2
25.2
6.6
6.6
0.0
0.0
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
44.9
S02
(tons/yr)
5.7
27.8
7.3
7.3
0.0
0.0
1.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
49.5
N0x (as N02)
Mg/yr
318.0
315.1
82.6
82.6
0.0
0.0
3.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
801.9
(tons/yr)
350.5
347.3
91.1
91.1
0.0
0.0
4.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
884.0
Mg/yr
9.3
45.5
12.0
12.0
0.0
0.0
2.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
81.5
CO
(tons/yr)
10.3
50.2
13.2
13.2
0.0
0.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
89.9

Mg/yr
0.2
18.2
4.8
4.8
4.4
9.2
113.8
0.5
0.7
0.0
156.6
PM
(tons/yr)
0.2
20.1
5.3
5.3
4.8
10.2
125.4
0.6
0.8
0.0
172.7
°3
VOC (as hexane)2
Mg/yr
77.6
377.2
98.9
98.9
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.4
653.3
(tons/yr)
85.6
415.8
109.0
109.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.5
720.2
Mg/yr
0.0
0.9
3.4
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
5.1
Pb
(tons/yr)
0.0
1.0
3.7
0.0
0.2
0.5
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
5.6
1  Source:   Dames & Moore,  1983c

2  Ozone (O3) levels may be calculated from volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions.

3  SO2/ NO  ,  CO and  VOC emissions from the concentrate dryers would originate
   in the power  plant internal combustion engines and would be  ducted to the
   dryers with power plant exhaust gases.

-------
standards  without  modifications.   The recently set New  Source Performance
Standards  (NSPS) for stationary internal  combustion engines (larger  than  560
in3 per  cylinder or  1,500 in3 per  rotor)  require that NO   emissions  not
exceed  concentrations  of  600  ppm.   Satisfying  the NSPS might also satisfy
BACT  requirements.   Meeting  SO2  emission  standards would  require use of
low-sulfur  diesel fuel.   VOC  and  CO could  be  controlled  by proper  main-
tenance procedures.   PM  emissions from  the  dryers would be  controlled with
a high-efficiency particulate collection  system.   Water sprays  would be used
to control  dust  on  access and  ore hauling  roads.   Dust  from the crusher
would  be  controlled by a baghouse.   Lead would  be controlled by the  high-
efficiency  particulate  collection  system on  the dryers.   Details of emissions
control  systems  would  be  provided  through  the  PSD   permitting  process.

PSD  increments are ambient pollutant concentration  limits  which legally define
to what extent pollutant concentrations in  an area are permitted to increase
above  a set baseline  for all  future  time.  The preliminary impact estimates
for the Red Dog  project might be  less than the PSD increments.

Overall air quality impacts of  the  power plant emissions plume  were estimated
using  the  EPA Valley model.    Assumptions  made  included  a  conservatively
low plume  height,  worst  case meteorological  conditions,  and  peak  rate  24-
hour  emission  concentrations.    Results of  the model  estimate indicated that
the most  likely  power plant plume  impact area would still  be in  compliance
with   the  applicable  NAAQS  and  PSD increments  for all  pollutants (Table
V-4).   Thus,  while  the project would  exceed the  EPA  Significant  Emission
Rates  and  require  BACT, impacts to  the  area would not be  significant  be-
cause the overall NAAQS would be met.

The  worst case analysis  discussed  in  the  preceding  paragraphs  did  not
consider a rather infrequent condition important  for protection of the health
of workers.    In  extremely stable  conditions  when  an  inversion  would  be
located immediately  above  the  power  plant  emission  plume, the plume  could
reach  ground  levels  in the vicinity  of the nearby worker  housing  complex.
Because of this possibility,  it would be  important  that the accommodation
complex  be  located  upwind from dominant wind  directions from  the  power
plant,   or  sufficiently  upslope to be  above  a  low lying  inversion over  the
power  plant.   Monitoring  alarms  for  carbon monoxide  installed at  the accom-
modation  complex  would  alert  workers  in  the  event  unusual atmospheric
conditions  caused the  power plant emission plume to move  in  that direction.

Protection  of  air quality  also would  require  proper operation of solid  waste
incinerators.   No visible  dark  or  black  smoke would be permitted.  Refuse
which  could  not  be burned with colorless or white smoke would  be buried in
the tailings pond.

Visual Resources

According  to  the  Visual   Resources   Management  (VRM)  Program,  Red  Dog
Valley was generally  rated as having  high  visual quality  with  a  variety class
rating of common.   However, the remoteness  of the mine  area  limits the num-
ber and sensitivity of potential viewers.   It should be  kept in  mind that all
mine area  facilities would  be located on private land and the VRM Program as
                                   V - 21

-------
a  management  system  is  not applicable  to  private  land.   The discussion
below, therefore, would  be primarily of benefit to  NANA as the landowner in
its joint management of the project.

The  mine  site would  be  located  within  a  partial retention  Visual  Quality
Objective  (VQO) zone.   This designation  normally  permits  management activ-
ities  which  would  not  dominate  the  existing  landscape.   Activities  which
would  introduce  different form, line, color or texture would be  acceptable as
long as they would remain  secondary to the  visual  strength of the landscape.
Activities  which  would  repeat the form,  line, color or texture of the land-
scape would  be compatible  with the partial retention objective.

The  landscape  character  of  the  mine  site  area  has a moderate ability to
absorb visual  changes.   The visual changes which would be associated with
the development include surface  rock  excavation  and road construction be-
tween  the  mine and mill sites.  The proposed changes  would be viewed pri-
marily by  construction  and mine related workers at or arriving at  the site.
Only  a small  proportion  of these  viewers  would  be expected to  have a con-
cern for scenic quality.

The  mine  site following surface mine  excavation would appear  as an oblong
depression  approximately  152 m (500  ft)  deep, 305 m  (1,000  ft)  wide  and
853 m  (2,800 ft) long.  Water  and  runoff  would  collect at  the base of the
depression.

The  tailings pond  would be  located in an area characterized by gently  slop-
ing hills  and  valleys.   Variety class at the  pond  site  was rated as  common
due to the typical character  of the area  landscape.   Few visitors other than
mine  related personnel  would be expected to  view  the tailings  pond.  Due to
this  consideration  and  the likelihood that few of  the viewers  would have  a
specific  concern  for  scenic  qualities,  the  tailings  pond  site  was  rated as
having a low  sensitivity  level.

The VRM system visual  quality objective  for  the tailings pond  site has been
designated  as partial retention.   Again,  to  adhere to the visual objectives,
proposed  changes should not  visually dominate the  area landscape.

The visual  absorption  capability of the area is  moderate owing to the gentle,
consistent  slopes  surrounding  the  proposed  tailings ponci.   During project
operation,  the tailings  pond would  be visible from  aircraft flying directly
overhead.    Proposed  pond   reclamation   activities   would  include  regrading
waste  rock,  capping the surface  and  revegetating  the  slope.   The resulting
color  and  textural changes  would be  secondary  to the existing  expansive
landscape  character.    The  approximately 46 m (150 ft) high  dam  and flat
surface of the  reclaimed pond would  remain visible  and create a contrast  in
line  and  form to  the  surrounding  landscape.   The  level  of contrast,  how-
ever,  would be consistent  with  the partial retention objective.

The mill site, worker  housing site and  airstrip would be located to  the west,
upslope from the tailings  pond  site.   Visual  variety was rated  common for all
three  sites  and  a low  sensitivity level  designation  would  be appropriate.
                                   V  -  22

-------
The  visual  quality  objective for the  three sites would be partial  retention.
The  facilities would  be visible from  aircraft and surrounding hilltops,  how-
ever, they  would be dwarfed by the expanse  of the surrounding landscape.
Visual  changes  would include the construction  of several buildings,  a  narrow
airstrip  and  connecting  access  roads.   Again,  few  scenic  viewers  would
likely  see the  sites since the facilities  would  be  located  in  the  far  back-
ground.

The  visual  absorption  capability of  the  sites  is moderate  due to the gentle
slopes  which characterize the area.  Dark colored  soils would blend with the
background  vegetation.   Reclamation plans  would include disassembling  all
structures to ground  level.   Access  roads and the airstrip  would be  per-
mitted  to return to a natural vegetated  condition.   Evidence of the facilities
eventually would not be visible.

The  water supply  reservoir on Sons Creek  would  be  located on gentle slopes
southwest of the  proposed airstrip.  The partial retention  visual quality ob-
jective assigned to the area would be maintained  and  possibly enhanced  by
the reservoir that could add  aesthetic variety to the landscape.  The reser-
voir  would not  be  removed at the end of  the project unless desired by NANA
or state  agencies.

Sound

Noise impact analysis of the proposed  project  requires  an  inventory of  noise
sources  and noise sensitive  receptors.    Noise  sensitive receptors would  be
people or  wildlife  that  could be adversely  affected.   Noise  sensitive people
would  be basically restricted  to visitors  to  Cape Krusenstern  National Monu-
ment  and, to a lesser  extent,  subsistence hunters who may feel  that  their
traditional hunting  grounds  would  be  adversely affected  by noise.   Wildlife
species most sensitive  to  noise would include caribou,  bears, muskoxen and
nesting raptors.

Noise  emanating from  the open  pit would  not propagate  past surrounding
slopes  and  ridgetops since sound  normally travels in  straight lines.    Noise
sources  would   include  blasting,  dozers,   front-end loaders and  ore hauling
trucks.

Estimated sound pressure  levels  generated  at  mine area facilities are shown
in Table  V-7.    Blasting sound pressure levels  are  normally thought of as
relatively loud noises.   However, blasting noise propagates in  lower frequen-
cies  somewhat like a thunderclap.   Low  frequency sound  of  this type would
usually be tolerable  since  it would  normally occur  at  most only two or three
times a  day.   The other  mine site  sound  sources,  assuming  six or  seven
pieces  of equipment would operate at any  one time, would combine to a sound
level  of  100 dB(A) at  15 m  (50 ft) and  65 to 75  dB(A) at the surrounding
hilltops.   There would  normally be few sensitive  receptors in the vicinity of
the mine other than workers.

Major sound  sources at the mill site, worker housing site,  access roads, air-
strip  and  water supply reservoir  are estimated in Table  V-7.   Assuming a
time  of simultaneous activity, the combined  sound pressure level  would be 66
                                   V - 23

-------
                                Table  V-7
               ESTIMATED SOUND LEVELS GENERATED BY
                MINE AREA EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES
                   Sound Source
         Blasting
         Bulldozers
         Front-End Loaders
         Ore  Trucks
         Primary/Secondary Crushers/
           Grinding Mill
         Diesel-Powered Generators
         Utility Vehicles
         Worker Accommodations
         Aircraft Operations
         For  Comparison:
           OSHA  Regulation
              (15 min exposure)
           Discotheque
           Jackhammer
           OSHA  Regulation
              (8 hr exposure)
           Automobile
              (100 km/hr  [62 mi/hr])
           Typical Outdoor Noise
              (wind, rain, birds)
           Soft Whisper
Sound  Pressure Level
	dB(A)	
  170 @ 91  m (300 ft)
   87 @ 15  m (50 ft)
   90 @ 15  m (50 ft)
   90 @ 15  m (50 ft)

   95 @ 15  m (50 ft)
  100 @ 15  m (50 ft)
   80 @ 15  m (50 ft)
   60 @ 15  m (50 ft)
   95 @ 15  m (50 ft)
  115 (max. allowable)
  110 on dance floor
   95 @ 15 m (50 ft)

   90 @ ear

   71 @ 15 m (50 ft)

   40 @ 15 m (50 ft)
   35 (a  2m  (6 ft)
1  The sound  pressure  level  in decibels  (dB) corresponding to a sound pres-
   sure (P) is compared to a reference level of 20 micropascals.  Sound  pres-
   sures for various frequencies  of noise are weighted by factors (A  weights)
   which account for the  response  of the  human ear.   The  sound  pressure
   level in  dB(A) = 20  Log10 (P/20).
                                  V - 24

-------
dB(A) at a distance of 2.4 km  (8,000 ft) on Volcano Mountain  (Fig.  11-1); a
level  above natural  noise levels.  Beyond the  surrounding hills, sound  gen-
erated by mine  area  facilities and  equipment  would not propagate  at  levels
above those caused  by wind and  rain.

Cultural  Resources

Four  archeological sites  are  located in  the immediate area of the mine  site.
Two of these  could  not  be avoided  during ore removal, and therefore  they
would  be evaluated  for eligibility to the National  Register of Historic Places.
If eligible,  mitigation  actions would  be  included in the Advisory Council  on
Historic  Preservation  (ACHP) commenting procedures covered by a Memoran-
dum of Agreement  concluded among the  State Historic  Preservation Officer
(SHPO), the ACHP and the federal agencies permitting  the  project.

Wherever feasible, road  alignments  and  other  facilities would be designed to
avoid  direct impact  on known archeological sites  determined eligible for the
National  Register.  If  such sites could  not be reasonably avoided, or other-
wise  protected,  recovery  of  data would be accomplished  in  accordance with
the  stipulation  of an  ACHP  Memorandum of Agreement.   Similarly,  sites in
borrow pit areas would  be  avoided if possible;  if not possible,  recovery
operations would  be accomplished pursuant to  an  approved research design.
Provisions would  be made  in the  Memorandum of Agreement for emergency
recovery  operations at sites discovered  during  construction.

Subsistence

Four impacts  on  subsistence  resources  and harvest activities are considered
below:   habitat degradation;  interference with fish  and wildlife  life  cycles or
migration  patterns;   increased   harvest pressures;  and  incompatible  work
arrangements.

Kivalina  and   Noatak   are  the settlements nearest  the project area.   Since
Kivalina  residents rely  more heavily on  a wider  variety of subsistence  re-
sources  (e.g., caribou,  Arctic  char, marine mammals)  present in the project
area,  that community would be  more likely to  experience any adverse impacts
on  the subsistence  resource  base.   However,  Noatak residents also  rely  for
an  important  part of their subsistence  on the fish and  wildlife  resources of
the area.

The  mine site  vicinity possesses little  value  for  subsistence or recreational
fishing and hunting.   There  are no  resident fish  or wildlife  resources of any
importance,  and  this  area  is  at  the  margin  of   use  areas for Noatak and
Kivalina residents.   Based on the assessment of environmental effects of mine
site operations on surface lands and water quality, the mine would not  cause
any material loss  of habitat.

The valley of  the South  Fork of Red Dog  Creek is outside the  prime winter-
ing  grounds for  caribou,  but may  support occasional  winter grazing.   Sub-
sistence  would  be  adversely  affected  if  mine  construction  and  operation
disturbed established  winter grazing  in  a way   that  reduced  the caribou
resources usually available  for harvest  by Kivalina and  Noatak  residents.
                                   V  - 25

-------
Caribou  might also  become subject to increased local  hunting pressure from
employees based  at  the  mine,  though hunting, fishing  and trapping would be
restricted while  workers were at the site.   Presumably,  resident employees
would  be more  inclined to hunt  during off-duty  hours  than  out-of-region
workers.  Since  most of the  resident workers would come from  villages that
do  not  usually  hunt  in  the  Red  Dog area,  any hunting  by them  could  in-
crease  subsistence  harvest  pressure above  present  levels.   The  dynamic
equilibrium  between caribou habitat and migration patterns,  and  herd popu-
lation and  harvest pressure,   is complex.  The net  subsistence outcome from
geographical shifts  in caribou  movements or  from increased  hunting  activity
would not be simple to predict.

There  would  be  potential that employment at the  mine would  have  adverse
effects  on the persistence of  traditional  subsistence  patterns.  Whether  these
effects  materialized  would  depend  in  part  on how  well work schedules and
commuting  patterns  could be  adapted to minimize  conflicts  with  subsistence
requirements.

First, there would be some cause for concern that closer involvement  in wage
employment  and  the  cash economy  might gradually  erode  interest in  subsis-
tence or lessen  subsistence success.  There is  some  suggestive  evidence  to
the contrary in  some recent  sociocultural studies (John Muir Institute,  1983)
which conclude  that regular  but flexible employment can  be compatible  with
continued subsistence participation  and  superior subsistence  success.   The
John  Muir   Institute  study found  a strong  positive  correlation  between high
cash  income and  subsistence  success,  perhaps  because cash income  enables
subsisters to acquire better equipment for their task.

Second,  safe,  efficient  operation  of  the mine would require a  stable,  year-
round work force.  Consequently,  a high level of resident employment would
hold some potential  to  disrupt either traditional  subsistence  patterns  or mine
operations,  especially  during  the  prime periods  in the  annual  subsistence
cycle.   Many of the  subsistence  resources  that  are most important to resi-
dents of the  region are highly  seasonal in  availability.  For  example, the
prime periods  to harvest salmon,  Arctic char and  marine mammals are very
brief, a few weeks  or less each  year.   If  the work rotation preempts  these
opportunities, there would be  some loss  of subsistence  income.

The mining  plan  tentatively  calls  for a two-week  rotation  schedule  for the
on-site  workforce, including employees who  reside in the region.  This would
allow  for subsistence  harvest  participation  during time off.   Also,  it should
be  noted that the availability of  subsistence  resources and the  seasonal sub-
sistence harvest cycle  is not  uniform  throughout  the region's  communities.
This, too,  might allow  some  leeway for  adjusting work  rotations to minimize
conflicts with subsistence.   For the  long run, the coexistence of traditional
subsistence  activities  and employment at the  mine would depend on the flex-
ibility  of work  arrangements  and  the  ability of individual  mine workers  to
retain  and  pass  on  their subsistence skills.   This is an important project
objective for NAN A.
                                  V -  26

-------
Socioeconomics

The proposed  project's socioeconomic consequences would  be largely detei—
mined  by  certain fixed features of  the  project,  e.g., the  isolation  of  the
mine,  port site  and transportation corridor from  existing  settlements,  and
the choice of a transient  campsite  for workforce support  rather than a per-
manent townsite.   Socioeconomic impacts would  also be sensitive to  certain
entrepreneurial  and managerial decisions.  Under terms of the NANA/Cominco
agreement,  NANA  participates  in  decisions  and  policies about design  and
operation of the mine that may affect local interests.  NANA's official posture
strongly reflects its  perception of  the development  concerns and preferences
of the  region's residents.  The NANA/Cominco agreement binds Cominco to
managerial and  labor policies  designed to magnify  positive socioeconomic  im-
pacts  and mitigate  adverse  social  impacts.   For this environmental  conse-
quences assessment,  it was assumed that the terms of this contractual agree-
ment  would govern  the project.   Where the  agreement aims at, but cannot
guarantee, such goals  as  a high level of resident hire, the analysis  relies on
our most  realistic  estimate of project  impacts.

Four  potential  socioeconomic impacts  are  considered below:  regional employ-
ment  and  income;  population  growth  and  migration;  demand  for community
infrastructure;  and  social,  political  and  cultural  stability and autonomy.

Project alternatives  mainly involve  variations in the overland transportation
corridor,   port  site  and  type  of  transfer  facility.   However,  the  project
factors that  critically  affect  socioeconomic  impacts  would be  constant for all
options.  In  terms of the most important socioeconomic impacts,  there would
be no  material difference among the project alternatives.

Regional Employment and Income

The economic impact of the Red Dog project on  the region would stem partly
from  the  new  basic jobs  and  earnings the  project  would  provide residents,
and  partly from  the  stimulus  that  this basic economic  growth would contrib-
ute to the secondary economy.

For purposes of regional  economic  impact analysis,  the Red  Dog project  can
be  usefully divided  into a construction  phase and  a production phase.   The
construction  phase would  cover  the  30-month period during which  the mine
project site and transportation system would be  developed.   As now  planned,
construction  would begin  during the winter of 1985-86 and  be completed  by
the end of 1987  (Fig.  I-2).   The mine would  begin production  by early 1988
and  reach full production by  about 1994.  This assessment  assumes that the
project would proceed  on  schedule.  A  few years'  delay in  the  start of  the
project would postpone but  not materially change  the socioeconomic  impacts.
Cominco's present mining  plan aims at a total annual shipment of 434,450 Mg
(479,000 tons) of combined ore concentrates  during the initial phase of pro-
duction.  Changed market conditions or other  factors  could  raise  or lower
that production  goal.   However, the mining and milling operation could sup-
port higher output with only  marginal added labor.
                                  V - 27

-------
Cominco estimates  that  direct project  employment would be  372 jobs for con-
struction  and  424  jobs for production.   Table  V-8 shows the employment
breakdown by  occupational  group.   There would  be  some overlap  in  the
occupational  skills  required  for  each  phase,  especially  among  equipment
operators  and skilled  trades.
                               Table V-8
       AVERAGE  ANNUAL  EMPLOYMENT BY OCCUPATIONAL GROUP
CONSTRUCTION PHASE
Craft
Carpenters
Boilermakers
Electricians
Instrumentation
Insulators
Ironworkers
Laborers
Linemen
Millwrights
Painters
Pipefitters
Equipment Operators
Sheet Metal
Truck Drivers
Pile Drivers
Management & Clerical
Total
Number
29
10
21
4
3
31
57
6
11
4
21
78
4
54
14
25
372
PRODUCTION
Craft
Management
Supervisors
Professionals
Technical /Clerical
Equipment Operators
Mill Operators
Tradesmen
Trainees
Laborers
Catering
Total






PHASE
Initial
7
30
9
51
64
22
69
84
16
40
392







Final
7
30
11
53
72
28
93
68
22
40
424






Source:  Cominco Alaska, Inc.
                                  V - 28

-------
Cominco projects  an annual gross  payroll (1983 dollars) of $23.1  million for
the  construction  phase  and  $13.4 million  for  the final  production  phase.
Average annual earnings per job amount to about $62,000 during construction
and  about $31,700  during production.   This earnings  differential would  be
due  to such  factors as different work schedules  and occupational  mixes for
the two phases.

In  order to  assess the  economic  impact of  project  payrolls on  the NANA
region, it  was necessary  to estimate how many of these direct jobs would  be
filled  by  residents,  how many non-resident employees might eventually  take
up  residence in the  region,  and  how much secondary  employment might  be
generated by basic  employment in the  mining project.

The  management agreement between  Cominco  and  NANA set  a goal  of maxi-
mum resident hire,  entitled NANA  to  nominate the project personnel  officer,
and  established a joint  committee to prepare a manpower inventory  and iden-
tify  manpower training  needs.   The  success of the  employment goal would
depend on  a number of factors such  as the number of qualified residents
seeking  work at the mine, the  effectiveness of resident training programs,
and  the compatibility of  work  and rotation schedules  with  other  important
interests of potential employees,  particularly subsistence pursuits.

Because of  the unprecedented  nature  of  this  project  for the  region, projec-
tions of the  level  of resident hire are necessarily  speculative (Table V-9).
Based  on a  review  of the construction  workforce composition  compared to the
size  and occupational skills of the  resident  labor pool  and current unemploy-
ment and workforce  participation rates, it was estimated that about one-third
(124)  of  the  construction  jobs would  be  filled  by  present  NANA  region
residents.

During the  production phase,  all on-site  positions would be filled  on a rota-
tion  basis  by  workers  billeted in camp  quarters.   Cominco's  preliminary
operating plan  foresees  a  two-week on/two-week  off  rotation for  all on-site
employees,  with  12-hour  work  days  for  operating crews  and 10 to  11-hour
days for support crews.

For  the production   phase,  Cominco estimates that  regional  residents would
fill  about 168 jobs at production start-up,  climbing to about 267 jobs  by the
final production  stage.   This  is a relatively high level  of  resident  employ-
ment for  a   large remote project in rural  Alaska.   However, these estimates
appear feasible in view  of  the  skills employed by the project  and  available in
the  region's workforce,  and  in  view  of  the  joint commitment of  NANA and
Cominco to recruit,  train and  employ local residents.

The  non-resident jobs  would be  filled  by transient  workers  who  would com-
mute  between  the  jobsite  and  permanent   residences  outside  the  region.
Cominco would  pay  round-trip air transportation  costs  for  all on-site  em-
ployees.  This transportation agreement would also make it easy for non-local
workers on  the project  to  retain their prior residences and  discourage them
from resettling into the region.   For purposes of  estimating  economic  and
population  impacts,   it  was  assumed that  only five  percent of the non-local
production workforce would take up permanent  residency  within the  region.
This group  would include former residents returning to  the region as well  as
newcomers.

                                   V -  29

-------
                                Table V-9


           ESTIMATED TOTAL RESIDENT EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS1

                              NANA REGION

Construction
Pre-production
Final Production
Direct2
Resident
Employment
124
168
267
Secondary3
Resident
Employment
100
86
162
New3
Resident
Employees
75
96
118
Total3
Resident
Employment
299
350
547
1  For  purposes  of  meaningful  regional  analysis,  project  employment  is
   assigned by residence  of  the worker  rather  than  by  the jobsite.   By
   Alaska  Department of Labor  and U.S. Census  economic and  demographic
   statistical  reporting  units,  the minesite is situated  in the  North  Slope
   Borough.
Source:

2  Cominco Alaska, Inc.
3  Kevin Waring Associates,  1983
Based  on these  assumptions,  the prorated share of direct income to region
residents  would be about  $6.9  million during  the construction peak and  rises
to about  $8.4  million  by  the  time the mine  reaches full  production  (Table
V-10).

In addition  to  direct employment  of residents, the mine project would trigger
other changes  in the  region's employment and economic structure, especially
at Kotzebue.   First,  the  added  purchasing  power  injected by mine  payrolls
would  pump  up local purchases of goods  and services.  This would stimulate
secondary  economic growth,  broadening the  range  of  locally available  goods
and  services for everyone and creating new  jobs in the support  sector.  In
order  to  calculate  the  effects  of  the mine payroll,  a   basic  to  nonbasic
employment  ratio of 1.0 to 0.3 was used for the construction  phase,  rising to
1.0 to 0.4 for  the  production phase.  This employment multiplier,  though low
                                  V  - 30

-------
                                Table V-10
                 PROJECTED  ANNUAL  PERSONAL  INCOME
                                ($ million)
                             DIRECT INCOME             INDIRECT INCOME
                     Resident1   Non-resident1    Total2      Resident Only1
Construction
Initial Production
Final Production
6.9
5.2
8.4
16.2
7.0
5.0
23.1
12.2
13.4
2.1
1.8
3.4
Source:

1  Kevin Waring Associates, 1983
2  Cominco Alaska,  Inc.
by  national  standards,   is  typical  of Alaska's remote  regional  centers  and
allows for some expansion in the region's  secondary economy.

Second,  it is plausible that many,  perhaps most,  of  the  residents  hired for
the  mine would  be  recruited  from other jobs in  the  region,  leading  to  a
period  of job shuffling.   These vacated positions  would become  available for
other underemployed and  unemployed resident  workers.   If the vacated posts
were not readily filled from the resident labor pool,  some of the jobs might
draw newcomers  to  the  region  to replace mine hirees.   In this way,  resident
hire on  the  mining  project would trigger upward  job  mobility throughout the
region's  labor pool  and  might also  attract some new residents to the region.
In all,  it was estimated that about two-thirds of the combined vacated or  new
secondary  posts  would  be filled  by  residents, with the rest filled by new-
comers or former residents.  On  this assumption,  there would be  about 118
new workers  moving  into the  region  to  take  up  jobs  created  by  the  mine
project.

The proposed project would provide  permanent,  year-round  employment  in a
developing region with substantial  unemployment and  underemployment.   The
project  management, as  expressed  by  the  NANA/Cominco  agreement, places
high priority on  policies  and practical steps designed  to make feasible a high
rate of  resident  hire.  Apart  from the  mine,  there  are no projects in  the
                                  V  - 31

-------
region that seem  likely  to  improve economic or job conditions  to a significant
extent.   At final production, the project would contribute about 547 jobs and
an  annual  payroll  of $11.8  million  to  NANA region residents.   For compari-
son,  the Alaska  Department  of Labor  reports that  in  1982,  the  average
annual employment for  the Kobuk census division  was 1,863 employees, with
a total annual  payroll of $39.0 million.  Thus, compared  to  1982  levels, the
mine  project at final production would increase resident employment by about
29  percent  and  resident earnings  by about 30 percent.  The project would
also create  about 248 construction  jobs and about 157 permanent production
jobs for  workers  commuting from other areas  of the  state,  plus  an undeter-
mined number of secondary jobs.

The economic impact of the project  would  accelerate during construction and
then  level off as  production  began.   Sudden prosperity might cause  some
transitional  problems (e.g.,  price  and labor  inflation) in the local  economy
until  the local  supplies of goods and services and  labor adjusted  to  meet new
consumer demand.   For the long run,  however, it seems probable  that eco-
nomic growth would  promote  local  diversification  and economies of  scale to
offset short-term inflation.

Development  of a  deep-draft  port  facility  for shipment  of ore concentrates
could lower shipping costs for fuel  and other cargo delivered to the  region.
A  fuels  and  general  cargo  depot,  from which in-bound goods  could  be redis-
tributed  to villages, would avoid the lightering costs for shipment through
the port  of  Kotzebue.

Population  Growth and  Migration

It  was estimated that the  mining  project would eventually add about 354 per-
sons to  the total  population of the  region above the  baseline forecast  without
the mine (Table V-11).  Much of this  growth would occur at the  early stages
                                Table V-11
                     PROJECTED POPULATION  IMPACT
                               NANA REGION
Construction
Initial Production
Final Production
Newly Resident
Employees
75
96
118
Cumulative
Growth Impact
225
288
354
         Source:  Kevin Waring  Associates, 1983
                                  V  -  32

-------
of the project.   This would include an  estimated  118  new resident workers,
plus their  households.  It was assumed that Kotzebue's more developed com-
merce,  transportation  and  community  facilities  and  services  would make it
more  appealing to newcomers than the smaller remote communities. Therefore,
nearly all  (about 90 percent) of these  new residents would probably  reside
in Kotzebue,  with the rest dispersed among the other  rural villages  (Table
V-12).
                                Table V-12


        ESTIMATED POPULATION  -  BASE CASE AND IMPACT CASE

                              NANA  REGION
           NANA Region
Kotzebue
Villages
Year
1982
1986
1990
2000
Base Case
5,343
5,671
6,019
6,985
Mine Case
5,343
5,896
6,307
7,339
Base Case
2,470
2,622
2,782
3,229
Mine Case
2,470
2,824
3,041
3,548
Base Case
2,873
3,049
3,237
3,756
Mine Case
2,873
3,072
3,266
3,791
Source:  Kevin Waring Associates, 1983
Recent  decades show a  pattern  of  intraregional migration  to Kotzebue from
its  hinterland  villages,  but this trend  appears  to  be  leveling off.    The
effects  of the mine project on population  movements within the region are,  at
best, speculative.  On the  one  hand,  Kotzebue's  more developed cash econ-
omy  and community services may prompt  some migration there of village resi-
dents working  at  the mine.  However, provision for  direct commuting  rather
than via Kotzebue,  plus  a  preference of village  residents to use new  income
to make their  families better off  in  their home communities might neutralize
this  tendency.   A best guess was that the project would not have much net
effect on intraregional population movement.
                                  V -  33

-------
Demand for Community  Infrastructure

All  elements  of  the  proposed project  (mine  area facilities, overland transpor-
tation  corridor  and port  facilities)  would  be  remote from  existing commun-
ities.   Cominco  would  provide at the mine  site all support infrastructure for
its  employees,  including  camp quarters,  recreational facilities and  emergency
medical services.   Worker housing would also  be provided  at the port for
emergency use, and for  temporary use by  ship loading  and road maintenance
crews.   Cominco  would  provide charter flight pick-up  and  return  to the
home   village  of  resident  employees,  and  via  Kotzebue  or  Point Hope  to
Anchorage for  non-resident  workers.  Thus,  the mining  project  would not
compete with existing  communities for state or federal community development
programs.

However,  former  residents  and  newcomers drawn to the  region to work on
the project or to take advantage of  other  work opportunities  opened up  by
the project  would generate  some  demand  for  new  community  facilities and
services.   As  the region's transportation  and commercial  center,  Kotzebue
would  feel the brunt of  this growth.   It is estimated  that Kotzebue's popu-
lation  would  grow by  about 200  persons  during construction and by another
100 persons  during production, for a net growth of about 300 persons  or  10
percent due to the project (Table V-12).

The bulk  of this population growth  would derive  from secondary economic
growth at  Kotzebue rather  than  from the mine itself.   Since  this  growth
would  be  concentrated  during the  construction and  early production phases,
it  would  likely  impose some short-term  strains  on  the capacity of the com-
munity to  meet the housing needs and other  community facility and  service
needs  of   new   residents.   It is also plausible  that the incidence of  social
problems  might rise while  resident workers and their families  adjust  to new
working  and  living arrangements  and to  improved  economic  circumstances.
Coordinated advance planning by the City  of Kotzebue  and other responsible
public agencies,  with  programs  linked to  progress  in  the mine development
schedule,  would  help  mitigate  these stresses of  rapid  community  growth.

Few new  residents would be expected  to settle  in the  rural communities,  so
minimal impact  on their  community  facilities  and services would ensue from
the mining project.

Social,  Political  and Cultural  Stability and Autonomy

The isolated,  self-enclosed  mine camp  facilities would tend  to  buffer the
existing  communities  from the most disruptive social impacts often associated
with  large resource  development  projects in  undeveloped  rural  regions.
Cominco would  not  establish a  permanent townsite  that might  eventually  in-
corporate as a  local government.   Ultimately,  more  than half of the perman-
ent workforce  would  be  drawn  from  the resident labor pool.   An estimated
354 new residents or  about a 5  percent  increment  to  the  base case regional
forecast would  accrue  from the project over  a period  when the  region  would
not be otherwise  projected  to undergo much  economic or  population growth.
All  these circumstances  would  tend to moderate any potential  disruptions  of
the prevalent  political,  social  and cultural equilibrium, except at Kotzebue
which  would receive the  brunt  of growth  impacts.


                                   V - 34

-------
The collaborative  role of NANA Regional Corporation, to which most residents
belong,  in  the development  and  management of the proposed project  would
also serve  to  avoid  or moderate  adverse  impacts.    The  management agree-
ment between  NANA  and  Cominco contains many features  designed to elimin-
ate or blunt aspects of the project that might clash with traditional lifestyles
and cultural values.    Undeniably,  the project  presents new  choices  to resi-
dents  about how  to  make their  livelihoods.   However, these  choices  would
not  be imposed by forces wholly  outside local control, but would arise from a
purposeful,  calculated  development  policy  by  the  regional  corporation.
Furthermore,  the  management agreement between  NANA and Cominco provides
a flexible, ongoing framework for resident  involvement  in project decisions to
adjust for unexpected  problems or changing conditions.

Because  there  would  be  no  permanent incorporated settlement at the mine
site requiring  public services, the mine facilities would not alter the  govern-
mental status  quo or  impose any  burdens on local governments.

Outside  the incorporated  cities,  the  NANA region  is part of  the unincorpor-
ated borough.   There  are no plans to alter that status.   The mine and most
of  the related  facilities  would be  in  the  North  Slope  Borough.   Thus,  the
project  would  offer  limited  revenue  potential for  a borough that might  be
incorporated in the  NANA  region,  unless the  Borough's  boundaries were
adjusted  to match  Native regional corporation boundaries.

However, as  noted  earlier,  Kotzebue would  be  subject to an  influx of new
residents.   This  might dilute  the cultural  and  social  status of  established
residents and  perhaps  upset the local political equilibrium.   Apart from sales
taxes, population  growth would  not  generate  much  additional local  govern-
mental revenue since the City of  Kotzebue does not levy a real  property tax.
If rapid  growth overtaxes the community's  fiscal resources to maintain ser-
vices for both existing  residents  and newcomers,  it  might  be a  source of
community conflict.

It appears that the potential for  any  severe adverse or disruptive socioeco-
nomic  impacts  on  the region  would be  well contained by the isolation of  the
project from existing  communities  and by the  mediating  role  of  the  NANA
Regional   Corporation   in  the development  and  ongoing  management  of  the
project.   The  relatively  low  level of  adverse socioeconomic impacts would  be
partly attributable to conscious policies and  decisions jointly made by  NANA
and  Cominco about  the development  scheme  and mode of operations  for  the
mine.  In  particular,  the  choice  of workcamp  quarters, rather than a full-
fledged  permanent  townsite, to  support  a transient  workforce  composed
mostly of local  residents on  a  rotation schedule  avoids  many of the  adverse
and  potentially disruptive  impacts that a  major  remote  resource development
project might  have  on  a  remote, lightly populated  and undeveloped  region.

On  the other  hand,  the  project has  substantial potential for positive  long-
term  impacts  on employment  and  income  opportunities  for the  region's resi-
dents.   However,  capture of  these  positive impacts  would  depend  on  the
success  of  programs to  recruit  and  train workers from the resident  labor
pool.   If the  effort  to  achieve  a substantial  degree  of  resident  hire falls
short,  then it  would  be necessary to  import more non-local  workers.  In that
case, the income benefits to residents  of the region would diminish.
                                  V  -  35

-------
A  high  rate  of  resident  hire  would be triply beneficial in  terms  of  socioeco-
nomic  impacts.    First,  it  would  permanently  boost  resident  income  and
employment.   Second,  it  would limit  the  scope of new demands  on existing
infrastructure  by  reducing   the  number  of  non-local  mine  employees  who
might opt to take  up local residence.  Third,  by  reducing the potential for
new  settlement in the  region,  it would allow for economic  development while
still  conserving  resident  control over the region's political,  social  and  cul-
tural  institutions and  resources.

Most of the growth impact anticipated from the project  would be concentrated
on  Kotzebue.   This  would impose  some  growth management  problems on  a
community  whose fiscal  and  physical  resources  to  accommodate much  new
growth are already limited.

Recreation

As  areas accessible to  state  population  centers  become  more  used,  those
seeking fairly primitive recreational opportunities might be drawn to the  Red
Dog  project area.   Recreational use  of the  project area currently represents
only a very  small  percentage of the total  statewide recreation.   However, as
more  information about the area is made available to the public, local recrea-
tional use  might change.   The  proposed  project might affect  the amount  and
direction of such recreational  use change.

When not  engaged  in  work  related  activities,  Cominco employees  would be
free to  recreate,  thus potentially increasing competition for local resources.
To  minimize  these impacts, Cominco  would prohibit employees  from  hunting,
trapping or  fishing during   their  active  phase of  work  and  residence at
project  locations, or while moving  to or  from their homes  and work sites on
Cominco  transportation.   Construction activities  and  mine operations  could
affect wildlife species  sensitive to  development  and human  intrusion.   There
could be temporary impacts and chronic  local impacts, but no major impacts
to recreational hunting and fishing on an  areawide basis would be anticipated
just from development of the Red Dog project.

COMPONENTS SPECIFIC  TO SOME ALTERNATIVES

This  section  discusses the impacts of each  project alternative on a  discipline
by   discipline  basis  where   certain components differ for each alternative.
Components  specific to Alternative 1 include  a southern  corridor  to  a  port
site  at  VABM 28,  with  a short  causeway/offshore  island  transfer  facility
(Fig. III-3).   Alternative  2  consists of a northern corridor to a port site at
Tugak Lagoon,   also with a short  causeway/offshore island transfer facility.
Alternative  3 consists of  the southern corridor  to  VABM  28,  with a short
causeway/lightering transfer facility.

Vegetation and Wetlands

                                Alternative 1

Construction  of  an 89.9  km  (56.2 mi) road in the southern transportation
corridor from the  mine area through Cape  Krusenstern National  Monument to
                                   V - 36

-------
the coast at VABM 28 would  directly disturb a total of approximately 197 ha
(487 ac) of vegetation.   Approximately 55 percent  of  the  corridor would be
in the  Wulik  River  watershed,  approximately  35  percent  would be in  the
Omikviorok  River drainage,  and approximately 10  percent would  cross  the
upper  reaches  of  the Noatak  River watershed.   Approximate  road  surface
area intersection of vegetation  types is  shown  in Table  V-13.   An estimated
additional 84.4 ha (208.5 ac)  of ground cover would be directly  disturbed by
development of borrow sites along the entire  corridor (Table 11-3; Fig.  11-8).
                                Table V-13


  APPROXIMATE AREA OF  VEGETATION TYPES INTERSECTED BY  ROADS

                  IN THE TRANSPORTATION  CORRIDORS
                                              Transportation  Corridor
                                           Southern
                       Northern
Total  Length of Corridor
Total  Area Intersected
89.9 km (56.2 mi)
 197 ha (487 ac)
117.0 km (73.1 mi)

 257 ha (634 ac)
Vegetation Type
Tall shrub & complexes
Low shrub tundra & complexes
Closed low shrub & complexes
Open low shrub & complexes
Mat & cushion tundra
Elymus tall grass
Sedge-grass tundra
Tussock tundra
Tussock tundra-low shrub complexes
Sedge-grass marsh
Sedge-grass wet weadow
Sedge-grass bog meadow
Wetland herbaceous

2
25
10
20
10
<2
<2
110
12
2
2
2
<2

ha
ha
ha
ha
ha
ha
ha
ha
ha
ha
ha
ha
ha

(5
(63
(24
(49
(24
(<5
(<5
(273
(29
(5
(5
(5
(<5

ac)
ac)
ac)
ac)
ac)
ac)
ac)
ac)
ac)
ac)
ac)
ac)
ac)

15
10
64
8
15
<2
18
110
2
<2
10
2
<2

ha
ha
ha
ha
ha
ha
ha
ha
ha
ha
ha
ha
ha

(38
(25
(159
(19
(38
(<6
(44
(273
(6
(<6
(25
(6
(<6

ac)
ac)
ac)
ac)
ac)
ac)
ac)
ac)
ac)
ac)
ac)
ac)
ac)
Source:  Dames  & Moore, 1982a
                                  V - 37

-------
If  borrow  material   was  taken  only  from  sites outside  Cape  Krusenstern
National  Monument,  approximately  49.1  ha (121.3 ac) of ground cover would
be directly  disturbed by  borrow site development (Table 11-4).   Locations of
potential  sites  are  shown on  Figures  11-8 through  11-13.   It is anticipated
that  vegetation  type disturbance would occur with a frequency  and distribu-
tion  similar  to that for the main  road.

Indirect  effects associated with  occasional foot  traffic,  off-road  vehicle use,
and  dust would  impact additional  acreage.  Snow  covered ground inundated
with  off-road travel might  be compacted,  melt comparatively  late,  or show
impeded  drainage and  increased erosion.   Direct damage to  uncovered vege-
tation might include breakage of plant  parts,  depression  of  the  ground sur-
face, ponding  and  increased  erosion.   In most cases  the degree of  impact
would  be unpredictable and would  depend on  the nature of the disturbance
and  the nature of the disturbed  community (Brown and  Berg, 1980).

Studies following  three  years  of operation of the North  Slope Haul  Road from
Atigun  Pass to  Prudhoe Bay  indicate that road dust impacts could  be sub-
stantial.   Maximum  dust fall might  occur up to  a distance of 300 m  (984 ft)
from the  road,  and early melt of dust  covered  snow might extend  from 30 to
100 m  (100  to  328 ft)  on either side of  the  road.   If borrow  material was
extracted only from sites outside  the  Monument,  road dust impacts during
road construction would be greater than if borrow  sites  were  spaced  along
the  entire  corridor.   This  would  be  due to  borrow being  hauled  further.
Mosses  and  lichens would  be most susceptible  and  might, with other heath
and  herbaceous  plants, die or experience a loss of vitality  along the road.
Some taxa,  for example cottongrasses,  might increase  in  relative  abundance
in  the roadside environment (Brown and Berg,  1980).  Communities  adjacent
to  the  road would  be  contaminated  by  any fuel,  chemical, or  concentrate
spill.  The degree  of  impact  would  depend on the  nature  of  the  site and
spill, time of year and  cleanup procedures.

The  road would  compact  the  ground  and might impede  local  drainage.  In
general this impact  could be  minimized  by  proper  bridge and  culvert con-
struction, but  might occur where drainage patterns  were more diffuse.   Some
impounding  of  water might occur on the upslope side of the road and some
draining or drying  might  occur  on  the  downslope side of the road.   Change,
more than  loss,  of  vegetation would be  expected in  response  to changes in
soil  type, moisture  regime and topographic setting caused  by the road.

A  large  proportion  of the  road  would  pass through areas  technically clas-
sified as  wetlands,  and wetland  impacts would involve a number of vegetation
types occupying  a  range of sites  that may  differ in soil  type  and  moisture
regime.   Therefore, associated  wetland  values might  also  differ.  Wetland
values are  determined  by  the  degree  to which  wetlands  perform various
ecological functions.  Such  wetland functions include:  providing  productive
habitat;  cycling  nutrients and energy;  maintaining water  quality; moderating
erosion  and  flooding, and regulating surface water flow.   As  habitat  values
cannot  always  be  described  by  the  vegetation classification   system used
here,  potential  impacts on  habitat  are  addressed in the  Terrestrial Wildlife
and  Biology sections  of this  chapter.   Some interactions  with  and  potential
impacts to the watersheds of  the  region  are addressed  in  the Hydrology and
Water Quality Section.
                                  V -  38

-------
Loss  of  sedge-grass  tundra  wetlands  would  be  small.   Loss of  tussock
tundra,  tussock  tundra-low shrub  complex and  open low shrub and  complex
wetland  communities  would  be much larger.   However, these  impacts would
not  be  considered  regionally  significant,  as the loss of  these  vegetation
types  would  be  small  relative  to   overall  occurrence  in the  project  area.
Wetland  values associated with these vegetation  types probably  would be low
to moderate along the corridor, but might  be somewhat greater  for communi-
ties  occurring in  lowland  basins  or areas of  diffuse  drainage.   Open  low
shrub  and  complex  communities occurring  in  riparian zones might  also  have
greater wetland value.   In  addition to open  low wetlands, other tall  and low
shrub  riparian wetlands  would be  impacted by the 187 stream  crossings re-
quired for development of the southern corridor.   The loss, however, would
be small compared  to overall occurrence and would not  be considered  region-
ally  significant.

Vegetation types of generally moderate to  high  wetland value are the sedge-
grass  marsh,  wet meadow, and bog  meadow communities.  It  is estimated that
6 ha (15 ac)  of  such vegetation  would be  directly lost.   This  would repre-
sent approximately 0.4 percent of  such  wetlands  within a  0.8 km (0.5 mi)
wide corridor from the  ore  body to the port site.  A regionally insignificant
loss  of wetland herbaceous community might also  occur.

Development of the  port site  at VABM 28 would directly  disturb about 20 ha
(50 ac)  of  sedge-grass  marshland,  Elymus  tall  grass  and  tussock  tundra
vegetation.   In addition  to  storage  and power generation facilities located on
the coast, a concentrate storage building would  be located about 4.0 km  (2.5
mi)  inland  in  an  area scheduled to be disturbed  by the removal  of  gravel.
Elymus tall  grass vegetation is not widespread  and the loss would  represent
greater relative impact than for more common vegetation types.   Value of the
sedge-grass marsh  wetlands would also  be lost.  However, these losses would
not  be significant  on more  than  a   local basis.  Port site development might
also  cause  erosion   or  aggradation  of shoreline  acreage  with a  resulting
change in  nearby  coastal community  types.   Breaching  Port  Lagoon would
cause  salinity to increase in the lagoon waters.    This  would probably cause
the  lagoon  shoreline  vegetation to  shift  from freshwater to halophytic  com-
munity types.   In  addition, fuel,  chemical  or concentrate spills  might impact
vegetation.   The  specific degree of change or  loss would be unpredictable.

                               Alternative  2

Construction of a  117.0  km (73.1   mi) road  in  the  northern  transportation
corridor  from the mine area to the  coast at Tugak Lagoon would  directly dis-
turb a total of approximately 257 ha (634 ac) of  vegetation.  Approximately
40 percent  of  the corridor  would  be in the Wulik  River  watershed, 40  per-
cent in the Kivalina  River watershed,  and 20 percent  in the Asikpak River
watershed.   Approximate  road surface area intersection  of  vegetation types
is shown in Table V-13.

An  estimated  additional  105  ha (260 ac) of  ground cover  would  be  disturbed
in the development of borrow sites.  These sites have not  been specifically
determined,  but  it  was  estimated   that  vegetation  type disturbance would
occur  with  a  frequency  and  distribution  similar to that  for the main road.
                                  V  -  39

-------
Other  impacts  associated with  road  development would be  similar  to those for
Alternative  1,  although as the northern road would be slightly longer, over-
all impacts would be  slightly  greater.

With respect to  wetlands,  collective impacts to sedge-grass tundra,  tussock
tundra,  tussock  tundra-low shrub complex  and open  low  shrub  and  complex
would  be  less  than  that  for  Alternative  1.   The northern  corridor  would
cross three major river systems  and numerous  smaller streams for a total of
312 crossings,  and  would  impact  more  associated  tall  and low shrub  riparian
wetlands  than  Alternative  1.   Of particular importance would be impacts to
the Wulik and  Kivalina floodplain  communities that offer  some flood  protection
and  provide valuable wildlife  habitat.  Impacts, however,  are small compared
to overall occurrence of these vegetation  types and would not be considered
regionally  significant.   Impacts to  the  sedge-grass marsh, wet  meadow and
bog  meadow communities would also be slightly greater  than  those  for  Alter-
native  1 .   It is  estimated  that up to 14 ha (37 ac) of these community types
would  be  lost.   However,  as in Alternative  1,  the  impact  would  be  small
compared to the total of similar  wetland  resources in  the  area and  would not
be  considered  regionally significant.  A  regionally insignificant  loss  of wet-
land herbaceous  community might  also occur.

Development of  a  port site  at Tugak  Lagoon   would  directly  disturb about
20 ha  (50 ac)  of sedge-grass marsh  wetland  and complexes  of Elymus tall
grass  and wetland herbaceous  communities.   As in Alternative 1, distribution
of shoreline vegetation  is more restricted  on a  regional  basis and, therefore,
its  loss  would  represent a greater  relative impact than  more common  vegeta-
tion  types.   However, the total vegetation and  wetland  loss at Tugak Lagoon
would  not be  significant on  more than a  local  basis.   As  for Alternative 1,
lagoon   breaching,  change in  nearby  shoreline characteristics  or  potential
spills might cause other changes  in  coastal vegetation  types,  but the specific
degree  of change or  loss would be unpredictable.

                               Alternative 3

Vegetation and wetlands impacts  would be similar to those for Alternative 1.

Terrestrial  Wildlife

                               Alternative 1

Construction of the  southern  corridor  road would  cause a direct habitat loss
of approximately 197  ha (487  ac).  On a  local  basis this loss  could be signi-
ficant  for  song bird  and  small mammal species, but it would  not be signifi-
cant on a  greater  than local  basis.   For  birds  of prey  and  larger  mammal
species, direct habitat loss  would  not be significant  even on a local  basis.

Indirect habitat  loss,  however,  would be of  significance  on  a  greater than
local basis.  While local song bird  and  small mammal populations  would likely
accommodate to the  presence of  the road  and  associated  activities,  birds of
prey and larger mammals  would generally  be affected  to differing degrees by
avoiding the area.   The degree of  avoidance cannot be  accurately predicted.
                                   V - 40

-------
Several nest sites  of  birds  of prey,  including three of the endangered  pere-
grine  falcon,  have been  reported along  the southern  corridor.   While  the
road alignment has been altered  to provide a buffer of at least 3.2  km (2 mi)
around the peregrine nests, in  at least one case that  has caused the road to
more  closely approach other  species' nests (e.g.,  at Tutak Creek).   Aside
from road  construction disturbance that  might cause nest abandonment dur-
ing the  first two  years  of project  development,  long-term  raptor  breeding
would  likely not be seriously affected by road activity  because of the dis-
tances from  the  nests.  Secondary road effects, e.g., increased use by bird
watchers,  photographers,  falconers and other visitors,  if the road was  even-
tually  opened  for  general  public  use, would likely cause  greater  long-term
impacts.   Just the presence of  the  road,  however,  would  probably modify
feeding behavior and cause  some avoidance of  the  road corridor.

Indirect habitat  loss would  likely be significant for caribou on a local basis,
and could  even be of greater than local  significance.  The southern corridor
passes  between current primary  caribou  low tussock tundra  winter  range in
the Wulik  and Kivalina lowlands,  and secondary  winter range  on  the more
wind-swept slopes  of  the  Mulgrave Hills  to the  southeast (Fig. IV-5).  Road
activity  would  cause  avoidance  of  the  corridor,  and  hence  displacement,
thereby  limiting  to some  extent  the use of otherwise available winter habitat.
There  would also likely be  some mortality  due to vehicle  collisions  or added
stress  from winter  traffic.

Interruption  of  major  movements  would   have the  greatest  potential  impact
upon  caribou.   In  addition to affecting local movements,  primarily during  the
winter, construction and operation of a road could cause major alterations in
the historic  movement patterns  of the  western Arctic  caribou  herd.  From
experience with  other roads  in  Alaska,  the  approximately  20 to 25 vehicle
round  trips  per day  (excluding  maintenance) associated  just  with the Red
Dog  project  would  be unlikely to cause such  a  major  shift in movement pat-
terns.

A  high volume of  traffic generated by additional  users  in the future,  how-
ever,  could  have a significant impact.   During the spring migration north to
the calving grounds, the early summer post-calving  concentration movements,
and again  during the autumn when large numbers of caribou  move southeast-
ward  through the  De  Long  Mountains and  the  project area,  the presence of a
very  active  transportation  corridor  might  cause  a  significant  change  in
migration   patterns.   Because of  their  dependence on  often widely spaced
calving,  concentration  and  wintering  areas, such  interruptions could have a
significant impact  upon a  large  segment  of the western Arctic herd,  espe-
cially if they occurred with any frequency.   In  addition, many residents of
the region  living  southeast of  the project area depend upon  caribou  as  a
major  staple of their subsistence  diets and would  be affected by  any such
change in  movements.  Thus, although  construction and operation  of a  road
for the Red  Dog Project  would  not in  itself likely cause major interruptions
to  caribou movements,  it would  open  a  road to increased future traffic that
might cumulatively  cause  such interruptions.

The  NANA/Cominco agreement specifically recognizes the possibility of  major
caribou migration  interruptions.   NANA  has  retained the  authority to sus-
                                  V  -  41

-------
pend  operation  of the project during  periods when caribou movements  are
imminent to minimize the possibility of  such interruptions.   Still,  the capri-
cious  nature of  caribou may cause changes in movement patterns nonetheless.
To  maximize the probability that such good  intentions would work,  a  specific
monitoring  plan  should  be developed  in  consultation with  ADF&G to  track
major movements and make suspension decisions.  This plan  should  be estab-
lished  before actual  construction begins  so  adequate baseline data would  be
available.

Bears  would  be  displaced  from the  area  of  the  road  corridor,  and their
movements  between  the  lowlands of  the  Wulik and  Kivalina Rivers and  the
Mulgrave Hills would probably be altered  to  some extent.   No known areas of
specific  importance  for denning  or salmon  feeding  would be affected.  The
major impact to bears  would likely  be from long-term increased  human access
to the project area as discussed later.

Moose  would  not likely  be  significantly  impacted  by indirect habitat loss.
The most  important moose  habitat is the  riparian  willow  along  Ikalukrok
Creek  and  the  Wulik and  Kivalina  Rivers.  The  southern corridor would  be
several  miles  to the  east near the  headwaters  of the tributaries to the Wulik
River.   The  road would  pose no  physical barrier  to movements,  and  moose
normally  accommodate  to  vehicular traffic.   There  would be  some mortality
due to  vehicle  collisions  or  added  stress  from winter  traffic.   The major
impact to  moose  would likely be  from long-term  increased  human access to
the project area,  particularly  by hunters.

The southern corridor traverses the home range of  the  small herd of musk-
oxen  that appears  to  winter  in the  Rabbit  Creek  drainage  southeast of the
Mulgrave Hills.   The potential impact on  these animals from habitat loss  due
to  road  construction  and  operation would be  unknown.   As with bear  and
moose,  the major impact upon muskoxen  would likely be  from  long-term  in-
creased  public access to  the project area.

Limited waterfowl habitat exists along the southern corridor,  the best being
confined  to small lakes,  ponds and  sedge-grass  marshes.   The road  would
cause  no significant direct habitat loss,  and  relatively little indirect  habitat
loss.   The major impact  would be  from  long-term increased human access to
the  project  area, particularly by  hunters,  or other visitors who might dis-
turb molting or staging Canada  geese.

Construction  activities  along the  corridor,  aside  from  direct  habitat  loss,
would  have  relatively  little impact  upon  song bird,  waterfowl or small  mammal
species.    Raptor nests  near  the   road alignment,  however,  might be aban-
doned if construction  activities  occurred nearby during  the critical period
from  the latter  part of  incubation  through  the first few  weeks after hatch-
ing.

Construction  activities would  displace  larger mammals  to a greater  degree
than  during operation of  the road.  This would probably not  be of greater
than  local  significance to bear,  moose,  sheep or muskoxen.  Caribou,  how-
ever,  could be significantly  impacted.   With  road  construction scheduled to
commence  in February 1986, some caribou wintering  in the Wulik and  Kivalina
                                   V - 42

-------
River lowlands would  likely be displaced.   Local movements between  that area
and  current secondary  winter habitat  in the  Mulgrave Hills would also likely
be  affected.   Impacts  upon  caribou  would  be  lessened  if  schedules  were
established  which limited  construction  activities to the port site, South Fork
Valley,  and  the  coastal end of the road corridor until the northward spring
migration had been  completed  (normally by  early  May).

Caribou  early  summer  post-calving  and  autumn  migrations  might  also  be
affected  by  road  construction activities.   The  autumn  1986 southeastward
migration in  particular  would  be encountering  the  road corridor for the first
time.  Its  physical  presence alone  might have an impact.    If actual construc-
tion  activities were occurring  during that  first encounter,  avoidance or dis-
placement actions might be magnified substantially, causing a change in the
historical movement  pattern.

Port  site development  at  VABM  28  would  result  in direct  habitat loss of
approximately 20  ha (50 ac).    In  addition,  storing  the  barge-mounted con-
struction camp  or the  lighter  in  the  breached  lagoon  would  result in tem-
porary or  seasonal  direct  habitat loss  of approximately 0.8 ha (2.0  ac).   On
a local basis, habitat loss could be  significant for song  birds, a few species
of shorebirds, oldsquaws  and  dabbling  ducks,  as well  as for small mammal
species.   Impacts  would  not  be  significant  on  a  greater  than  local basis.
For  birds of prey and  larger mammal  species, direct habitat  loss would not
be significant even  on a local  basis.

Indirect  habitat  loss  would  not be  of significance on  a  greater than  local
basis for  song  bird  and  small  mammal  populations as  they would  likely
accommodate  to  the  presence of the facilities  and associated activities.   Birds
of prey  and larger mammals,  however, would generally tend  to  avoid  the
area.  The degree of  avoidance cannot be accurately predicted.

No  raptor  nests  have been  identified  near this  port site  and no direct im-
pacts on nesting  would  be expected.   However, individual  raptors,  including
peregrine falcons,  have  been  sighted  over  the hills 4.8 km  (3 mi)  to  the
east.  The   presence  of a  developed  port site would likely  modify feeding
behavior of  raptors  presently  using the area.

Caribou  and  moose  would  not  be significantly  impacted  by the presence of a
port site at  VABM 28.   The important  habitats for  both  species are generally
located  further  inland,  and  only  an  occasional  small  group or  individual
would be likely to encounter the facility.

Bear and  muskoxen could  be  impacted  by  indirect habitat loss  on a  local
basis.    Both species  have   been  reported  to  use  the  area  between  the
Mulgrave Hills  and  the  coast as   a  movement  corridor  (Dames  & Moore,
1983a).   A facility at VABM 28 would  likely  interfere with normal  northwest/
southeast movements.    Bears   use  the  coast  extensively,  often  moving  right
along the  beach.   The  port  facility  with  its associated  noise and  human
activity  would displace normal  bear movements  at VABM 28.   In addition,  the
breached barrier beach  could  impede  bear movements along the coast.
                                   V - 43

-------
Bears,  wolves,  wolverines  and foxes would also be impacted from disturbance
and  human contacts.  While  not  significant on  a greater than  local  basis,
individuals  would  be  displaced  from  the  general area  unless  attracted  by
improper  disposal of garbage or outright feeding.  As described earlier  for
the mine  area  facilities,  mitigation  measures would include "bear-proof" fenc-
ing  of  garbage  collection  and  incineration  facilities,  worker  training   in
proper  garbage handling techniques,  and the  removal  of incineration  residue
and  nonburnable  wastes  for  burial  in  the tailings pond.   Feeding  of  animals
would be  prohibited  and this would be strictly enforced.  All workers at  the
port facility would also receive environmental training.

Development  of this  site and  use of the lagoon for lighter storage would  not
cause a significant  indirect habitat loss for  waterfowl.  The  lagoon  and  the
immediate  surroundings are relatively unproductive and few waterfowl appear
to use the area, even during  staging  and migration.

Construction activities  at the port site,  aside from direct habitat loss, would
have  relatively little  impact  upon  song  bird,  shorebird, waterfowl or small
mammal  species.  However, construction would  displace  larger mammals to a
greater  degree than during  operation of the facility.   This  would probably
not be  of  greater than local  significance except  possibly for  caribou.   If  the
major autumn southeastward  migration moved  close to  the  coast  during con-
struction,  a change in  the  historical movement pattern  might occur.

                               Alternative 2

Construction of the  northern  corridor road  would cause a  direct habitat loss
of approximately  257 ha  (634 ac).   While this  would be approximately 60 ha
(147 ac)  greater  than  for the  southern corridor road,  direct  habitat  loss
impacts  for all  species  would  be similar to those for Alternative 1.

Indirect habitat loss would also be  similar to Alternative 1  for song bird and
small  mammal species.

The  northern  road  corridor  has more raptor nests than does the  southern,
including  four  peregrine falcon  nests  as opposed  to  three.   All  peregrine
nests,  however,  would  be at least  3.2 km (2 mi)  from the road.  The type
of indirect  habitat  loss  impacts  upon raptors would be similar to those  for
Alternative  1,  but the magnitude would be greater due to the higher  number
of raptors.

Indirect habitat loss  for  caribou would be somewhat greater than  for Alterna-
tive  1 due to the  greater length  of the  road.  Chances of a significant inter-
ruption  of historical caribou  migration patterns  would also  be greater with
the northern  corridor  road.    Both the spring and early  summer  migrations
would be  more  likely to encounter that road  than the southern corridor road,
with consequently greater  risk of altering traditional  routes.

Indirect habitat loss  for bears would likely be  greater  than  for Alternative
1.  The  Siatak Hills,  immediately  west of the Asikpak River, are important
for denning, and movements to and from that area might be  affected by  the
road.   Also,  as  the road  would parallel the  river,  road activities  including
                                   V - 44

-------
 human  disturbance would displace bears  using  the Asikpak River for salmon
 feeding or other purposes.

 Indirect habitat loss  for  moose would  be greater than for  Alternative 1,  but
 would still  be small.   Road  activity  would  tend  to  displace moose where  the
 corridor crosses the  riparian  willow  habitats favored by moose  in winter.   If
 not  seriously disturbed  by hunters,  moose  would  likely accommodate to road
 activity  associated with  the  project.   There  would  be  some  mortality from
 vehicle collisions and  stress  caused by winter traffic.

 Impacts  upon  muskoxen  from  indirect habitat  loss would likely be  similar to
 those for Alternative 1.   While the  Rabbit  Creek  herd would  not be signifi-
 cantly affected by a  road along the  Asikpak River, one or  possibly two small
 herds of muskoxen  appear to  range widely in  the  vicinity of the Singoalik
 River, the next drainage to the west.

 Indirect impacts on  waterfowl would likely be  less  than  for  Alternative 1.
 The northern  corridor does  not pass close  to the same  number or quality of
 small lakes,  ponds and  sedge-grass marshes  used by waterfowl  for molting
 and  staging.   Thus,  disturbance by  human  activities, including  hunting,
 would  not be as great.

 Direct habitat loss at Tugak  Lagoon  would  total  approximately  20  ha  (50 ac).
 This  would  be  the same  area  as  at  VABM 28,  and the direct habitat  loss  for
 all  wildlife species would be  similar  to that for Alternative  1.   Impacts asso-
 ciated with  the breached  lagoon would also  be similar  to  those for Alternative
 1.

 Indirect habitat loss  at the  port  site for all wildlife  would also be similar to
 Alternative  1  with the  exception of  bears  and muskoxen.   These  species
 would  likely  be affected  to a  greater extent because of the presence of this
 port site in  a  much narrower and more  restricted area between the coast  and
 the first  hills.  Northwest/southeast movements could be displaced away from
 the coast.

 Construction  impacts  would  be  similar  to  Alternative  1,   except that  the
 autumn northwest  to  southeast migration of caribou  would probably not  be
 affected.

                                Alternative  3

 Terrestrial wildlife impacts would  be  similar  to those for Alternative 1.

 Groundwater Resources

                                Alternative  1

 Potential  impacts   associated  with  a  road along  the  southern  transportation
corridor would  primarily  involve the  risk of groundwater contamination from
fuel  and  chemical  spills.   Soils  containing groundwater might then act  as
conduits for  contaminant  migration  to nearby streams.  Travel time between a
spill site  and a nearby stream would depend on  the  location of the spill,  the
substance spilled and  the nature of intervening  soil  materials.
                                   V - 45

-------
Potential groundwater impacts at the port  site would also involve  the hazard
of fuel  and chemical  contamination.   Spillage  control  plans  and  rapid  re-
sponse  to   spills  would  be the  primary  mitigative measures.   Appendix  2
(SPCC Plan) outlines the proposed  draft plan for spill  reaction.

                               Alternative 2

Groundwater impacts would be similar to those for Alternative 1.

                               Alternative 3

Groundwater impacts would be similar to those for Alternative 1.

Freshwater  Resources

Hydrology  and Water Quality

                               Alternative 1

Improper road  construction techniques  used on  permafrost and across Arctic
streams  can lead to severe erosion  problems and  degradation of water quality
downstream from  stream crossings.  If proper methods  of road construction
and  drainage control  were followed, environmental impacts could  be held to
insignificant levels.   Under  authority  of  Title  16  (Anadromous Fish Stream
Permit),  ADF&G  must approve  the  design, construction  and operation of  any
structure  (e.g.,  bridge  crossings,  impoundment  and  drainage  structures)
that  might  affect an  anadromous fish  stream.   This  permit specifies certain
stipulations  that  must  be  followed  by  the applicant  to  mitigate  potential
impacts.   The  Red  Dog project  would follow acceptable guidelines  for  road
construction in  the  Arctic as  summarized  below.  More  specific detail  on
road  construction,  including design  of all  bridges and  culverts,  would  be
developed  during  the  permitting  phase  of the  project.  The design,  con-
struction and operation of the  road system would  be  in  full accordance with
agency permit stipulations.

The  road  would  be  constructed  to protect the  thermal regime.   It would
generally be composed of a 2.0  m (6.5 ft)  deep  layer of  crushed  rock or 0.6
m  (2 ft) of crushed  rock  over 7 cm  (3  in) of  insulation.  These specifica-
tions would  prevent permafrost  thawing  and  resulting  severe  erosion prob-
lems.  Borrow  sites  would  be  located to  minimize  potential   water quality
impacts on  local  drainages.   Buffer strips and sedimentation ponds  would be
used  at  borrow sites  located within 91 m  (300 ft)  of surface waters to  pro-
tect  water  quality.   Borrow  excavation operations  at surface  gravel sources
would  be conducted  so that the resulting contoured edges could be reveg-
etated using  appropriate  Arctic  techniques.  Where natural  gravel  sources
were  not available,  rock quarries would  be developed by drilling and blast-
ing operations.   The  side  slopes of the quarries  would   be made to resemble
surrounding rock  outcrops.   Natural  freeze-thaw cycles would  eventually
erode  the   surface  of  these  side  slopes  to create a  natural   scree* cover.
Depressions  resulting from  gravel  and rock extraction   would  be allowed to
fill with  water to form  ponds  or lakes.
   Defined in Glossary.


                                   V - 46

-------
Haul  roads for construction materials would  receive  special attention  due to
their temporary nature  and  potential  for  tundra  and  permafrost damage.
These roads would  be built to  have a stable wearing  surface appropriate for
the time of year.   Whenever possible preliminary construction work would be
done  in  the  final   road   alignment.   Construction  using  snow  roads  or
rolligons*  would occur during  winter months.   Off-road construction  activi-
ties  during the thaw season would  normally  occur where exposed  rock  sui—
faces, finished gravel roads  or gravel pads would  be  available  as staging
areas.   Construction on areas  of  ice-rich  soils  and  wet areas  would  be
avoided during the  thaw  season.

The  number and  types  of  stream  crossings required  for  the transportation
corridor alternatives are  shown  in Table V-14.

Temporary  stream  diversions during construction  of  crossings  would  be de-
signed  to  minimize  erosion  and  sediment  loads.   Stream crossings would  be
surveyed  for  bank  stability, stream  character,  icing  occurrence and  ice jam
potential.   Scour and erosion  risk  would  be evaluated  at all  stream  cross-
ings.   If  bank  excavation  for  bridge  or culvert installation  would  expose
ground  ice, the exposure would be covered  with  an  insulating layer of  syn-
thetic material, soil, gravel  or  rock.

Emphasis  would be  placed  on minimizing clearance  of  vegetation and distur-
bance of  soils.  Erosion  control  measures  would include revegetation,  mulch-
ing,   mat  binders,  solid  binders,   rock or  gravel  blankets and  terracing.
Special  problem areas  would  be  associated  with  exposed  ice  or ice-rich
slopes.   Areas of  natural accumulation  of  winter  icings  would  be completely
avoided.  Care would be taken that the road  embankment not restrict  cross-
drainage  of   surface  or  groundwater.   Improper  drainage  could  create
impoundments  behind the structure  and result  in  destroyed habitat.   Slope
drains and minor stream  crossings would be designed to prevent hydraulic or
thermal  erosion  by  use  of  channel  liners,  rock  aprons,  check  dams  and
energy  dissipators.

Along the  corridor  there would be potential  spill  hazards due to transporta-
tion  of  mill  process  chemicals,  diesel and fuel oil and  ore concentrates.  The
greatest risks  to  the environment  would  be from  spills of toxic chemicals
near  stream  crossings.   The most  serious  spill  would  be from  an oil  tanker
truck/trailer because of  the potential large volume of  oil involved.  Spillage
control  plans   and  rapid  response  to  spills would  be the  primary  mitigative
measures.   Appendix 2  (SPCC  Plan)  outlines the  proposed draft  plan for
spill  reaction.

                               Alternative  2

Major bridges   on   the  northern corridor  would  be  required  at  Ikalukrok
Creek,  Main  Fork  Wulik  River, West  Fork Wulik  River,   Grayling Creek,
*  Defined in  Glossary.
                                  V  -  47

-------
                                Table V-14
  ESTIMATED  NUMBER  AND TYPE  OF STREAM CROSSINGS REQUIRED FOR

        SOUTHERN AND NORTHERN TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS
Southern
Corridor
Length of road 89.9 km
(56.2 mi)
Major bridges1
Minor bridges2
Major culverts3
Minor culverts4
Total stream crossings
Icing locations at culverts
Fish passages at bridges
and culverts
1
4
49
133
187
14
11
Northern
Corridor
117.0 km
(73.1 mi)
6
6
81
219
312
24
12
              Source:   Cominco Alaska, Inc.

1  Bridge span >30.5m  (100  ft).

2  Bridge span <30.5 m (100 ft).

3  Culverts  >  137 cm  (54 in) diameter,  or the equivalent of  using  two to
   three smaller culverts.

4  Culverts <137 cm  (54 in) diameter  at  gullies,  grassy swales and seasonal
   drainages.
Kivalina  River and Asikpak River (Fig. II-6).   In  comparison, the southern
corridor  would  have only  one  major bridge  (across  the  Omikviorok River).
With the  exception of the Asikpak River,  bridges  on the northern road would
cross wide meandering  or braided rivers with unstable banks.  Protection of
these crossings from excess  generation  of  sediment during construction and
high flows would be difficult.  Icings and  ice jams  in these rivers  would also
                                  V  - 48

-------
 place unusual  engineering constraints  on design.  The northern route would
 have nearly twice  as  many  minor culverts  and more  difficult  icing and  fish
 passage problem  crossings.   Due to the number  of  stream  crossings which
 pose engineering difficulties,  the northern  route  would  have  much  greater
 potential  for  significant  environmental  impacts  related  to  increased  stream
 sediment  loads and  the risk of  hazardous  chemical  spills reaching streams.

                                Alternative 3

 Hydrology  and water  quality impacts would  be similar to those for Alterna-
 tive 1.

 Biology

      Invertebrates

                                Alternative 1

 The southern  corridor  would cross approximately 187  streams  primarily with
 culverts.    One  major   bridge  would  be  constructed  across the  Omikviorok
 River.  Twenty-four of the  streams  would have gravel/cobble substrates  and
 18  grassy  swales  would  be  crossed.   Benthic production would  be  lost at
 stream  crossings  and  downstream  of  crossings  during construction as  a
 result of  instream work and sediment production.  This would  be  a transient
 loss, generally of less  than  one week.   Longer term losses could  result from
 erosion of altered stream  banks unless they were  revegetated.   The  amount
 of  loss would  depend  on  construction  timing  relative to insect life  cycles.
 The loss  would not be significant overall  since a small  portion of total  stream
 length would be affected.

 A  small  permanent  loss of habitat would occur as a  result of culverts  re-
 placing natural substrates.  This  loss would  be negligible compared to total
 stream  lengths  and  would  not be expected to significantly affect fish produc-
 tion.  Provided culvert size  were  sufficient  to  allow spring  gravel  flushing,
 and ongoing erosion were small,  no  additional impacts  would   be  expected.
 Loss of  production would  occur  if ore  concentrate  or fuel  spills  occurred.

                                Alternative 2

 The northern  transportation  corridor would  cross  approximately 312 streams
 with  six  major  bridges,  six minor  bridges  and  300 culverts (Fig.   II-6).
 Thirty-two  of  the streams would  have  gravel/cobble  bottoms and  17  grassy
 swales would be crossed.   Construction impacts would  be  similar to  those for
 Alternative  1.    However,  greater impact would  result  due to  the  larger
 number of  crossings and   the  greater amount of instream work required at
 the  six  major bridge crossings.

 Permanent impacts would occur  in the same  manner as those for Alternative
 1.    However,  more  streams  would  be crossed,  so more  habitat  loss  would
occur.   Impacts on  trophic* resources  would  not be significantly greater
 since a  similar  number  of streams containing fish would be impacted.
* Defined in Glossary.


                                   V - 49

-------
                               Alternative 3

Benthic  invertebrate  impacts would  be  similar to  those  for Alternative  1.

     Fish

                               Alternative 1

The   southern  transportation  corridor  would  be  approximately  89.9   km
(56.2 mi) long  and would  cross approximately  187  streams  ranging  in size
from  rivers  to  ephemeral drainages  (Table V-14).  Eleven  of  these  streams
are known to contain  fish  (Fig.  IV-9).  Five tributaries  to  the  Wulik  River
would  be crossed in their  headwaters, well away  from the main  stem of the
river.    Four of  these  tributaries support fish  (Arctic  char  and/or Arctic
grayling) in  the vicinity of the  corridor crossings during  the summer months
(Dames & Moore, 1983a).   All four  tributaries provide  some  fish spawning
habitat near  the corridor crossings.

The  Omikviorok River would be crossed  at least  once on  three of  its five
forks  and  once  on  the  upper part  of the main  stem.   The river provides
spawning and rearing habitat for char in  its  lower reaches.  Tributaries to
the Omikviorok  River  would  also be crossed, but none of  these tributaries is
known to contain  fish  in  the vicinity  of the  transportation  corridor  crossings.
New  Heart Creek would  also be  crossed in its  upper reaches  and is known
to contain Arctic  char near  its mouth.

Both  the Omikviorok  River  and  New  Heart Creek  flow  into  Ipiavik Lagoon
where  some  subsistence fishing  occurs.  These  systems  are  less  critical than
the Wulik and  Kivalina River drainages,  but should be  afforded the protec-
tion  of  proper  crossing  site selection,  crossing  design and  construction
timing.

Potential  impacts from  road construction  and  operation  along  the southern
corridor would  involve  an  increase in  sediment loading,  fish migration  bar-
riers,  risk of spills to major water courses  and  increased  access  to currently
inaccessible  areas.  Minor increases in  sediment loading would be unavoidable
during  construction  and operation  of  the  road  in  spite  of mitigation  mea-
sures.   Impacts on fish from  sediment originating  from  the road could  be
minimized to insignificant levels  by  good  crossing location selection, proper
crossing design  and  construction timing.  Crossings where fish  were  present
or where migration occurred should have  crossing  structures  that do  not
impinge on the floodplain area.

Preliminary  detailed information  on the amounts of materials  and locations of
borrow sites along the entire corridor  is  shown in Table  11-3.   Borrow sites
would  be located as  far from water courses as possible to minimize  surface
runoff impacts.    However,  in cases  where the  borrow sites  were within 91 m
(300  ft)  of  surface  waters,  provisions  would be made for the  collection  and
settlement  of suspended  solids  from runoff water.   Provided  these  precau-
tions  would  be  taken,  borrow site  impacts  on fish resources should be  small.

If borrow material  was taken   only  from  sites  outside  Cape  Krusenstern
National  Monument,  the surface  area and  excavation  depths  of Sites  7  and 8
                                   V - 50

-------
would  increase (Table  11-4).  Because Site  8  is  located within 91 m (300 ft)
of a  stream,  potential  impacts  to  fish  from  borrow  site  expansion  might
become significant unless further protective  measures were taken.

The  transportation of concentrate and chemicals  along  the  road poses a risk
of undetermined  probability.   The  scenario of  spillage directly  to a  stream
poses  the most serious  hazard.   Spillage control  plans  and  rapid  response to
spills  would  be the  primary mitigative measures.  Appendix  2 (SPCC Plan)
outlines the  proposed draft  plan for spill reaction.

Timing  of construction  for crossings along the transportation corridor  should
consider the individual  stream.   For streams without  fish, the crossing could
be made at  any time,   but  caution  should  be exercised to  prevent as much
disturbance  and sediment  generation  as possible.   Streams containing fish
could be crossed with  minimum  impact after  Arctic grayling  fry emergence in
about  mid-June,  but  prior to  Arctic char  and salmon  spawning  in late
August.

                               Alternative 2
The  northern  corridor  would be  approximately  117  km  (73.1  mi) long and
would   cross about  312 streams   ranging  in  size  from rivers to ephemeral
drainages  (Table V-14).    Three   major  drainages   (Wulik,   Kivalina  and
Asikpak  Rivers) would  be  involved  along  with  four  minor drainages.  The
Wulik  River  drainage would  have  approximately  28 stream crossings,  four of
which  would  be on the  main stem or  main forks.   Fish are present at all of
the major crossings.   Three of  the  24 smaller tributary streams  also contain
fish.   The  Kivalina drainage would  experience about 23  crossings,  three of
which  would  be main  stem  or  main fork crossings.   These  three  crossing
areas  all  contain  fish,  whereas  the 20 tributary  crossings  contain  no fish
(Fig.  IV-9).   The Asikpak  River drainage  would have 13  stream crossings.
One  of these  crossings would  be  on the  main  stem  near  the  river mouth
where  fish are present.   Only one  of the 12 tributary streams to be  crossed
contains fish.

Between the  Asikpak River  and Tugak Lagoon four other drainages would  be
crossed.  These are  small  drainages  which  do  not contain  fish.   Two  of
these drainages enter Asikpak  Lagoon; another enters  Kavrorak Lagoon; and
the other  flows directly to the sea.

Potential  impacts  to fish  from  road  construction and operation  would  be
similar  to those  for  Alternative  1,  but of a  significantly greater magnitude
due  to  the greater number  of crossings of  important habitat.  The northern
corridor would  cross  the major  fish  streams  in  the  project area (the Wulik
and  Kivalina  Rivers and tributaries) at several locations.   These  streams are
very important for  spawning, rearing  and overwintering fish and  as such are
also  migration  corridors.  Proposed  crossings occur  in main stem areas and
in significant and  highly sensitive  char spawning areas in  both drainages.
Several of these crossing areas have highly unstable and very mobile  stream
beds where  lateral  movement occurs  readily.  It would be  particularly diffi-
cult  to ensure  that crossings in  these areas  did not cause  barriers to fish
migration.   The  design of  appropriate  crossings  to  prevent  migration  bar-
riers and  allow crossing stability  would require considerable effort.   Proper
                                  V -  51

-------
crossings in these  areas  would  be  critical  since  any  migration  blockage  of
main stem areas  would eliminate large  sections of spawning and  rearing  areas
used by  Arctic char and  Arctic grayling.

The  increase  in  access available to local  residents or  mine  employees would
adversely impact fish  resources in  streams that are crossed  by the corridor.
These  impacts  would  result  from fishing  and  associated disturbance during
the  late  summer char spawning  period,  and  could  severely  impact char
populations  in  the  Kivalina  drainage.   Other  impacts  such as sediment from
construction and  borrow  pits, concentrate spillage,  and timing  and  location
of crossings would  be similar to  those described for Alternative  1,  but of a
significantly greater magnitude because of the higher number of major stream
crossings.

                               Alternative 3

Fish impacts would be  similar to those for  Alternative 1.

Marine Biology

Marine Invertebrates and  Fish

                               Alternative 1

Port site construction activities would  result in increased suspended  sediment
and  turbidity  in  neighboring waters.   Port  Lagoon,  located adjacent to  the
port site,  would be breached to shelter a barge-mounted  construction camp.
Some dredging could take place along  the  shore depending on the  local  avail-
ability  of  fill,  but no dredging would take  place within the  lagoon.   The
short  causeway  construction  would  involve driving or vibrating  sheet pile,
placing of armor rock and the placing  of fill.

In  open water  areas,  the   suspended  sediment resulting from construction
would  be dispersed by wind and waves.   Sessile organisms, including poly-
chaete   worms,  gammarid  amphipods  and  ophiuroid  seastars,  would   be
smothered   in areas of  high sedimentation.   More  mobile  organisms  such  as
shrimp,  crabs  and  fish would abandon the area.  Construction  impacts  would
last approximately one season.

Breaching   Port Lagoon would result in saltwater intrusion, with  insect  larvae
slowly replaced by euryhaline* crustaceans (isopods,  amphipods and  mysids),
molluscs (bivalves  and gastropods) and oligochaete worms.   Euryhaline fish
species  which  might also  penetrate  the breached  lagoon could  include  Arctic
flounder, starry flounder,  Pacific  herring, and anadromous species  such  as
humpback  whitefish and  pink salmon.   The lagoon would, therefore,  become
more similar to  other open  lagoons  on the  coast.   These  lagoons generally
have greater fish and  invertebrate species diversity than closed lagoons,  and
appear to  be more  productive.   Although  local  impacts from breaching  would
be  significant,  they   would be  of  a  short duration,  and  a  relatively  more
stable saline  lagoon environment would  result.  Impacts would not be signifi-
cant on a   greater than  local basis  because of the large number and area of
 * Defined  in  Glossary.

                                   V  - 52

-------
coastal  lagoons  (207 km2  [80 mi2])  between  Cape Krusenstern  and  Point
Hope.

Additional  construction  impacts  would  result from  heavy  equipment moving
over shallow subtidal areas; vibrations  from  pile  driving and rock placement;
oil and gas  spills and leaks from construction equipment;  and possible dredg-
ing.   With the exception of dredging,  these  impacts should  not  add signifi-
cantly  to  the  impact  of  suspended sediment and turbidity  increases.  Dredg-
ing impacts would  depend  upon  the amount  of area dredged and  the  water
depth.  Dredging from  greater  depths would result in the  loss  of a larger
number and biomass of organisms than shallow depths.

Construction  of  the  short  causeway  would  remove  approximately 0.9 ha
(2.2 ac)  of shallow  subtidal and  intertidal  habitat.   Densities of  infaunal*
organisms range  from 16.7/m2 (1.6/ft2) (Dames & Moore,  1983b)  to 266.6/m2
(24.8/ft2) (Dames &  Moore, 1983a).   The  infauna  is characterized  by nema-
todes,  amphipods,  polychaetes and tunicates.  Approximately 66.2 to 77.6 kg
(146  to  171  Ib)  (Dames  & Moore, 1983b)  of  organisms  would   be  lost.
Epifauna*  (typically gammarid amphipods,  mysid  shrimp,  seastars and crabs)
would be displaced  and habitat for foraging bottomfish  would  be lost.

The  short causeway  would  add  hard substrate  habitat in the form  of  armor
rock and  sheet pile.  The armor rock (approximately 0.3 ha  [0.7 ac] nominal
surface area)   would  provide habitat for hard  substrate  organisms such as
barnacles,  shrimp and gammarid amphipods.   Exposed  hard faces  (sheet  pile
and  exposed  armor  rock)  would  only  provide  seasonal  habitat due  to   ice
scouring.

Sediment  would  generally  be  deposited  on  the  northwestern side of  the
causeway  structure  and  eroded  from the southeastern side,  though at some
point  in the future  an  equilibrium would  be  reached.   Infauna and epifauna
communities  would  be altered by  these erosional  and  depositional   patterns,
but it would be impossible to predict overall  effects.

Construction of the transfer facility  would  have a  minimal impact on  anadrom-
ous and  marine  fish.  There would  be a possibility  that  fish moving  along
the shore could  be  impeded by the  causeway, but its short length  would  not
likely  cause a substantial   barrier  to  migration.   The causeway should  be
constructed  in July or early August  to  prevent any interference with migrat-
ing fish that could  be caused by sediments or noise.

Construction of  the  offshore island transfer facility  would require  initial
dredging  followed by placement of  berms on  which the tanker  would  rest.
Once  in  place,  dredged  sediment would  be  pumped into  interstices beneath
the ship.   Dredging  for  site preparation would impact about  24 ha (60 ac) of
bottom.   The  density of infaunal  organisms  in this area  ranges from  3.1  x
106/m2 (2.9 x  I05/ft2) to 7.9 x  109/m2 (7.3 x 108/ft2)  and biomass from 0
mg/m2  (0  mg/ft2) to 785.5 mg/m2 (73.0 mg/ft2).   This means approximately
90.5 kg (200  Ib) of  biomass  would  be  removed.   Affected  species  would  in-
clude  polychaete  worms,  bivalves, gammarid  amphipods,  crangon shrimp  and
ophiuroid  seastars.
* Defined in  Glossary.


                                  V - 53

-------
Dredging  operations  would also create  suspended  sediment and turbidity.  A
reduced  infauna and  epifaunal  community  would  result from  this,  and fish
would tend  to  avoid  the area.   These impacts would  be significant on  a local
basis,  but not  on  a  greater than local  scale.  Turbidity and suspended sed-
iment impacts  would  cease shortly after dredging  stopped.   Recolonization
would occur within the next growing season.   Transient  impacts  would also
likely result from small fuel and motor oil leakages or spills.

Once  in  place  the offshore island  would result in the loss of approximately
24 ha (60 ac) of soft bottom benthic habitat.   Although the submerged sides
of  the   ship  would   represent  new  hard  substrate,  attached  community
development  would be reduced by  ice  scouring.   An  increase in deposition
would  tend  to  occur  on  the  northwestern side  of  the  ship and  increased
erosion  would tend to occur on the  southeastern  side.  This  might  result in
some alteration  of  the biotic communities, although the changes would prob-
ably not be significant.

During  construction  and operation,  fuel, chemical and ore concentrate spills
might occur.   These  could  occur  on   a  small  continuing  basis  or  from  a
catastrophic  event.   In either  case,  some toxicity would result.   The  amount
of toxicity would depend  on the size of the area affected,  as well  as  on the
type and concentration of toxicants.   Small spills would  have a  locally sig-
nificant impact, but would  probably not  be  significant on  a greater than local
basis.    Larger  spills  could have  greater  than  local  impacts on   fish  and
invertebrate populations.   Spillage control  plans and rapid response to spills
would be the primary  mitigative measures.   Appendix 2 (SPCC Plan) outlines
the proposed draft plan for spill reaction.

The offshore  island   transfer  facility would have little effect on  nearshore
fish and  invertebrate  migrations.   The  tanker would  be  approximately 1,097
to 1,219 m (3,600 to  4,000 ft)  from the  shore  in 7.6 m  (25 ft) of  water at its
shoreward end.  This should  be  ample  space for  the  movement  of  mobile
species.   Movement  in  deeper water seaward of the facility would  be unim-
peded .

The offshore island  should not negatively affect fish resources but might, in
fact,  act as an artificial  reef  for  orientation  and attachment  of  food  organ-
isms.

                                Alternative 2

Overall  impacts  would be  similar to those  described for  Alternative  1,  al-
though  the density and diversity of benthic  organisms appear to be  greater
than  at  the  southern  port site.   The benthic  community  assemblage  also
appears   to  be  composed  of  longer-lived   species  rather than  short-lived,
opportunistic species  as found  at VABM 28.

Construction related   impacts to nearshore  invertebrate communities  at Tugak
Lagoon  might   include a  community  shift  towards  shorter-lived,  colonizing
species typical  of shallow water  habitats.   Eventually,  a  longer-lived com-
munity  would return  after disturbance  ceased.   The  port site would  remove
approximately 72 kg  (159  Ib) of biomass, while the offshore island ship would
remove  about 90.5 kg  (200 Ib).


                                   V -  54

-------
The construction and operation of the  port site facility at this site  should
have no adverse effects on  fish provided  that oil,  chemical and  concentrate
spills  were  contained.   Some  sediment loss  to  the  environment  might be
expected,  especially  during construction.   However,  no   anadromous  fish
spawn or  rear  in the  vicinity  of  Tugak Lagoon  so no  impact would be ex-
pected.   The  lagoon  would  be breached  for storage  of  construction  and
lightering  barges, but  this  should  have no  impact  on anadromous fish since
the  lagoon  is  not used by  these  fish.  Other species of marine fish would
likely  be affected by modification  of the lagoon in a  manner similar to  that
described for Alternative 1.

Impacts  of the  short  causeway  and offshore island  would be similar to those
for  Alternative 1.  The offshore island  might  provide suitable substrate for
herring  spawning  thought to occur in this  area.   This could have a bene-
ficial effect on  herring  stocks if spawning habitat is presently limited.

                                Alternative 3

Port site and  lagoon  impacts would  be similar to those described  for  Alterna-
tive 1.  There  would be  less  removal of  benthic habitat and generally  less
dredging activity because  no offshore island would  be constructed.   Elimina-
tion of  the  offshore  island  transfer  facility  would  increase the risk of a
chemical  or concentrate  spill.   Transfer  of  concentrates  would be more likely
to occur in the  limited  time frames when the bulk cargo carriers were pres-
ent, even  if  weather  conditions were unfavorable.   The direct  effect of a
spill on  fish  would  depend  on  the time of  year  (i.e.,  during  migratory or
nonmigratory  periods) and on the  nature of the spilled material.   Impacts on
both anadromous and  marine  species could range from  low to  moderate.

Marine Birds and Mammals

                                Alternative 1
The persistent polynya  that  typically forms  offshore between  Kivalina  and
Point  Hope would  likely  attract greater  use  by  marine mammals,  including
endangered whales,  and  marine birds.   Therefore VABM  28  as a  port  site
location,  approximately  26  km  (16  mi) southeast  of  Kivalina,  would  likely
have  less general  impact  upon these groups than  would a port site  at Tugak
Lagoon located closer to the polynya.

Direct  habitat loss  from construction  of the  short causeway and  ballasted
ship  would total  approximately  24.9  ha  (62.2 ac).  This would   not be a
significant loss to either  marine birds or  mammals.

Indirect habitat loss  for  marine birds would  not be significant as they do not
use the nearshore areas  for  feeding.   For marine mammals indirect  habitat
loss could be  significant,  but probably  only  on a  local  level.  There might
be  some displacement of  ringed seal pupping  in late  March/early April,  but
this would be  very local  in nature.  The noise and activities  associated with
lighter  and  bulk  carrier traffic, and  the corresponding loading and unloading
activities  at the  short causeway  and the  ballasted  ship,  would  cause marine
mammals to  generally  avoid the area.   Neither  the causeway nor  the  ballasted
ship would present a  physical  obstacle  to  movements.
                                   V - 55

-------
The  endangered  bowhead  and Gray whales exhibit excellent hearing and re-
spond  to  sounds caused  by human activities.   Whales demonstrate  avoidance
reactions  to  ship  and helicopter  noise  at  distances of 1.6 to 3.2 km (1 to 2
mi).   While  some noise and  disturbance would  occur yeai—round,  most dis-
turbance  would  occur during  the ice-free shipping  season  from  late  June
until early October.   The bowhead whale  in particular is slow-moving, timid,
and  sensitive to  sound.   Bowhead whale  migrations  from mid-April to early
June would be unimpeded as most individuals move well offshore.   However a
few  moving  closer to  shore  might be  displaced seaward  of the  facilities to
some  extent by noise.   Any  significant  noise-generating activities on  the
dock or  on the ballasted  ship  would  be restricted during the  April through
early June  whale migration  period  to  keep impacts to bowhead whale  migra-
tions  past Kivalina to  a  minimum.  The autumn  return migration of  bowheads
is  usually well  offshore  to the  west  in the Chukchi  Sea.  The Gray  whale,
which  normally  moves  and  feeds  nearshore,   would  likely avoid  the  port
facilities also, thus reducing  feeding habitat to  some extent.

Initial  vessel traffic  associated with the port would be low, approximately 16
to  20 bulk ore  carriers,  tankers and  supply ships per  year.   These vessels
would  be active only during the ice-free  shipping season from late June to
early October  and  would  not overlap  the  normal bowhead whale  migration
period.   The small number of vessels  would probably not significantly impact
any marine birds or mammals.

Transfer  facilities  construction  would  have  essentially  the same  kind  of im-
pacts as  described for indirect habitat loss above,  but of a greater  magni-
tude.   Disturbances   from  driving  sheet  pilings,  rock  filling of  the  short
causeway,  dredging and  ballasting  the ship could cause significant  local dis-
placement of marine mammals.  If these activities  occurred during northward
bowhead whale migrations from mid-April  to early June,  there might be dis-
placement  of individuals  seaward of  the  facilities.   Following  completion of
construction,  noise  and  disturbance  levels  would  decrease  to those  of  on-
going operation.

Transfers of concentrates from the  short causeway to the lighter, the  lighter
to  the ballasted  ship,  and from the latter to the bulk carriers would create
an unknown  risk  of  spillage,  as  would movement of petroleum  products, rea-
gents and other  toxic materials  in the opposite direction.  Chronic  spillage
or a  severe spill could  have  significant  impacts  on both  marine  birds  and
mammals,  depending   upon the  time  of year  and local  weather  conditions.
The  stable  nature of  the two platforms at each point of transfer (i.e.,  the
short causeway and  the  ballasted ship) would  tend to  lower the probability
of  such   spills.   The  buried  pipeline  from  the ballasted ship to  the short
causeway would also  lower the probability  of petroleum spills.

                               Alternative 2

Because  of  the  polynya  which  forms  offshore  between  Kivalina  and Point
Hope,  the Tugak  Lagoon port  site in  this alternative  would  likely have a
greater general  impact upon marine birds and mammals than would a port site
at  VABM  28.
                                   V - 56

-------
 Impacts  associated with the  short  causeway and  ballasted ship transfer facil-
 ity would be similar to those for Alternative 1.

                                Alternative 3

 Impacts  associated  with  construction  and  operation  of the port  site facility
 would  be the  same as those for Alternative 1.

 Direct habitat  loss  from  construction  of the short causeway only would total
 approximately  0.9 ha  (2.2 ac).   This would  be  approximately 24 ha  (60  ac)
 smaller  than  Alternative  1,  and  would not  be  a significant  loss  to either
 marine birds or mammals.

 Indirect  habitat  loss for marine birds would be similar to that for Alternative
 1.   For  marine  mammals  it  would  likely be  less.   For this  alternative  the
 peak  periods of activity and disturbance would be  limited to approximately 16
 to  20  times during the  ice-free  shipping season  when  the lighters would
 directly  load or  unload the bulk  ore  carriers, tankers or  supply  ships.   In
 Alternative  1,  there would be  more constant activity  offshore  as  concentrates
 were steadily  moved to the ballasted ship and  routine maintenance and  opera-
 tions  generated noise.

 Transfer facilities construction would  have somewhat less  of  an impact than
 Alternative  1  because there  would  be  no dredging or ballasting  of  the ship.
 However, this  would not likely be a significant difference.

 To the  extent marine  birds and  mammals  would be affected  by  concentrate
 and other  toxic spillages,  this  alternative  would likely have a greater impact
 than Alternative 1.  The  lack of  a stable  concentrate transfer platform dur-
 ing periods of rough  weather,  as  would exist with the ballasted ship, would
 increase  the probability of chronic  or major spills.  Also,  petroleum products
 would  have to  be transferred  to  the short  causeway  by  lighters,  and  not
 through  a buried  pipeline.   This would  also increase  the risk of spills.

 Physical  and Chemical Oceanography

 Coastal Geologic Processes

                                Alternative 1

 According  to  Hopkins  (1977),  the  net drift of  the sediments in the  area  of
the proposed  port  facility at  VABM  28 is  to the southeast.   Moore  (1966)
 estimated that approximately 22,000 m3 (28,780 yd3)  of sediment move down
the coast to be deposited  at Sheshalik Spit each year.  However, Woodward-
 Clyde  (1983)  recently  estimated that  about  82,580 m3  (108,000 yd3) of sedi-
ment is transported annually.

 It would be extremely unlikely that Cape Krusenstern would be affected by a
sediment barrier 32 to  48  km (20 to 30 mi) away  since:  (1) large volumes of
sediment, compared to  potential trapped sediment, exist between the VABM
28 port  site and the Cape Krusenstern beaches; and (2) the  entire coastline
is eroding  and providing  an  ample sediment  source.   Placement of  a solid
                                V - 57

-------
causeway  at either port  site would affect areas  limited to a distance of  ap-
proximately eight to  10  lengths of the structure.  Local  and offshore sedi-
ment  sources  exist which would compensate for  the trapped sediment.   The
total  maximum  sediment entrapped  by the  causeway would  be  about 183,500
m3  (240,000 yd3) (Woodward-Clyde,  1983),  though the actual amount trapped
would  probably be closer to  137,630  m3  (180,000  yd3).   Because  total  en-
trapment is approximately 1.7 to 2.2 times the yearly sediment transport,  it
would  take  about one and a  half to two years for sediment to begin bypass-
ing the causeway  structure.   This would  have  only  local impacts.

The port site  causeway  would have  an effect on the beach adjacent to  the
causeway.   The  up-drift (northwest)  side of the causeway would temporarily
fill  in and stop sediment movement.    Erosion would occur on the down-drift
(southeast) side  of  the  causeway,  and  would  be  approximately  equal in
volume  to the  sediment  trapped on the up-drift  side.  The impacts  would be
significant  locally, but would  represent an  insignificant  percentage of  the
total  volume of sediment moved toward Cape  Krusenstern  southeast of  the
port site.

Construction of a breached  causeway  was initially considered as a  means of
reducing  local  down-drift  erosion.    Although  a  breached  causeway  would
allow  more net sediment  movement along  the shore (and thereby reduce local
erosion impacts), such  a  causeway  would  be  technically more difficult to
construct and  maintain, and  was,  therefore, not considered to  be cost effec-
tive.   Neither causeway would  affect sediment  movement  on a  greater than
local  basis.

Storms  can  produce  waves  that  would  cause sediment  movement  in  either
direction  along the  coast.    The amount of material  moved  by such storms
could  be  as large as  the  net sediment transport for the year.  Therefore,
alternate  erosion  and filling  would be expected  to  take place on  either  side
of the causeway.   The  erosion could also threaten portions of the port facil-
ity if they  were  not properly protected.  On the up-drift side  of the cause-
way,  where sediment would  be deposited, the  effect would be to  alter the
depth of  water and composition of the nearshore  substrate.  This could have
a local  impact on  the marine organisms as previously discussed.

The effect  of  the causeway on the beach  ridges at Cape  Krusenstern, 38 km
(24 mi) to the southeast, would  be insignificant since the  main  impact of  ero-
sion  would  be near the causeway.  Material would fill  the  area on the north-
west  side of the  causeway,  and would then begin passing around the cause-
way to the southeast to maintain  the  net transport  rate.   Most of  the mate-
rial  traveling  to  the Monument originates  down-drift of  the VABM  28  port
site (Hopkins, 1977).

An offshore island would have little or no  effect on sediment transport along
the coast because, in  the  depth of water at the island,  wave-induced water
velocities and  wave force impacts  on  the  bottom  which are the primary forces
in  sediment movements  would be smaller  than  near the shore.   The reduced
forces  on  the bottom  sediments  would  tend  to  move only the  finer-grained
materials.   The  amount of  material moved at  the depth of the offshore island
would, therefore, be insignificant compared to the material  moved  along the
beach.
                                 V - 58

-------
                               Alternative 2

The  forces acting to move material  along  the beach at this port site would be
different  than the  forces acting at the  VABM 28 port site.   The  effects of
deposition and erosion  in the area adjacent to the  causeway would be  approx-
imately  the  same  as those  at  the  VABM 28 port site,  except that  the  net
movement of  sediment would  probably be  to the northwest.

At this  site  the  nearest  lagoons (Tugak  and  Kavrorak) would  be  at least
1,050 m  (3,452 ft)  distant  from  the causeway.   Because  of this separation,
the only  likely effects of  the causeway would be  erosion  and deposition adja-
cent  to  the  port facility.   This could  endanger the port facilities  if they
were  not properly protected.   The  composition of the substrate in the vicin-
ity  of the causeway would  also be changed, but  this would only  be of local
significance.    There would  be no  effect  on Cape  Krusenstern since several
sediment  nodes exist  between this  location and  Ipiavik  Lagoon  (Hopkins,
1977).

                               Alternative 3

Coastal  process impacts would be similar to those for Alternative 1.

Marine Water Quality

                               Alternative 1

Port  site construction  could  increase sediment  loading  for  a  short period
until  a  beachhead were established.   During construction and operation,  the
lagoon  barrier  beach  would be  breached  for barge access to the  lagoon.
Sediment impact  of  limited beach  construction  would  not be significantly
different from that  experienced during  summer  storms which move consider-
able quantities of beach sediments.   Impacts  would  be local.

Onshore port  construction  activities could  cause erosion and  sediment con-
taminated runoff  into the marine environment.   Sedimentation  ponds  to cap-
ture  and treat runoff  would  be constructed early in the schedule  to limit
impacts on marine water quality.

Offshore  construction  impacts  would  be comprised  of   limited  sediment  in-
creases  during the  short causeway construction and  seabed  preparation for
the  ballasted  tanker.   The short  causeway would be  comprised of  sheet
piling  facing  with  backfill  from  the shore  out to  the piling.   Sedimentation
would  be limited by the piling facing.   Excavation  of fill material  would in-
crease  local  sediment  loading for a short time period.   No significant long-
term water quality impact  would result.

Seabed   preparation  for the ballasted tanker  would  require  dredging  and
placement of  bottom material in an  approximate 61 x  305 m (200 x 1,000 ft)
area to accommodate the ship.  Granular  material would be  pumped  under the
ship  to  give  uniform  support,  and  the   tanker's outer  holds  would  be  bal-
lasted with  approximately 72,628 m3  (95,000 yd3) of granular material.   The
granular  material  would be  dredged from the seabed adjacent to construction
sites.
                                 V - 59

-------
Excavation  and placement  of  the  bottom and  ballasted material  would resus-
pend  small  sediment fractions  of the  existing seabed.  There is  evidence  that
such  resuspension  occurs  regularly during  summer storms.   Construction
activities  would  not  be  significantly  different and would  produce  no long-
term  water quality  impact.   Corps  guidelines would  be followed  for dredge
and fill operations.

Wave-induced scour of ocean  bottom  sediments has been  noted  in 9 m (30 ft)
water  depths.   Observations  of  the project area  seabed  indicate   signs of
such  movement.   During  storm  events  it is not  uncommon to have design
waves in  the  area  exceeding 6 m (20 ft)  in  height.  Such waves might  in-
duce  a  velocity along the  seabed  in  excess of 1.8 to 2.4 m/s  (6 to  8 ft/s).
A  ship  ballasted in  place and exposed  to  such waves would experience wave
forces and  velocities in  excess of the normal bottom  velocities.  The design
of the ballasting system  should  be such that wave forces and  velocity would
be  considered.   Appropriate  design  considerations along the  boundaries of
the ballasted  ship would be  necessary  to  control scour and to protect the
ballasted  tanker foundation.   The design  evaluation process  must  address
scour causes,  anticipated  scour  effects  and methods  of  scour  control.   The
design wave selection should  consider events likely to occur during the life
of the mining  activity.   Proper  design  features  would  limit the potential of
impacts due to sediment movement or  ship damage.

The  tanker would  also be  designed  to  withstand  anticipated forces  from  ice
movements.  The tanker would  have a  sidewall height of 24 to 27 m (80 to
90 ft) and be ballasted down  in  9 to  12  m (30 to  40 ft) of water to provide a
freeboard of approximately 12 to  18 m (40 to 60 ft).   Limited experience with
a  similar  structure  in  the  Beaufort  Sea  (Dome  Petroleum's structural  steel
drilling  caisson)  indicates  that ice override of the  ballasted  tanker might not
be  a  problem.   Reports  show that the ship essentially  creates a barrier to
ice movements  and the resulting  ice  pile-up builds  against the  ship,  grounds
out,  and  forms  its  own  rubble  field of  protective ice.   This  effect is  ex-
pected to  provide  adequate  protection  from wind-driven ice impacts on  the
ballasted tanker.  The added  ice  strengthening steel plate around the watei—
line  of  the  ship,  and  the additional  internal bulkhead  bracing,  would  be
designed to withstand anticipated ice forces.  An  ice load monitoring system
would also be installed  in the  hull.

Detailed  design engineering for  the   ballasted  tanker concept  has not been
performed  to  date and is beyond  the scope of this document.   Detailed  and
very  complex design efforts including modeling of scour  and ice forces might
be necessary  for  full  evaluation.   Little experience exists  with similar facil-
ities  so  it  is  impossible to statistically evaluate  the probability  of  various
risks  associated  with the ballasted tanker.   Detailed  designs would  consider
potential risks and  address safety factors that could  reduce risks to accept-
able  levels.   Such  design  detail  would  be included  in  pertinent  state  and
federal permit applications.

Other potential marine water  quality impacts involve shipping and  material
handling spill  risks.  The  risk  of spill  of fuel and materials might be some-
what  higher during  construction.   However,  the  quantities of material  and
frequencies of  shipments  during operation would present  a much higher over-
                                V - 60

-------
all risk.  Since spill  risk analysis is  a statistical problem  that  has not been
quantified,  the  impacts for  construction  will  be discussed  along with opera-
tional impacts.

Spillage  during  construction or  operation could result from  transfers between
the  "ship  island"  and lighter  barges,  or between  lighter  barges  and the
short causeway  (and  vice  versa);  shipping accidents; or  weather  related
hazards.  During construction,  the items that would  be most likely to result
in a  spill   problem  would  be fuel, cement and  concrete  additives and oil.
Spillage  during  operation could include  fuel,  ore milling  process  chemicals
and  concentrate.   Impacts  from spill events  would vary depending  upon the
magnitude  of the spill  and  the material spilled.   The  area  of  impact would
vary  depending  upon  the  weather  conditions  (wind, waves and currents).

Impacts  of fuel  or oil  spills could be heavy on local area aquatic life.   Over-
all  water quality impacts  would  be  short-term  for  small  spills,  but  major
spills could  have greater than  local  significance and result in longer term
hydrocarbon-induced   water  quality degradation.   Under  adverse  weather
conditions,  oil  spills  could  impact  beaches anywhere in the area from  Cape
Krusenstern to  Point  Hope.

On an  annual basis,   approximately 214,000  bbls of  fuel  oil would  be con-
sumed by project power generators, on-site  equipment  and  for  regional fuel
use  by  villages.   A  year's  supply of  fuel would be  stored  primarily in the
ballasted offshore  tanker.    Oil  to be  stored  on  the tanker  would be trans-
ferred from  bulk carriers using flexible hoses.  Transfer would  be rapid and
the primary spillage potential would be on the ships where  hose connections
would be made.   Spillage on the ship should  be contained onboard.

Onboard fuel storage and handling  facilities  would be in center  compartments
protected from  the  sea by two  layers  of steel   (Fig.   11-17).   Containment
capacity in  the  tanker would  be  10  percent above the projected necessary
storage  volume.  Large protective wing  tanks  on  either  side of  the fuel
storage  tanks would  contain  gravel ballast  material, thus providing a con-
siderable degree  of protection  from side impacts.  Status monitoring of the
stored  fuel   would  be continually conducted by instrumentation,  and the
bilges between hull  compartments  would be  routinely  inspected.

Transfer of fuel from the  tanker to shore would be  through a  buried  10-cm
(4-in) diameter steel  pipe surrounded by a 15-cm (6-in) diameter steel guard
pipe.   Flow detectors would  be  used  to monitor fuel transfer  operations  to
give  immediate  indication of pipeline leakage or  unusual transfer conditions.
As an  extra precaution,  a  fuel  leak  detection system  would be  installed  to
detect  leakage  from the 10-cm  (4-in) transfer  pipe  into  the space between
the two  pipes.

To preclude  the  possibility of  pipeline break impacts,  the  transfer pipeline
should  be  purged  of  fuel oil between transfers.   An  oil spill under ice  or  in
open  water  could  have  significant  impacts on fish and wildlife if  unnoticed
and  not immediately reclaimed.   Fuel  oil spills under ice would  be  especially
harmful  unless quickly detected because they could  not  be  effectively cleaned
up.   With   proper  design,   construction  and  monitoring, the buried pipeline
                                 V - 61

-------
with associated leak detection systems  could  be installed and  operated in a
manner which would  minimize the potential for fuel  oil  spills  occurring during
fuel  transfer operations.

Onshore fuel storage tanks would be constructed on well  drained gravel pads
or  on  pilings, with  spillage  containment dikes  and  synthetic  liners  con-
structed around the tanks.   Trucks would  be used  to transfer oil to the
mine  site.   Truck  transfer  areas  should be constructed  to  drain  to spill
containment areas, and should be sealed  to prevent undue soil  contamination.

Spills  of  mill process  chemicals  that disperse or dissolve in  seawater could
result  in  buildup of toxic concentrations in  the immediate area of the spill.
Process  chemical  spills could  be extremely  significant.   Chemicals  such  as
sodium  cyanide,  copper sulfate and  sulfuric  acid  could result  in direct toxic
reactions  and degradation of  surrounding water quality to  below  aquatic life
standards.   Depending  upon  weather (wind,  wave, current) conditions, the
toxic area  would  be dispersed  in  hours or  days.   Impacts  of  small spills
would  be  locally significant, while large spills could have a greater than local
significance.

Potential  for  spills  at  the port site  would  be  low  because  all  unloading,
handling  and storage of concentrates would  be done  under cover in an en-
closed area.  Conveyors  would be covered to  protect against wind pick up of
concentrate  particles,  and  the  structural   supports  at conveyor  transfer
points would be skirted at the bottom to  contain any minor spills which might
result during  handling operations.   These  spills  would be cleaned  up  and
returned to the storage building.

The port  site  area  would be  served  by drainage  collection channels and a
sedimentation  pond  to control  suspended  particulate  matter  generated  by
runoff  erosion.   This  system  would  also be  able to  contain  miscellaneous
spills  of  concentrates  or fuel oil  which  were  not  controlled  at the source.
Accumulated water  in  the onshore  containment system would  require treat-
ment and  discharge  during the  summer  months to maintain  adequate  storage
volume in  the  event  of  a fuel  tank  rupture.   Any  contaminated  sediment
which  was  collected  in the pond would  be  reclaimed  and transported  to the
mine site for disposal in  the  tailings pond.  Annual sampling of site materials
and  pond  sediments  would be  conducted  to determine concentrations of lead,
zinc, barium,  cadmium and fuel  oil  which might accumulate due to spills and
normal  operations.

The primary  source of potential  concentrate  spillage  to  the marine  environ-
ment would  be during the dock/lighter/tanker/bulk carrier loading  and un-
loading operations.   All  points of material transfer for this alternative would
be  relatively secure.  The dock transfer and two ballasted  ship  transfers
would  be  stable,  and would occur in protected  conditions using conveyors or
cranes  operating  from  a stable platform.  It  would be expected that at some
point  weather  might be a significant  factor  in the environmental  safety of
loading operations.  All  loading  and unloading  would  be  suspended during
extreme wind and sea conditions.
                                 V - 62

-------
The lead and zinc concentrates would  be essentially sulfides  of  the respec-
tive metals,  while  the  barium concentrate would  be barium sulfate.   Sulfides
are  insoluble and release  toxic  contaminants very slowly upon  prolonged
exposure to the elements.   If  submerged  under  most marine or freshwater
conditions,  they would be  expected  to remain intact  and not oxidize to the
corresponding  soluble   metal  sulfates  over short  time periods  of  days  or
months.   However, upon  dilution  and  mixing  with  water,  some initial  release
of surface adsorbed  flotation reagents  would occur.   Impacts would be of low
to moderate local significance.

Most reagents used in  the milling  process  have been  evaluated for  toxic im-
pacts by Hawley  (1972).   The impacts at low concentrations  are significant
for many of the reagents.  The quantities anticipated  in the event of a spill
and  the  short  exposure  would not  present  a significant  long-term impact,
however, rapid  implementation  of  cleanup measures  would be  necessary.   In
the event of a  soluble material  spill, dispersion  and resulting dilution would
reduce the  significance of local impacts.

Barium  sulfate  has a  low water solubility of  about 2 mg/£ and is not re-
garded  as  being  particularly toxic.   Quantities  released to the  environment
would depend on  the degree of contact with water  and the duration  of expo-
sure.  Therefore,  mitigation in  control  of  concentrate spills  would require
rapid implementation  of cleanup measures where practicable.

The impact  of  a  concentrate  spill  would  also  depend upon  quantities and
weather  conditions.  Small  spills  during  ship  transfers  would be dispersed
rapidly  and  would not cause even a  short-term impact.   Small  spills  which
occurred  repeatedly  over  years of operation  could  increase sediment concen-
trations  of  lead, zinc and barium.  Present sediment concentrations for these
elements are as  follows:


                   Sediment Concentrations at Port Sites

                   Lead (Pb)            2.7 to 6.3 mg/kg
                   Zinc (Zn)            25 to 46 mg/kg

                   Barium (Ba)          22 to 283 mg/kg


Spills of  0.9 Mg (1 ton)  of concentrate  per day would be anticipated to in-
crease  sediment concentrations spread  evenly  along an 8  km  (5  mi)  segment
of the coastline  approximately one percent in 20 years  of operation.  Concen-
trations  near large spill  sources could approach  pure concentrate strengths.
However, mixing energy and sediment  transport  would be strong influences.
The high inherent mixing energy  and fine concentrate grind  would tend  to
disperse  concentrate  spills.   The slowly  settling  concentrate would create
suspended solids water quality  impacts for major spill occurrences.   Cleanup
of all but the  largest  spills  would not be  feasible.   Direct  impacts  to water
quality  would be minimized  since the concentrates  would  be relatively  insol-
uble and background  seawater  concentrations  would  be  likely  to  be well
below normally accepted aquatic life standards.
                                V  -  63

-------
The  most  prevalent  summer wind  conditions, from  the west  or  northwest,
would  tend to move  spills  down the  coast  toward Cape Krusenstern.   For
large oil spills, this  movement could  increase  the  extent of impact such that
a spill could have  greater than local significance.   For  chemical or dispers-
ible  spills, the transport would tend to disperse  the material  rapidly.

The  risk  of  spillage  would  be  directly dependent  upon the  number of trans-
fers, the number of  transfers  between unstable  platforms and  the number of
ships involved  (Table V-15).

The  SPCC Plan  (Appendix  2)  required by  EPA would  also be  certified  by
the  state.   The  plan would outline  rapid  spill  reaction measures,  materials
and  equipment required  for containment and  cleanup  procedures.   Training
programs  and  spill  contingency staffing  requirements would  be outlined in
detail.
                                Table V-15
                  TRANSFER AND SHIPPING  FREQUENCY
Alternatives
Number of Concentrate Ships/Year
Number of Concentrate Barges/Year
Number of Concentrate Transfers/Year
Number of Concentrate Transfers/Year
1 & 2
13
420
853
0
3
13
84
168
84
              at an  Unstable  Platform

         Number of  Material and Equipment           13        13
              Ships/Year
         Note:          Transfer =  movement from one ship to a
                                    dock or another  ship on or
                                    over water.

                Unstable Platform =  a floating ship or barge subject
                                    sea conditions.

         Source:  Cominco  Alaska,  Inc.
                                V  -  64

-------
                               Alternative 2

The  marine water quality  impacts of this  alternative would be similar to those
for Alternative 1.

                               Alternative 3

The  marine water quality  impacts of this  alternative would be similar to those
for Alternative 1 with the following exceptions:

     0  Oil  would be stored onshore at the port site thus increasing the risk
        of onshore fuel  spill contamination.

     0  Oil  would  be lightered  instead  of piped  to shore.   Lightering  pre-
        sents different  spill  risks and,  since more connections  to  pipelines
        and  more  transfers  would  be made,  oil  spill  risk  would increase.
        Fuel transfer by  lightering would be subject to wind  and  weather
        limitations as discussed below.

     0  Lightering  ore  concentrate to a moored   ship  would be subject to
        interruption  due  to adverse  weather  conditions.  Transfers  between
        the lighter and  the ship, two  unstable platforms, would  not be pos-
        sible  when wave  heights  were over  1.5 m (5 ft).   These conditions
        exist  approximately  20 percent of the  time during  the 100-day ship-
        ping season.  Delay  of  the ore concentrate vessels would cause  sub-
        stantial   increased costs.   In  addition,  these  increased  costs  would
        force  attempts   to work in marginal  weather  conditions,  greatly in-
        creasing the chance  of significant spills of hazardous  substances to
        the marine environment.

     0  Two tug-assisted  4,535 Mg (5,000 ton) barges would be used instead
        of one  907 Mg   (1,000 ton) self-propelled  barge.   This would  reduce
        the number of barge  trips.

     0  According  to shipping  companies, neither  clam  shell  loaders mounted
        on the  bulk  carrier or barge-mounted conveyors provide the neces-
        sary  speed for open  sea  transfers.   They also  present more  of  a
        risk for  equipment damage  and  spillage.

     0  Shipping frequency  and  number  of transfers differ from  Alternatives
        1  and 2 as shown  in Table V-15.

Approximately one-fifth the number of concentrate transfers  would  be  made
using Alternative 3.   However,  half of these transfers would be  between two
unstable  platforms in the open  sea (bulk carrier and  lighter).   Since  con-
centrate transfers  for Alternatives 1 and 2 would be  all from  or to  a stable
platform  (dock  or  ballasted ship), and  either under  cover  or by conveyor,
the  risk  of spills for  Alternative  3 would  be considered  slightly greater
because of the following factors:
     0  Pressure of weather to speed transfers;

     0  Unstable open sea transfers;  and,
                                V  -  65

-------
     0  Transfer methods would  be unproven and  not  desirable to shipping
        companies.

Air Quality

                               Alternative 1

Air pollutant emissions from the  concentrate  haul trucks' and supply  trucks'
exhaust  would  be  negligible  when  averaged  over  nine  to  12  trips per day
and  the 180  km  (112 mi) round-trip  distance.   However,  dust generation
would be a  serious  concern.   Measurements  along the North  Slope  Haul  Road
from  Atigun  Pass to  Prudhoe  Bay have shown that dust accumulations ex-
hibited  a logarithmic  distribution on  both  sides of the  road,  with  greater
accumulations   downwind   from  the  prevailing  wind   direction.    Measured
accumulations  in  one  summer  ranged  from  50  to 100  g/m2  at  30  m  (98  ft)
from  the road,  and  from 2 to  3 g/m2  at 1,000  m  (3,280 ft)  from the road
(Brown   and  Berg,  1980).  Dust  accumulations  were  found toxic to  many
species  of  mosses and  lichens  with  noticeable changes to vegetation  alongside
the road.  Total  accumulations during a  67-day period  in summer were  28 to
56 Mg/km (50  to  100 tons/mi) of road.

Dust  control  measures  could  keep dust  generation  to  low  levels.   These
measures might include:   road  constructed  of  hard crushed  rock;  use of a
subsurface fabric;  water  sprayed  on dry days; use  of chemical  stabilizers
and  binders;  use  of  wind  screens  and  berms; and  revegetation of  road
shoulder embankments  and  cuts and fills.   Revegetation procedures would
include  mulching, fertilization  and  irrigation  (if necessary due  to  drought).
Rooted  willow cuttings would  be suitable for revegetation of  wet slopes and
stream  crossing  areas.   Use  of  appropriate  dust control  measures would
reduce  potential  impacts  to roadside  vegetation to  insignificant levels.  Dust
control  measures would be especially  important to  reduce impacts to  vegeta-
tion  in Cape  Krusenstern National Monument.

Potential air  pollutant sources at the  port site facility  include  a small diesel
power generator  and ore concentrate unloading activity  involving trucks and
front-end loaders.   Emissions from the power  plant and  loading  equipment
would be much lower than those discussed for the mine  area, and would rep-
resent an insignificant percentage of  National Ambient Air Quality Standards.

Dust  control  at the  port  site facility would include  water sprays and chemical
stabilizers.   Revegetation would be  attempted in  areas  not  subject  to ve-
hicles.   The  ore concentrate  would   be unloaded  in  an enclosed  area and
stored under cover.

Offshore air  pollution  sources  would include  emissions from  the  lightering
transfer operation  and a  small power generator on the  ballasted  ship.   The
emission plumes  from  either  of these sources  would not  reach any  nearby
terrain   in significant  concentrations.   The  greatest  potential  source, the
lighter,  would  be moving from ship to dock, which would disperse its  emis-
sions under even the most stagnant atmospheric conditions.
                                V  - 66

-------
                                Alternative 2

Air  quality  impacts  would be  similar to those  for Alternative 1, with  the
exception  that there  would  be  no concern  about  the effect  of road dust
plumes on Cape  Krusenstern National  Monument.

                                Alternative 3

Air  quality  impacts  would be  similar to those  for Alternative 1.  Slightly
greater emissions from  the lighter  tugs  would have no significant impact on
air quality.

Visual Resources

                                Alternative 1

The southern  corridor  passes  through Cape  Krusenstern  National Monument
and  would be  visible in the middle and  background view  of  travelers.  Use
level  of  the National  Monument  is presently  extremely low; less than  five
visitors  per  year  visit the  site from outside the  region.   However,  their
concern for  scenic qualities would be  expected to be very high.

The southern  corridor  would  be  located  in  an area  of  moderate visual  vari-
ety.   Road  construction would  meet the visual  subordinate  criterion  if sur-
facing material  were selected  which would not contrast with the  natural  land-
scape.  Gravel borrow  sites would  be contoured and revegetated,  while rock
quarries would be made to resemble surrounding rock outcrops.   Depressions
resulting  from  borrow  extraction would  eventually  fill with  water to  create
small  ponds  and lakes  along the  corridor.  If borrow material  was extracted
only  from  sites  outside   the   Monument,  the  surface  area  and  excavation
depths  of  Sites 7  and  8 would  increase.   This would result in greater visual
impact  at  those  areas  (Fig.  II-8).   Reclamation  could  permit  road  closure
through  the National Monument with  subsequent natural  revegetation  of the
road bed.

The  proposed  port  site and  transfer  facilities  would be located  in  partial re-
tention  Visual  Quality  Objective (VQO) areas.   The proposed facilities could
meet the VQO  provided  some design considerations were made.

As  noted  earlier for the mine  area  facilities,  the port site facilities would be
located  on private land and the VRM  Program  as a  management  system is not
applicable  to private  land.   The  discussion below,  therefore, would be pri-
marily of  benefit to  NANA as  the  landowner in  its joint management of the
project.

The  port  site  would be the project  component  which would be most visible to
those visitors  with  a  major concern for visual quality.   Located on the sea-
coast  near Cape  Krusenstern  National Monument,   the  port site would  be
visible in  the  middle ground view  of the majority of scenic viewers to the
area.   Since it is possible  these facilities would be used well into the future,
the  port   site  and  appurtenant  facilities  would  require  mitigating  design
measures  to  achieve the  partial retention  VQO.   Port facilities which  would
complement the  color,  form,   line  and texture  of  the  shoreline  would  be
necessary  and  appropriate.  If  borrow extraction was not allowed  within the

                                 V - 67

-------
boundaries of the  Monument,  the main concentrate storage building would be
located  at  the  port site  rather  than 4.0 km (2.5 mi)  inland at Borrow Site  1
(Fig. 11-16).  The visual  impact of this large structure would be substantial.

The  offshore island  tanker facility  would be  located  approximately  1,097  to
1,216 m (3,600  to  4,000 ft) from the shoreline where highly scenic  features
occur.   Because  of  its  tremendous size,  the visual  impact  would  be sub-
stantial and  visual quality considerations should  be considered  during facility
design to achieve the partial retention  VQO.

                                Alternative 2

All  components  of  this alternative would occur in  partial retention VQO zones
except  for two  separate  segments  of  the northern  transportation  corridor.
Although  scenic viewers  would have  a  background   view  of the  corridor,
approximately 19   km  (12 mi)  of  road  corridor  would cross  retention VQO
zones.  This classification directs  development activities to repeat the form,
line,  color and texture  of the  characteristic  landscape.   These sections  of
corridor would  be  considered  more  distinctive  landscapes  because they would
traverse the  highly  scenic basins  of  the  Kivalina and Wulik Rivers.   Well
planned  design  and  reclamation techniques would  be important to the main-
tenance of the  retention VQO.

The  port site location  is  considered highly scenic due to  the  distinct visual
variety class of the  coastline.   The  port site would require mitigating  design
measures to achieve the partial  retention VQO.  The  visual impact of the off-
shore transfer  facility  would be similar to Alternative  1.

                                Alternative 3

This  alternative  would  be  similar  to  Alternative 1  except  the  lightering
transfer system would  not involve a  ballasted  tanker offshore.   Visual  im-
pacts,  therefore,  would  be  substantially  less than  those for Alternative  1.

Sound

                                Alternative 1

During  construction  of the road,  significant  noise disturbance  would occur
from  drilling and blasting activities  at  the borrow sites.   If borrow material
was  extracted  only  from  sites  outside  the  Monument,  there  would  be more
noise generated during  road  construction than  if borrow sites  were  spaced
along the  entire corridor.  This would  be  due to borrow being hauled  longer
distances.    During  operation,  the  southern  corridor  road would  be used
consistently  for  nine to  12 round  trips per day by concentrate  truck/trailer
units.  Additional  daily tanker  and  supply truck trips and  one  or two trips
per  day   by light utility  vehicles  would  occur.   Use would  be  primarily
during  daylight hours with no  traffic  during  periods  of  hazardous weather,
such  as fog or  whiteout.

Sources of noise along the transportation corridor are  shown below:
                                 V - 68

-------
     Concentrate truck/trailer units  90 dB(A) at 15 m (50 ft)
     Tanker/supply trucks           90 dB(A) at 15 m (50 ft)
     Utility/passenger vehicles        80 dB(A) at 15 m (50 ft)
     Helicopter                       82 dB(A) at 152 m (500 ft)
     Helicopter                       76 dB(A) at 305 m (1,000 ft)
     Helicopter                       70 dB(A) at 610 m (2,000 ft)


Maximum  sound  levels would be  approximately  90 dB(A)  at  15  m  (50 ft).
Sound   levels from the  road would be  intrusive  (to human  conversation)
under  optimum  propagation  conditions  (low temperature  inversion)  out to  a
distance of 0.8  km  (0.5 mi), and noticeable above  normal background  sound
levels of wind and  rain to approximately 8 km  (5  mi)  from  the road.

Assuming  12  round  trips  per  day along the road corridor by  concentrate
truck/trailer  units  or tanker/supply vehicles (i.e., excluding  other  road
vehicles,  aircraft,  etc.),  at  an  average  speed of 48 km/hr  (30 m/hr), noise
would  be intrusive  to humans at  roadside  under optimum  propagation condi-
tions  approximately  3.3  percent  of the  time during a  24-hour period  (or
approximately  6.6  percent  during  a  12-hour   "daytime"   period).   Under
similar  conditions,  noise  would  be noticeable above normal background  sound
levels  to  humans at  roadside somewhat less than 33 percent of  the  time dur-
ing a 24-hour period (or  somewhat less than 66  percent of the  time  during  a
12-hour daytime  period).   At a  distance  of 4.8 km  (3 mi)  from  the  road,  the
percentages would  be somewhat  less than 27 and 53,  respectively.   Animals,
which  are generally  more  sensitive  to noise than humans,  would likely  notice
sound  for  a greater percentage of time  at  similar  distances.

Helicopter and light plane flights from the  mine area to  the port site or to
Kivalina should  follow the road corridor or stay  at  elevations of 610  m (2,000
ft) or  greater  above ground level  to the  extent  weather  and destinations
would  allow.   Helicopters  and  light planes  should  be  required  to  detour
around  known raptor nest sites  by  1.6 km (1  mi) or  greater horizontally  and
vertically.   No  route deviation   should  be allowed  to  investigate  wildlife,
particularly muskoxen, caribou,   grizzly bears, or nesting birds.   Air trans-
portation  to  and from  Kotzebue  should  also  follow  a consistent  route  and
maintain  610  m  (2,000  ft)  above  ground level  to the extent weather  and
destinations would  allow.   Failure to adhere to these restrictions could have
significant  local  impacts  on  wildlife species;  during  caribou  migrations  the
impacts could  be significant on a greater  than  local  basis.

Noise disturbance  to  visitors at Cape  Krusenstern  National Monument  would
be unavoidable within 8 km  (5 mi)  of the road corridor.   The relative  brief-
ness of any potential exposure  and the present  infrequent  visitation  to this
portion  of the Monument would  suggest that noise  impacts due to traffic on
the road would not be significant.

Potential  noise sources at the port site and transfer facilities can be divided
into  those which  propagate  through the  air  and those  through  the  water.
Onshore air-propagated noise sources would  include:
                                V  -  69

-------
     Concentrate truck/trailer units   90 dB(A)  at 15 m  (50 ft)
     Tanker/supply  trucks            90 dB(A)  at 15 m  (50 ft)
     Diesel power generator           85 dB(A)  at 15 m  (50 ft)
     Crane loader                    70 to  85 dB(A) at 15 m (50 ft)


The  combined sound level at 15 m  (50 ft)  would be approximately 93 dB(A)
assuming all  sources were operating simultaneously.   During normal wave  and
wind  conditions  (generating  30  to  50  dB[A]),  such a sound  level would be
discernible at  a  distance of  approximately  1.6  to 3.2 km (1  to 2 mi).   The
relatively consistent nature of port  facility sounds would  be unlikely to cause
terrestrial  wildlife  avoidance at distances greater than  that also caused  by
sight and smell stimuli.

Offshore underwater noise sources are shown below:

                                               dB at 305 m
                                                (1,000 ft)
                 Transfer barge/lighter/tug         106

                 Shipboard  generator                102
                 Ore ship transfer operations         92


Noise levels  are given  in  dB  instead  of dB(A) since the characteristics of
marine mammal  hearing  are different from those  of humans.  Most noise would
be  restricted  to  the  June  through  mid-October  period when the transfer
facility  would  be operated.   Ice-free  conditions would  likely  exist from  late
June  to early October.   Summer natural  underwater sound levels would range
from  30  to 75  dB.  Natural ambient sound  levels underwater with moving ice
present  would  range from  75 to 85 dB.  In  comparison, moderate to  heavy
shipping noises would  range from 70 to 75 dB.

Background  underwater noise sources  would include  ice action, waves, wind,
rain   and  marine  life.   Potential sounds  from the port and transfer facilities
would be  discernible  above  natural   background  sound  levels for  approxi-
mately 8 to 16  km (5 to 10  mi)  underwater.  They  would be capable of mask-
ing  sounds from  some   marine  mammals,  thus  limiting the range  over which
these animals  could detect  members  of  their own  and  other  species.  Most
sounds  produced  by port operations  would be  below 2,000 Hz  with a greater
proportion below 200 Hz.   Seal  communications  are not disturbed by offshore
operations sounds  since most seals generate sounds in a fairly  broad spec-
trum,  up  to 3,000 Hz.  Belukha  whales vocalize  above 2,000  Hz.    Noises
generated  by  Gray and bowhead  whales,  however, are  belches and  moans,
mostly  below 500  Hz.    This sound  range would  overlap those  frequencies
generated  by  offshore  operations.   Thus,  communication among  Gray  and
bowhead whales  could be affected at  least up to 16 km  (10 mi) from the  port
site.  The sounds might cause  these  whales to  avoid the vicinity  of the  port
site  during  summer operations.   This avoidance would  probably not be  sig-
nificant  since  bowhead  whales would normally not be present at this time and
Gray whales  would be relatively infrequent  visitors.


                                V  - 70

-------
                                Alternative 2

Sound impacts would  be similar  to  those  for  Alternative  1  with  the  following
exception.  The northern  corridor  would pass through areas  more important
to wildlife and subsistence  users.   Traffic  noises would cause  greater im-
pacts on  both.

                                Alternative 3

Sound impacts would  be slightly  less than those for Alternative  1.   The off-
shore island facility would  not  exist,  but sounds  from the  lighter operations
would be  similar in  intensity to  the  ballasted ship operations.

Cultural  Resources

                                Alternative 1

For those of  the  13 archeological sites that  could  not  reasonably  be avoided
by  realignment of  the  southern corridor road, it  would  be proposed to the
Advisory   Council   on  Historic  Preservation  (ACHP),   through  the  State
Historic  Preservation  Officer (SHPO),  that professionally designed  recovery
operations be conducted to  preserve the site data  and  material that could not
be  preserved  in  place.   On  a  site specific  basis,  measures to  protect  sites
near the  transportation corridor from  indirect impacts  would  be proposed to
the ACHP for approval.

The  historical  reindeer  herding facility  remains  at the  VABM  28 port site
would  be  either  directly  or indirectly impacted  depending  on  the  specific
port facilities  location.   Priority consideration would be given to a design to
avoid the  site,  and to provide protection  from  indirect impacts.  If avoidance
were  not   a  reasonable  option,  recovery  and  recording operations would  be
developed in consultation with the SHPO and the ACHP.

Because  of ice scouring and littoral transport along the coastline,  it is not
likely that submerged archeological  sites  or  historical shipwrecks would  be
encountered  by construction of  the  offshore island  transfer  facility.

Management  decisions  relating   to  sites  within Cape  Krusenstern   National
Monument  would  be  based  on  federal  regulations,  and on  the  additional
consideration  of  their  relationship  to  the prehistorical  data  base of  the
Monument.

If all  these measures  were  taken, impacts would not be  significant.

                                Alternative 2

For those of the 23  archeological  sites that are  determined  eligible for the
National  Register  and that could not reasonably be avoided  by realignment of
the northern corridor road, the same mitigation measures would  be  used  as
described  for  Alternative   1.   This  would also apply  to  the cabin  at the
Tugak Lagoon  port site.   As at the VABM 28 port site,  it is not likely that
archeological  sites  or historical shipwrecks would be  encountered  by  con-
                                 V - 71

-------
struction  of  the offshore  island facility.   If  all these measures  were taken,
impacts would not be significant.

                               Alternative 3

Cultural  resource  impacts would be similar to  those for Alternative  1.

Subsistence

                               Alternative 1

The  southern road corridor would be shorter than the northern  corridor and
would  tend to parallel  the natural topographic and drainage  features of the
region.  As  a result, it would traverse more upland habitat  and have fewer
stream  crossings  than  the  northern corridor.   The  upland  and  freshwater
habitats  along the southern  corridor also tend to be less accessible and  lower
in quality  and productivity  and thus of less  established value to subsistence
hunters.

The  western  Arctic  caribou  herd  is the  primary subsistence resource  along
the  southern corridor.   The  flanks  of  the  Mulgrave Hills between  Kivalina
and  Noatak provide good  winter range.   The southern  corridor follows  along
a  natural  buffer zone  between  the primary  winter  caribou range  in the
Kivalina  and  Wulik  River drainages and  the  secondary  winter  range on the
wind-swept  western  slopes  of  the  Mulgrave  Hills.    If  the road  were  to
grossly  impede  customary movements between these  ranges,  there would  be
immediate  adverse  impact  on the  Noatak  subsistence  harvest of caribou and
perhaps  on the  long-term herd  size.

The  NANA/Cominco  agreement would permit NANA to curtail road use during
caribou  migration periods when traffic  might interfere  with the normal pas-
sage  of  caribou  through  the  vicinity.   This  option,  if exercised properly,
could mitigate many of the adverse  impacts of road  activity on caribou move-
ments  near the road corridor.

The  southern corridor  would cross about 187  streams,  including  tributaries
of the Wulik  and  Omikviorok Rivers and  New Heart Creek.   Eleven  of  these
stream crossing sites contain  resident fish populations or spawning grounds.
These sites   are  relatively  remote  from  Noatak  and  Kivalina  and  are not
routinely used  for  subsistence.   However,  degradation of spawning  habitat
or new fishing  pressure as  a result of  increased access might impair down-
stream subsistence fisheries.

While the  southern  route passes  near  and through some  habitat  supporting
moose  and furbearers,  habitat impacts  would  probably be local and minor,
with  minimal  impacts  on  subsistence.   Near the  coast  the  corridor would
enter wetlands and  lagoon areas that support waterfowl populations,  so  there
would  be some local  habitat  loss and displacement  of waterfowl.

The  VABM 28 port  site falls within a marine mammal harvest area.  Accord-
ing  to  a  1974 survey  by  Mauneluk (Maniilaq) Association,  marine  mammals
were the  single  most important subsistence  food  resource  for Kivalina  resi-
                                V  -  72

-------
dents.   Seals  and ugruk  (bearded seal) were  most  important,  followed  by
walrus, and  belukha  and bowhead whales.

Marine mammal hunting is generally confined to the winter and spring months
when the port would  be ice-bound, so  ship  traffic from the port should not
significantly   disrupt  harvest  activities.   However,  port construction  and
year-round  activities  aboard  the offshore  transfer facility would likely dis-
place some marine mammals  from the  immediate area, resulting in a reduction
in size of the local marine  mammal harvest area.   Any  mishaps such as epi-
sodic or chronic  spillage of  fuels or  chemicals that  could seriously damage
habitat quality might  adversely affect marine  mammal  populations.  However,
the  net  impact of ordinary  port operations on marine mammal  resource  avail-
ability would  not be significant.

                                Alternative  2

The  northern  corridor  would  traverse  an  area  important to  caribou as pri-
mary winter  range and for  migration.   This  area  is  intensively  used  by
Kivalina  hunters.   As  noted in the assessment of  impacts on terrestrial wild-
life,  disturbances  from construction and traffic along the road  corridor  would
likely  result in reduced  use of this habitat by  caribou.   There  would  be an
unknown risk that road-related  disturbances could  cause an unfavorable shift
in winter grazing habits or  deflect  traditional  caribou  migration  routes  so
that  subsistence  access  to  this  important  food resource  would be  reduced.

The  upper  reaches of the Wulik and  Kivalina  Rivers support moose popula-
tions that  are harvested by  Kivalina  residents,  but moose  generally  adapt
more easily  to human intrusions.   Finally,  where  the  road  corridor  would
cross  the  Ikalukrok,  Wulik,  Kivalina  and  Asikpak  drainages,  it would pass
through  habitats  of  small  furbearers  important to  Kivalina  trappers.   How-
ever, the impact on these species would likely be  local and minor.

The  northern  corridor  would  make numerous crossings of the main streams
and  tributaries of the Kivalina,  Wulik  and  Asikpak drainages.  The crossing
areas would  impact fish  spawning areas and other  productive  habitat.   Kiva-
lina  residents  depend heavily on downstream  sections of  the Wulik and  Kiva-
lina  Rivers for their  fall subsistence harvest  of  Arctic char.    Road  construc-
tion  and use have  the  potential  to  impair  both  local habitat and  important
downstream   subsistence  fisheries  if  water quality  were degraded  or fish
passage  interrupted.

Lagoons  and  wetlands along  the coast  provide  habitat for waterfowl.  Con-
struction and use of  road  and  port facilities  near Tugak Lagoon could pos-
sibly result  in reduction of waterfowl habitat of minor importance to subsis-
tence hunters.

The  area offshore  from the  Tugak   Lagoon  port  site  is  used  by Kivalina
residents for harvest  of marine mammals like the VABM  28 port site.   The
relative  level  of  subsistence  hunting  effort  offshore  from  Tuguk Lagoon
reportedly  has  shifted  southeastward  in recent years.    Braund  and  Asso-
ciates  (1983)  found  that the area from Kivalina  south  to Rabbit Creek  is now
most intensively used for marine mammal harvest.   An earlier study (Saario
                                V  -  73

-------
and  Kessel,  1966)  reported marine mammal hunting  was most intensive north
of Kivalina  to Cape Seppings.   This may be  a dynamic phenomenon  which
periodically undergoes  change.   In  general,  it appears that the local impacts
of the Tugak Lagoon  port site  and transfer  facility on  subsistence  would be
similar to the impacts  noted for  the  VABM 28 site in Alternative  1.

                                Alternative 3

Subsistence impacts for this alternative would  be similar to those for Alter-
native 1, except that  the  absence of the ballasted ship  should lessen the
potential  for  disturbance  of marine  mammals  during the  spring subsistence
hunting period.  This would not represent a  substantial  difference.

Recreation

                                Alternative 1
Recreational  hunting, trapping  and  fishing  activities  by Cominco  employees
would  be prohibited  during their active  phase of work or residence at pro-
ject  locations,  or while  moving to or from their residences and work sites on
Cominco  transportation.   The southern road  corridor  would cross areas used
by  migrating fish  and  game species.  The  route would  be public  in that  it
would  be  available for  use by  other future  resource developments in the
region,  but  it  would not be open for general public use.  Current recrea-
tional  use of Cape Krusenstern  National Monument  is extremely  low due to
difficult  access  and overland travel.

Development  and human  use of the  port  facility could also lead to a potential
increase  in  recreational  activity  near the coast.  Similarly to  the  road, the
port and transfer  facilities  would be  for industrial  resource use.   However,
if  eventually they were made available  for  public  use, access would be im-
proved  for  non-residents,   and   hunting, fishing,   sightseeing  and  coastal
boating might increase.   Good waterfowl  habitat would be more  accessible and
these species would probably receive greater exploitation.

Project facilities would  replace a  roadless and generally  undeveloped recrea-
tional  experience with a developed  setting.   However, the impacts  on  exist-
ing  recreational activities would  be  minimal.   In  fact, recreational use  of the
project area  might increase due  to  more people  residing in the area;  better
access and  support facilities; more  publicity; and establishment of an indus-
try  for which Alaska is  known  worldwide.  Some  people might  be discouraged
from using the area  as its wilderness   character would decrease,  but more
might  be  encouraged to engage in  local recreational  activities as cultural
development  increased.

                               Alternative 2

Impacts  from development  of this alternative  would  be  generally  similar to
those  from Alternative  1.   However, the northern road corridor would  inter-
sect more  important  moose,  caribou and  fish  habitat, and  would thus have a
                                 V - 74

-------
greater potential  for  increasing  hunting  and fishing activities.   In partic-
ular,  major fish  streams  of the  area  would  be  crossed  at several  locations,
and increased  recreational fishing activities would adversely impact important
fishery resources  in  those streams.   If  angling  and associated  disturbance
occurred  during  the  late summer  char  spawning period,  char  populations
could  be severely impacted in  the Kivalina drainage.

                               Alternative 3

Recreational impacts would be  similar to those for Alternative 1.

Regional Use

Analysis of regional use impacts must  be made in light of the stated  positions
of the  landowners in the project  area regarding  use of the transportation
system  right-of-way and  port  site.

The  State  of  Alaska, through  its  Department  of  Natural  Resources,  has
stated  that it  will authorize development of a single industrial use transporta-
tion  corridor  to connect  mineral  deposits in the Western  De Long Mountains
with tidewater.  The  route would be  public in  that  it would be available for
use by other  future  resource developments in  the  region  (but not to  the
general public).   As  a public industrial use route,  reciprocal  right-of-way
agreements would  be  required whenever  individual,  corporate  or other pri-
vate ownership was encountered  to  ensure public access across these private
lands.   Likewise, tideland and associated  upland port development would also
be available to other users such  as  oil, gas, coal and other hardrock mineral
exploration, development  or support services (Wunnicke, 1983).

The  National Park Service has also  stated that if a Title XI  right-of-way was
issued   across  Cape Krusenstern National Monument,  it  would be  for indus-
trial resource use only and not open to the  general public.

NAN A  Regional Corporation,   as  owner of the   private land at the  proposed
VABM  28  port site, and  probable owner of the  land at the proposed  Tugak
Lagoon  port site,  has  stated that it would make  available a reasonable amount
of land for other resource users  at either port site at  fair market  value.

Also,   while  use  of the  road  by other  industrial  resource  users  would  be
permitted, such  users would  be  expected to reimburse the  Red  Dog project,
or other  appropriate  entity,  reasonable  costs   for building  and  maintaining
the road.

Thus,  from the  perspective of access to the transportation corridor  and port
site, any  of the  three alternatives  would provide  a  guarantee of reasonable
access   and use  by  other industrial   resource  users, and such  reasonable
access   and use  are  considered  assured for the  following impact  analysis.

                               Alternative 1

This  alternative  would provide  a  relatively flexible transportation system
between the coast and the foothills  of the De Long Mountains.  The  port site
location would  have adequate  soils and be  large enough  to handle major  ex-
                                V -  75

-------
pansion,  if needed.   Also,  since the 122 m (400 ft) causeway would  exist in
all three  alternatives,  the presence  of  the  ballasted tanker would  add extra
flexibility  for  transshipment  of materials  or  supplies  into or  out  of  the
region.

                                Alternative  2

The  effects  of  this  alternative  would be similar to those for Alternative 1.
At this early stage of development of the De Long  Mountains area of Alaska,
the  differences  between  this  alternative  and  Alternative  1  cannot  be  ac-
curately assessed with respect to the geographic ability of the port sites  and
road  corridors  to serve  other  users.   GCO's  Lik  prospect would  be more
easily  accessible  from  the northern   corridor,  but  would also be  reasonably
accessible  from  the southern  corridor.   From the standpoint of access to  the
port and  road corridor by residents  of  Kivalina, the three alternatives would
be approximately  equally distant from the village.

                                Alternative  3

The  regional  use  impacts  of this alternative would be  similar  to  those  for
Alternative 1  except that the  absence of the offshore island would somewhat
limit the flexibility of the port facility in serving other users.

Technical  Feasibility

                                Alternative  1

Since all  the  options  used to  develop the alternatives  were technically feasi-
ble,   in   determining   the  potential   technical   impacts  of  the  alternatives,
emphasis was  placed  on the technical  complexity of the options.

The  southern  corridor road  would  have one major multi-span  bridge over
30.5 m  (100 ft)  in  length,  and would  have  four  minor single span  bridges
under  30.5 m.   The  road would  be  built through  soil,  slope,  elevation  and
river  bottom  conditions  that  would  be  classified  as moderately  difficult or
difficult to construct for 19 percent of its length.

The  VABM 28 port site  location would  have suitable soils  and bedrock at a
depth of approximately 16.8 m  (55 ft).

The  offshore  island transfer facility  would  use a technically complex  system
involving  a self-propelled lighter and three concentrate  transfers using con-
veyors.   It would also employ  a buried  fuel  pipeline that would be subject to
ice-scour  problems during the  winter.

                                Alternative  2

The  northern corridor road would have six major  multi-span bridges (over
30.5 m  [100 ft]  in length)  and  would   have six minor  single  span  bridges
under  30.5 m long.  The road would be built through  soil,  slope, elevation
and  river bottom  conditions that would be classified as moderately difficult or
difficult to construct for 41 percent of its length.
                                 V - 76

-------
The  Tugak Lagoon port site location would likely have suitable soils, but the
depth to bedrock  is not known.

The  technical  impacts  of  the  offshore  island transfer  facility would  be the
same as those for Alternative  1.

                               Alternative 3

The  technical  impacts of  this alternative would  be  the  same  as those for
Alternative 1  except for the transfer facility.  This alternative would  employ
a technically complex  lightering system using two larger lighter barges towed
by  two tugboats.   Concentrate transfers  to  the  bulk carriers  would  be  by
clam shovels between  two unstable  platforms.   This facility  would not  have a
buried  pipeline subject to  ice-scour problems  during the winter,  but would
have to lighter fuel ashore from ocean-going ships.

Cost

Capital  and  operating  costs can be calculated for  eight of  the project com-
ponents:   the  mine,   tailings pond, mill,  worker  housing,  water  supply,
power  generation, transportation  system and  port  facility.   All  components,
except  the transportation  system  and  the port facility,  are common  to  all
three alternatives and would, thus, cost  approximately the same  regardless
of which  alternative   were  selected.   Any   significant  differences  in cost
among  alternatives, therefore, would  result from the  transportation corridor
location  and  the  type  of   port facility  selected.   Table  V-16  presents the
estimated road system and  port facility capital and annual  operating costs for
each of the three  alternatives.
NO ACTION  ALTERNATIVE

The No Action Alternative is identical to the base case forecasts for economic
and  population growth  and  regional change.

Generally, the  base case forecasts for the near  future  anticipate a slowing
population growth  and a static  or  deteriorating regional  economy.   Over the
past decade,  growing  federal and  state expenditures  have accounted for the
major share  of  the  region's cash economic expansion.  Paralleling this trend
has  been  a  marked  shift  toward  local  control  over  the administration of
public  resources.   Now, curtailed  federal  expenditures  and shrinking  state
revenues  and  expenditures  make it  unlikely that the  economic expansion of
recent years  would  persist.   Since  local government  and other local public
service  agencies  are  heavily dependent  on federal and  state funds,  their
ability to  improve or  sustain current  levels of community services  might be
impaired.   Even  so,   in the  absence  of  private  economic development, the
public sector would likely continue  to  dominate  the region's economy.

The potential impact of the No  Action Alternative on  the cultural and social
evolution  of  the region is not clear.   To the degree that the project is seen
to favor modernization and a  departure from established  cultural values, the
No  Action Alternative  would forego  those  social changes.  However,  it is
                                V -  77

-------
                                Table V-16


      ESTIMATED ROAD SYSTEM AND PORT  FACILITY CAPITAL1 AND

       ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS  ($000) FOR EACH  ALTERNATIVE
                  ALTERNATIVE 1
  ALTERNATIVE 2
                 Southern Corridor
                VABM 28  Port Site
                Offshore Island Fac
 Northern Corridor
Tugak Lagoon P. S.
Offshore Island  Fac
  ALTERNATIVE 3

 Southern Corridor
VABM 28  Port Site
Lightering  Facility
Component
Road System
Port Facility
TOTAL COST
Capital
Cost
74,700
54,700
$129,400
Annual
Operating
Cost
2,614
1,605
$4,219
Capital
Cost
125,700
54,700
$180,400
Annual
Operating
Cost
3,334
1,605
$4,939
Capital
Cost
74,700
74,000
$148,700
Annual
Operating
Cost
2,614
2,966
$5,580
Source:  Cominco  Alaska,  Inc.
1 Based on  July 1983 capital costs.
plausible  that  if  public sector growth  flagged,  the No  Action  Alternative
could mean  a  halt  in  the  shift  of political  and  social  power  to  resident
institutions.   This,  in turn, might  tend  to stall the movement now underway
to restore traditional Native cultural and  social values.

The  Red  Dog Mine  property represents a major economic  asset of the NANA
Regional Corporation,  which  is the most important non-governmental  economic
and  political  institution  in  the region.   The No Action  Alternative, which
would mean  no  development of this asset, might adversely affect the  long-
term viability of the NANA Regional  Corporation.
MITIGATION

The  term "mitigation" can  have several  meanings  in an  EIS process.  These
include:
                                V  -  78

-------
     (a)  Avoiding  the impact  altogether by not taking  a certain  action or
          parts of an action.

     (b)  Minimizing  impacts  by  limiting  the degree or  magnitude  of the
          action  and its implementation.

     (c)  Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating,  or restoring the
          affected environment.

     (d)  Reducing or  eliminating  the impact over time by preservation and
          maintenance operations during the  life of the action.

     (e)  Compensating for the impact by  replacing  or providing  substitute
          resources or environments.

 In this EIS,  no  significant impacts were found  that  would require, or would
 be  capable of  being  mitigated   by, compensation  as defined  in (e)  above.
 Mitigation  by  avoiding impacts  altogether,  as in  (a)  above, was incorporated
 extensively throughout the EIS process through elimination or alteration of
 options or  designs  to  avoid  significant  effects  (Chapter  III).  The other
 three  forms  of  mitigation,  i.e.,  minimizing  impacts,   rectifying   impacts
 through  repair,  and  eliminating impacts over time  (as in [b], [c] and [d]
 above),  are the  forms of mitigation generally grouped in this  EIS  under the
 term  "mitigation" and  are  referred to as "mitigative measures" in the  text.

 Without these numerous  mitigative measures, or environmental  safeguards,
 which  have been incorporated in the  Red Dog project plans for design, con-
 struction  and operation,  there   could  be many significant  impacts.   In the
 following  paragraphs, these mitigation measures are  briefly described  to pull
 together in one  place the major environmental safeguards  that  would be used
 in  project  development.    Details  of  these  mitigative measures are discussed
 under   individual  discipline  environmental   consequences  earlier  in   this
 chapter.

 Vegetation and Wetlands

 Vegetation would be  restored in  disturbed areas not subject to  vehicle  use or
 scheduled  for future  disturbance to the extent feasible under Arctic  condi-
 tions.

 Terrestrial Wildlife

 Aircraft  and  helicopter operators  would be  provided  maps and required to
 travel  corridors   and at altitudes  which would  avoid  known  raptor  nesting
 sites and  wildlife concentrations to  the extent weather and  destinations would
 allow.   Harassment would  be  prohibited.   Flight areas would be updated as
 required  to  avoid  caribou  movements.  Vehicle  use of  the  road  would  be
 restricted  or  eliminated  when  caribou movements occurred  near  the road.
Workers would not be  permitted to hunt or  trap  during  the active phase of
their  work  and  residence  at  project  locations,  or while  moving to or from
their residences  and  work sites  on  Cominco transportation.
                                V  -  79

-------
All  garbage collection sites  and incinerators  would be fenced using adequate
"bear-proof" fencing, and  workers  involved  with  garbage disposal would  be
instructed   in   proper  collection,   handling,  and  incineration   techniques.
Incinerator  wastes  and  unburnable solid  wastes  would be  buried in the tail-
ings pond  to  eliminate landfills  and their associated wildlife attraction  prob-
lems.

Feeding of  animals would  be prohibited  and  this would  be strictly enforced.
The ADF&G regulation  prohibiting  such  feeding  (5 AAC 81.218)  would  be
posted  conspicuously  throughout   the  camp.   All workers  would  receive
environmental  training which would  stress the importance of this prohibition,
the usual  consequences to  the  animals  themselves  from being fed, and  the
potential danger to  employees  (e.g.,  bear/human  contacts,  rabid  foxes).

Groundwater Resources

Runoff  from the ore  body would be  collected  by a diversion  ditch and  routed
to the tailings  pond.   If seepage occurred from the tailings dam  foundation  it
would be collected  and pumped back to the tailings pond.

Freshwater  Resources

Hydrology  and Water Quality

The ore body  diversion ditch would collect surface runoff and  sediment  and
route  it to the sump  sedimentation  pond and  tailings  pond.   All  mill  and
domestic  wastewater  would  also  be  routed to  the   pond.  Mine, mill  and
domestic wastewater  in  the  tailings  pond  would  be treated to  meet appropri-
ate permit standards  before  being  discharged.  The pond  would be sized to
handle  the  10-year  recurrence  24-hour  flood event.   Spillage  control plans
and rapid   response  to spills would  be  the  primary  mitigative measure for
spill impacts.    Appendix 2  (SPCC  Plan)  outlines the proposed draft plan for
spill reaction.

Guidelines  for  road  construction in the  Arctic would  be followed  to  prevent
sedimentation  impacts.  The  most important guidelines would include:  use of
erosion control  measures which  prevent  restriction of cross-drainage; avoid-
ance  of icings  and ice-rich soils; and use of stream  crossing designs which
minimize bank  erosion  and channel  scour.  Development of specific construc-
tion schedules  should  include consideration of:  ground  conditions most suit-
able for construction (e.g., frozen);  raptor  breeding, incubation  and hatch-
ing periods; caribou  wintering  areas  and major movement timing; fish pres-
ence  at stream crossings;  and marine  mammal   migrations and subsistence
hunting periods.

Biology

Mitigation  measures  which protect  water quality  would also protect  aquatic
plant, invertebrate and fish  resources.
                                 V - 80

-------
Air Quality

Permit  requirements  would  ensure  control of  gaseous and  particulate emis-
sions from mill  operations and power generation.  Dust suppression measures
such  as  watering  and  chemical treatments  would be used  for  mine access
roads,  the open pit,  overburden storage  piles and the road to the port site.

Sound

Offshore  port site noise would  be  minimized  during the  March through June
period  when  it might  affect  subsistence  seal hunting and whale  migrations.
Helicopter and fixed-wing operations would be  restricted  to the road  corridor
or to  altitudes  above  610 m  (2,000 ft) outside the  corridor  to  the extent
weather and  destinations would  allow.

Cultural Resources

The  preferred  course  of  action would  be to avoid all prehistorical and  his-
torical  sites.   Based  on  a  plan of mitigation  developed  in cooperation with
the  SHPO and  approved  by  the  ACHP,  data  recovery  operations would be
conducted at those sites that  could  not be avoided, or which  were discovered
during  construction.

Subsistence

Hunting and  fishing  activities  would  be  restricted for  project personnel in
order  to   protect  traditional   Native  subsistence  activities.   Road  activity
would  be  restricted or  eliminated  during  periods  of major caribou  movements
or at other times when such  activities might threaten or interfere with sub-
sistence resources or  harvests.

Socioeconomics

Cooperation  with  NANA and  local  community  officials in  Kotzebue  and  the
villages  would  ensure  that  mitigative  measures  were  applied to  problems
which developed.
MONITORING

Monitoring programs are  usually  established  in  response to permit require-
ments.   However,   additional  monitoring  requirements have  been  suggested
here  to  answer environmental concerns since:   (1) the baseline data  collec-
tion  period  of two years, while  adequate for EIS writing  purposes, may have
been  insufficient to document the full  range of natural fluctuations (e.g., in
caribou  migration  routes and timing;  runoff and  water  quality); and,  (2)
some  potential environmental impacts associated  with project  operations were
difficult  to  accurately  predict in  advance and can only  be  understood  after
actual  experience.
                                V -  81

-------
Vegetation and Wetlands

Dust from gravel  roads can be  detrimental to nearby vegetation.   Road cor-
ridor  vegetation would  be examined at five-year intervals  to ascertain  if dust
generation from the road were excessive and/or damaging  vegetation commun-
ities.

Terrestrial Wildlife

It  is not  possible  to predict the influence of the road corridor and associated
activity on caribou  movements and timing.   Before and during  the first few
years of  project  operation,  caribou movements would be monitored to deter-
mine  both a  baseline  and  then  the  extent of avoidance and  alteration of
traditional movement patterns due  to road activities.

Groundwater Resources

Seepage  through  the  dam  foundation  might occur if the  foundation thawed.
Seepage  rates and  water quality  measurements would  be made annually at
mid-summer to determine seepage trends with time.

Freshwater Resources

Hydrology and Water Quality

DEC and  NPDES  permit requirements would  be  expected to  specify  a water
quality  monitoring  program  at  the  confluence  of  Red  Dog  and  Ikalukrok
Creeks.   Sedimentation ponds  at   the  ore  zone  diversion  ditch  sump,  the
tailings dam  seepage collection facility and the port site would be  checked on
an  annual basis  and   excess  sediment accumulations removed.   An  ongoing
maintenance  program along  the  road  corridor and access roads would check
for:   (1) excess  icings in  stream  crossing structures;  (2) excess bank ero-
sion  or scour at  stream crossings; (3) excess icings along the  road embank-
ments  showing  evidence  of interference  with  cross-drainage;  (4)  excess
settlement and erosion  of fine soil  ice-rich subgrades; and (5) excess  erosion
or slumping  of cuts, ditches and  culvert outfalls.  Potential  problems should
be corrected  before environmental impacts  to water quality  or fish  passage
could  occur.

Physical  and Chemical  Oceanography

Predictions  in  this  document  on nearshore sediment  transport would  be
checked  after several  years of operations.  Qualitative  assessments would be
made  of  the  extent of sediment  scour and  deposition near  the  dock,  and
ballasted  ship (if  selected).

Marine Water Quality

In order  to  determine  any cumulative influence of small spills on the marine
environment,  bottom sediment sampling would be  done at  five-year intervals.
Transects  parallel to  the  beach  near the  dock  and  offshore  would collect
bottom  samples  and analyze for concentrations  of zinc,  lead,  cadmium  and
petroleum hydrocarbons.
                                V  - 82

-------
 Air Quality

 Records would  be  kept of typical  plume  behavior for the  power generator
 and  driers to avoid any  possibility of air quality  degradation at the worker
 accommodations.    A  notice  would  be  posted  at  the  accommodations  for
 workers to report  any  episodes of objectional odors and  gases reaching  the
 area  from the mill.  Permits would  require periodic  monitoring  of  emissions
 from  the mill  operations.

 Cultural Resources

 The Cultural  Resources Management Program would be periodically checked to
 verify  compliance  with  the  ACHP Memorandum of  Agreement  stipulations.

 Subsistence

 Monitoring of project influence  on subsistence hunting  would be in response
 to NANA  concerns  as raised  by  the  Red  Dog Project  Subsistence Committee
 presently  organized to  identify and  minimize  potential  subsistence problems.

 Socioeconomics

 Continued  coordination  with NANA and local  community officials  in  Kotzebue
 and  the villages  would  identify project related  social,  cultural and economic
 problems as they  might  develop.

 Recreation

 Monitoring of potential  problems  associated  with  increased recreation  would
 be in response to NANA and National  Park Service  concerns.


 RECLAMATION PLAN

 Under existing  law there are no  specific  requirements  for reclamation other
 than  those desired  by the  landowner.  This section presents a summary of a
 conceptual plan developed  by Cominco  Alaska for  NANA  for the  protection
 and  reclamation of  land  and water resources potentially affected  by various
 components of the Red Dog  project.  The conceptual  Reclamation  Plan may be
 found in Appendix 1.

 Open  Pit Mine

 The  area  of  land  disturbed by  the  open  pit mine and  access  roads  would
 ultimately  reach approximately  134 ha (330  ac).  Soils in  this area are shal-
 low,   stony and contain toxic levels of zinc,  lead, copper and iron.   There
 appears to be little potential  for  stockpiling soil for later use.   Reclamation
of the open pit would have  unusual problems  due to the proximity of the ore
 body  to  Red  Dog  Creek and the  steep,  rocky sides of the pit.   Backfilling
the pit,  resloping  pit walls to natural  contours  and  restoring  the  original
course of  Red  Dog  Creek  would probably not be practical  under existing
Arctic conditions.   Upon completion  of  mining,  Red  Dog  Creek  would  be
diverted  back into the  pit,  creating  a lake with a water  level at the  274 m
                                V  -  83

-------
(900 ft)  elevation.  The surface area of the lake would  be approximately 40
ha (100 ac) with maximum depths to approximately 122 m (400 ft).

Water quality of the lake would be dependent  on the extent of contact with
residual  ore  materials.   The volume of the  lake  would  be approximately five
times the  annual  mean  inflow of Red  Dog  Creek at this point.   This means
that the  water  quality  of the lake  discharge would show lower  seasonal fluc-
tuations  compared to  pre-mining   conditions.   Because of the  existing  de-
graded water quality of  Red Dog  Creek, mean water quality of the lake dis-
charge might substantially  improve over present natural  conditions.   All of
the ore with high  concentrations of lead and zinc would be removed,  leaving
only low  grade material  in  contact with the lake water.   The depth  of  the
lake would restrict oxygen  contact with remaining mineralized rock, reducing
dissolution and  release of toxic metals.   The  lake  surface would be  frozen
over from October  through  May,   further  restricting  circulation of  oxygen-
rich water to   mineralized  areas.    In  summer the  lake  would stratify  with
warmer  water overlying  cold  water, which  would also restrict  lake circula-
tion.   As  a  result,  a  substantial  improvement  in  the water quality of  Red
Dog  Creek might be expected.

Overburden Storage

Mineralized and unmineralized overburden rock not  suitable for  mill process-
ing would  be stockpiled  on  the east side of the  tailings pond.  The  surface
area of this  storage site  would  be  approximately 101  ha (250 ac).   Vegetation
types present in the area include dwarf shrub tundra  and low shrub tundra.
Underlying a shallow organic  layer is approximately 1 m (3.3 ft) of  annually
thawed silty  soil material.   This material would be removed where  necessary.

Overburden  storage  areas would  be constructed by dumping  and spreading
methods  designed to increase overburden stability, accelerate freezing of the
overburden and prevent  leaching.  To restrict  significant leaching  of toxic
materials,  the  surface  of the  sites would  be compacted  and covered  with  a
frozen  layer or other  impervious   material  to prevent  infiltration  of  rain or
snowmelt.  Overburden storage areas  would be  recontoured as  required to
achieve permanent slope  stability   and  facilitate  revegetation  and  restoration
to natural appearance.    Soil cover and  vegetation would be placed over  the
impervious surface  layer  of the dumps.  Particular care would be taken to
control runoff  from waste piles of  oxidized overburden and low grade  minei—
alized ore.   If  it proved  infeasible to  completely restrict  runoff from  minei—
alized  overburden  piles, they  would  be  moved  to the  tailings  pond  and
placed  in  a layer over  the tailings.

Tailings  Pond

The area  of land  disturbance  associated  with  the  tailings  pond would  be
approximately 237  ha  (585  ac).   The  reclamation plan for this  project com-
ponent  would  include  removal  and stockpiling  of  surface organic materials
and  soils  for future use if feasible under  Arctic climatic  constraints.   The
pond would  impact  an area  currently covered  with  dwarf and  low shrub
tundra and sedge-grass  tundra along the streams.   Soils of the drier  tundra
areas are  similar to those  described  in the waste  dump area.   The  wetter
sedge-grass  tundra  soils are organic with  an  active depth of  approximately


                                V  - 84

-------
0.6  m (2  ft).   When  mining operations ceased,  free  standing  water in the
tailings pond would  be treated and  discharged to Red Dog Creek.  After the
then-exposed tailings froze, lined  channels for runoff would  be constructed
across the tailings to  stabilized spillways  in  the dam.   Coolant pipes might
be  installed  in  order to enhance freezing of the  tailings  to permit access of
equipment.

The surface of the pond area would be restored  to an  appearance resembling
that of the  surrounding  terrain.   Application of  lime might  be required to
neutralize  the potential  acid generating surface  of  the tailings.  The depth
of material spread over the tailings to support vegetation  would be sufficient
to  prevent thawing  of  the tailings  when the  active  layer reached  maximum
depth  of  0.5 to  1.0  m  (1.6 to  3.3  ft) in late  summer.  If feasible  under
Arctic climatic constraints,  stockpiled  surface  and organic material would be
used.   Revegetation,  reseeding,  mulching,  fertilizing and  irrigation would be
done as  needed to restore a tundra-like appearance to the reclaimed  pond.

Mill  Site,  Worker  Housing,  Airstrip and Access Roads

The  area  of  land  disturbance  associated  with  these  facilities  would  be
approximately 38  ha  (95 ac) of sedge-grass tundra, dwarf shrub tundra and
open low   shrubland.   At  completion  of the  operating life of the  mine, the
facilities would  be removed and the  sites rehabilitated.  All equipment,  build-
ings and  other surface structures would be dismantled and removed from the
site.   Where  remaining  concrete  foundations would be significant obstacles to
regrading,  they  would  be  removed  to ground  level.   The airstrip,   service
areas and  access roads would  be scarified  to  relieve compaction, and recon-
toured,  if  necessary,  to  restore  natural  drainage.   Culverts  and  bridges
would  be  removed  and  open drainage channels  would be restored.   Water
bars would be constructed  to control  erosion.   Suitable  vegetation would be
established on disturbed sites  by applying  revegetation techniques  developed
during the operating life of the project.

Bons Creek Water Supply Reservoir

The area  of land disturbance associated with the  reservoir would be  approx-
imately  31  ha  (76  ac)  of  dwarf shrub tundra.   Reclamation  of the water
reservoir  would  involve either  breaching the  dam structure,  or allowing the
lake to  remain  with  a permanent  spillway.   An  evaluation  of regulatory
agency  desires  at the  time  of mine closure  would be  required  to  determine
the most satisfactory action for reclamation.

Transportation Corridors

The area  of land disturbance associated with  the  southern corridor would be
about  197  ha  (487  ac).   The  area  disturbed along  the  northern  corridor
would  be  about 257 ha  (634 ac).  It is possible that the  road  corridor would
be  used  for other regional  purposes  beyond the  operating life  of  the mine,
and  reclamation  would  not  be  required.   If  reclamation  were  required,  all
bridges  and  stream  crossing  structures  would  be  removed  and  drainage
courses restored.  The road surface would be scarified to relieve compaction
and,  where  necessary,  recontoured to  restore a natural  appearance.  Water
                                V  -  85

-------
bars would  be constructed to control erosion.  Native plant  species would  be
established  on  disturbed  areas  using  revegetation  techniques  developed
during the operation period of the project.

Borrow pits would be  reclaimed when no longer needed for maintenance pur-
poses.   Where practical, slopes would  be recontoured to  an  appearance com-
patible  with  the  surrounding  terrain  and  revegetated  using  appropriate
Arctic  techniques.   The  side  slopes  of rock  quarries  would  be  made  to
resemble surrounding rock outcrops.   Depressions resulting from gravel and
rock extraction would  be  allowed  to  fill  with water to form  ponds  or lakes.

Port Site

The  area  of land  disturbance associated  with the  port site would be approx-
imately 20 ha  (50 ac).   It is possible  that  the port site  would be used  for
other regional purposes beyond  the operating life of the mine and reclamation
would  not  be  required.  In the event the facility  were abandoned,  all build-
ings,  equipment and  other  surface  structures  would be dismantled and  re-
moved  from the site.   Concrete foundations would  be removed, if necessary,
to allow  site recontouring.  Crushed rock  pads would  be  scarified  to  relieve
compaction  and perimeter slopes would be  recontoured.   Shoreline features
would  be restored  following  removal of  the dock.   Natural  shore  transport
processes would  restore the original beach  slopes and profiles within a few
years.   Native  plants  would  be established  on disturbed areas.   The  bal-
lasted  ship  transfer facility would  be refloated and removed.

Reclamation Research

During the  operating period of  the project,  revegetation techniques would  be
assessed and  refined  on sites  representative of the  major kinds of land dis-
turbance.   Techniques  investigated  would depend  on the  nature and severity
of factors identified as limiting to plant growth on  the various waste mate-
rials.   Development  of practical  methods  for   conserving  surficial  soil and
organic material for use  in  reclamation  of  waste  rock,  tailings  and  borrow
pits  might also  be necessary.
OTHER PROJECT  IMPACTS

The Red  Dog  project  as a  whole  would  have impacts irrespective  of  which
specific alternative were  ultimately implemented.   Several  of these are dis-
cussed below.

Regional Impacts

The NAN A  region,  together with the  western quarter  of the  North  Slope
Borough and the  federal outer continental shelf off the western  Arctic  coast,
is  thought  to  be endowed  with   substantial  energy  and  other mineral  re-
sources.   Development  of the  Red  Dog  mine would  be the  most  advanced
effort  to date  to  develop a major  resource deposit in  the region.   The other
natural resources  of  outstanding   interest in  the  larger  region  are oil  and
gas, hardrock minerals and  coal.   The presence of some of these other re-
                                 V - 86

-------
sources  is well  established  and some  are  as  yet of only speculative interest.
In  every  case,  their  feasible  development  for export awaits either better
definition  of  resource  values  through  further  exploration,  more favorable
commodity market conditions or provision  of  transportation  and other devel-
opment infrastructure.

While  development of these  other  economic  resources  is  not  imminent,  it  is
possible that  their future development feasibility might depend  on  shared use
of  transportation sites,  corridors  or other  infrastructure  (particularly the
surface  transportation route  and  port  site) established for  development of
the  Red Dog  mine.   Since both the  road  and  port site would be available to
other  industrial   resource  users and support   services, the  most important
resource  prospects are reviewed below.

Oil  and Gas Resources

Alaska's western  Arctic  is generally  suspected  to possess substantial oil and
gas  resources.   The areas of highest  interest are outside but close to the
project area.   To date,  there has been spotty, fruitless exploration  for oil
and  gas in the Kotzebue Sound upland  perimeter,  and north and  east of the
study  area.   Now, within  the  next five years, a series of major federal and
state oil and gas  lease  sales are scheduled.

The federal Department  of the Interior  has two offshore  lease sales pending
for the outer continental shelf waters of  the Chukchi  Sea north  and west of
the  project area.  These are:  the  Barrow  Arch Sale #85 (February 1985);
and  the  Barrow   Arch  Sale #109  (February 1987).   The  State  of  Alaska has
two  lease  sales scheduled  for the region:   the Hope Basin  Sale  #45  (Sep-
tember 1985)  in the  vicinity of Kotzebue  Sound; and the Icy  Cape Sale #53
(September 1987) north  of  the NANA region.   There are also some existing
leases   and more proposed  in  the  western quarter  of  National  Petroleum
Reserve in Alaska.   Finally, the NANA  Regional Corporation  and the Arctic
Slope  Regional Corporation each have landholdings with petroleum potential in
northwestern  Alaska.  Both have  sponsored limited  exploration programs in
the northwestern  Arctic, without commercial success to date.

It would  certainly be premature  at this  stage to settle on whether, where or
in what  volume oil or gas reserves might  be  discovered in the  region.   Still,
some general  features for  a  feasible  transportation system for oil export (at
present,  natural   gas finds  do  not  appear  likely to be commercially valuable)
would  be  fairly  well fixed  in  advance  by certain  economic, technical,  geo-
graphic and  environmental  conditions.   Due  to the remote, frontier status of
the region and  its lack  of transportation  and  other  economic  infrastructure,
the  threshold  for pioneer  commercial  discovery  would  be extremely  high,
especially  for the   Chukchi  Sea  offshore  province.   A  recent  economic
analysis (Dames  & Moore,  1982b)  estimated  that the  minimum  economic  field
size  would be about 1.5  billion   barrels   of recoverable  oil.   The minimum
economic size  for  an  upland oil field would  be smaller, but still must be  large
enough to  absorb the  cost of an overland pipeline  spur  eastward  to the
Trans  Alaska  Oil  Pipeline or westward to a tidewater  port, plus the cost of a
marine terminal if none existed.
                                V  -  87

-------
Assuming that offshore or  upland commerical  reserves would  eventually  be
discovered in  the  western  Arctic, it would  be most likely  that  the  specific
configuration  and  siting of offshore/ surface, pipeline or port facilities for
development  and transport  of crude  oil would be dictated by  considerations
as  yet  unknown  and  independent of  the  status  of the  Red Dog project.
First,  geographic,   technical,   environmental  and  economic  factors   would
strongly  favor a  choice of overland  and/or  marine facilities specifically  de-
signed for,  and exclusively dedicated to,  petroleum  handling,  without  regard
for transport  facilities  installed  for  the Red  Dog mine.   Second, the  crude
oil  production  threshold would  be extremely  high.   It would  entail a  multi-
billion  dollar  capital  investment  in  production and transportation  facilities
that would  dwarf  the  anticipated cost  of  the Red  Dog  project.   For these
reasons,   there would  be a  relatively  low probability  that future decisions
about  petroleum  facilities  would  be  much  influenced  by  the comparatively
modest capital  investment committed to the Red Dog mine.

Hardrock Minerals

The Western  Brooks Range/De  Long Mountains area is a highly  mineralized
region  whose  potential  has  not yet been fully explored.  Apart from the Red
Dog mine,  the two  hardrock mineral  deposits that  have  so  far been  most
seriously considered for large-scale  commercial development are  the copper-
zinc-silver  deposits  in  the Ambler  District,  approximately 275 km  (172 mi)
southeast of the Red Dog  mine  site, and  GCO Minerals'  Lik lead-zinc-silver
deposit 19 km  (12 mi) northwest of the  Red  Dog mine site.

The 1981 Western and Arctic Alaska Transportation Study (WAATS) examined
10  transportation  systems,  involving combinations of six  corridors and four
transport modes, for export of  mineral  production  from the Ambler District.
The shortest  route  to  tidewater was  an overland corridor for  a road,  rail or
slurry pipeline system  to  the  coast  near Cape Krusenstern.   This corridor
traversed parts  of Kobuk  National Monument, Noatak  National Preserve  and
Cape  Krusenstern  National  Monument.   Bear Creek  Mining Company,  a  sub-
sidiary  of Kennecott Copper Company  and holder of substantial  reserves in
the Ambler  District, has stated  its  preference for this  general  route, ter-
minating  at a  port site  in  the vicinity  of  Tasaychek  Lagoon in Cape Krusen-
stern National Monument,  about 38 km  (24 mi) south-southeast of VABM 28
(Bear  Creek Mining  Company,  1983).   Since this route from the  Ambler Dis-
trict and the  proposed  Red  Dog  southern corridor converge on  the coast at a
right angle,  a common overland corridor would not seem  feasible.   A common
port site would require a coastal  link  or  a rerouting of the final  leg of the
overland  route from  the Ambler District.  Thus,  apart from the potential for
a  common  port  site,  presently  proposed transportation corridors for  the
Ambler  District do not  seem likely to be  affected by development of the  Red
Dog project.

On the other hand,  the Lik deposit  is  similar in  mineral  content and  infra-
structure requirements  to  the  Red  Dog  mine, as  might  be  other deposits
discovered  in  the immediate vicinity of the  Red  Dog mine.   The  economic
feasibility  and development plans  for these  as  yet  speculative  prospects
might  be affected  by the  development scheme for  the Red  Dog  mine,  espe-
cially  by the  location,  design  and  capacity  of  common-use  transportation
facilities, including the  port site.  For smaller mining operations, however,


                                V -  88

-------
especially  placer gold,  construction  of a road  from the  coast  into  the De
Long Mountains could be an  important stimulus.

Coal

The State's  Division of Geological  and  Geophysical  Survey  (DGGS) estimates
that the western Brooks  Range  north  and east of  the  Red Dog  project area
holds Alaska's most  massive  coal deposits, perhaps  a trillion tons of recover-
able coal.    However,  the  costs  of surmounting the  obstacles to  production
and transportation  of  these deposits  under  Arctic  conditions  place  these
deposits at a serious competitive disadvantage with other sources  of supply.
Therefore,  development of these Arctic  coal reserves does  not appear  likely
in  the  foreseeable future.  As  with oil and  gas  development,  geographic,
technical,  environmental and initial high  capital investment  factors associated
with  coal  development  would largely dictate the choice of overland  and/or
marine  facilities  specifically  designed  for coal  production.   There would  be  a
relatively low probability that  future decisions about coal  development would
be  significantly influenced  by the Red  Dog project.

The Morgan Coal Company is in the  initial  stages  of considering  the devel-
opment  of  a coal field  32  km  (20 mi)  east of  Point  Lay  (180  km  [112 mi]
northeast of Cape Lisburne).  The company has  expressed some  interest in
using the  proposed  Red  Dog  port site.   BLM will begin  an EIS  process in
1984  to review  the major  project  components  and determine the preferred
option for  coal shipment.

If construction  of a  road and  port for  the Red  Dog  project does promote
development of  other industrial resource  projects in the region,  their incre-
mental  impacts  would  raise the ultimate overall impacts from  initial develop-
ment of Red Dog.  Dust  and noise pollution from increased use  of the  road,
and  its  extensions,  could additionally  impact  vegetation,  caribou  and  other
wildlife, and recreational  users.   Likewise,  increased  use  of the  port  facil-
ities would  likely result in additional vessel  traffic with a  higher  possibility
of  spills and effects on marine  mammals.   Other developments would impact
visual   resources  and  wilderness values,  and  could  cumulatively  affect  the
existing subsistence  uses  and historical  lifestyles of local residents.

Since selection  of the  preferred  alternative for this project has  taken into
consideration  the regional  use perspective,  and since the  State has  specif-
ically stated that there will  be  only one  transportation  corridor  between  the
De  Long Mountains and  the  coast,  overall regional impacts should be  some-
what mitigated  by prevention of a proliferation  of  other  corridors and  port
sites for future developments.

Increased General Public Access

Although the road right-of-way  permit  would limit use to industrial resource
users,  there  cannot be  any guarantee  that such  a  restriction  would  apply
indefinitely.   Therefore,  one  of the  most  significant  long-term  impacts of
development  of the  Red  Dog project could be  its effect on  "opening up"  the
De  Long Mountains  region  of northwest  Alaska  to people by construction  of  a
regional  port and surface transportation  system.   This could take the  form
                                V - 89

-------
of increased access from  outside the area as well  as increased  ease  of access
for moving  around within  the  area.

While the ability of people from  outside  the  area  to initially access the port
and  road systems  would be limited,  in time  other  projects  (e.g., new mines
in the  De  Long  Mountains  or  further  energy  developments  on the  North
Slope) would  increase  the ease of  access and  use of these systems.   If the
port facility and  road  were ever opened for use by the general  public, they
would  be  increasingly  used  by hunters,  fishermen,  hikers,  birdwatchers,
sightseers,  etc.    The  mere  presence of these additional  people could ulti-
mately have substantial impacts on several resources.  In particular, wildlife
and  fish  populations   would   be  affected by increased harvests,   requiring
additional financial  commitments  and  management efforts  by the  Departments
of Fish  and Game  and Public Safety.   ADF&G in  particular  would need  to
substantially increase  resource assessment and monitoring efforts to minimize
impacts of  project  development on  fish  and  wildlife.   Additional management
efforts  would  likely be  required  to identify  and  close areas  to  (or limit)
hunting,  trapping and fishing in the vicinity  of  Red Dog  Valley, the trans-
portation  corridor  and the  port  site.   Disturbance of caribou could  have
regional  impacts  if  it  caused  a  shift in  traditional wintering areas or migra-
tion  routes.

The  archeological  sites in  the area might be affected by unauthorized collec-
tion  of  artifacts  from  sites within  walking or off-road vehicle distance of the
transportation  facilities.   Traditional subsistence  activities could be affected
either  by  direct  competition  with,  or disturbance  during,  subsistence har-
vests.   The impacts upon the fish  and wildlife  resource base discussed  above
could also affect subsistence  harvests.

Additional  access  by  off-road  vehicles  (ORVs)  could have  severe impacts
upon  vegetation  in  heavily  traveled areas,  especially at  shallow  fords  at
stream crossings.   Such use might cause erosion  which could cause  increased
siltation  in  the  area's streams.   Depending  upon  the severity, this  might
impact fish  spawning and ultimately the  subsistence use of that resource.   If
the  southern  corridor road  along  the  less  vegetated  Mulgrave  Hills  was
chosen,   ORV  trails   might   cause substantial  erosion  at  those  altitudes.
Harassment of wildlife could  also become a  problem,  particularly during the
winter.    Even though  only industrial resource users  would be  permitted  to
use  the road  initially, ORV  use would  be  very difficult to  control.   Past
history  shows  that regulation  of ORVs  by land managing agencies  has  been
largely  ineffective.  The degree to  which ORVs  might impact the Monument
would depend upon how successfully  the  NPS could  regulate their use.

Just the  development  of the project  itself would  have a significant impact on
the wilderness values  of  the  area.   While not  specifically recognized  by re-
cent federal or state  actions  as  being of wilderness  quality,  the area is de
facto  wilderness  and  project development  would  irrevocably change that.
The  increase in the number of people using  the area due to the easier access
would  certainly  put some additional developmental  pressures on  the area.
Increased  access   to   Cape Krusenstern  National  Monument by  recreational
users would also detract from the wilderness  experience of all users.
                                 V - 90

-------
 Increased  ease  of  access  within  the  area could also  have substantial impacts
 on  resources and  how they  are  used, including subsistence.   In particular,
 establishment of  a  road  could  intensify  local subsistence use  of  fish  and
 wildlife resources  along the  transportation system.  The prohibition of hunt-
 ing  and fishing by workers during  their active work phase  would signifi-
 cantly reduce the  impacts.   If,  however, such  restrictions were  not applied,
 the  continuous  presence  of  the camp  workforce  might  result  in  off-hour
 casual recreational  activity  concentrated  near the mine and along  the road
 corridor.    The northern   road  corridor  would give  camp  occupants  ready
 access  to  upriver  fish populations not  previously  harvested.    Both  routes
 would allow  access to caribou and other species on  their winter ranges.   The
 ultimate  impact of  the mine  workforce upon  the subsistence  resource  base
 would thus depend  heavily on the restrictions placed on firearms  and recrea-
 tional  use of camp  vehicles,  and on  recreational fishing,  hunting and trap-
 ping  by  mineworkers.

 If the  roadway became  a  convenient and popular  overland  transportation
 route  for  resident  subsistence  hunters,  it might  tend to extend the  range
 and   redistribute  the  subsistence harvest effort.    It  is  hard  to  foresee
 whether  such an  adaptation would,  over the long  run,  have  a  positive,
 negative or  neutral  effect on the resource base.   Possibly,  it would  merely
 amount to a  more  efficient  use  of  subsistence effort  over a  larger  range.

 Thus, while careful  design,  construction and operation of the  project might
 be  able  to  limit  impacts  upon  fish,  wildlife, vegetation, archeological  and
 other resources, the improved ease of access  both  into and within  the area
 for the public,  which  would  be very  difficult  to restrict, would have  definite
 and  perhaps substantial long-term effects.

 Cape Krusenstern National  Monument  Impacts

 The  purposes for  which Cape Krusenstern  National  Monument was  created are
 listed in Chapter  IV.  The various  environmental impacts  which would  affect
 the  Monument would be largely the same as  those  for other portions  of the
 project  area.  These  impacts have  been  described earlier  in  this  chapter.
 However,  because  a portion  of the southern   road corridor in Alternatives  1
 and  3 would cross the Monument,  and  because of Title  XI requirements  if
 the  southern corridor were  selected,  a  brief summary of the  environmental
 impacts on  the  Monument  is  presented below.   More  detailed descriptions of
 these impacts may  be found  earlier  in this  chapter  under  the specific dis-
 cipline headings.

 Vegetation  and Wetlands

 The  southern road  corridor  would  cross  approximately 38 km  (24 mi)  of the
 Monument.    Approximately  77 ha  (190 ac) of  vegetation would  be destroyed
 by  actual  road  construction.   Generally,  more  productive wetlands,  e.g.,
 waterfowl  habitat,  would  be  avoided by this road corridor.  Road dust could
 have  effects on  vegetation  to a distance of approximately 300 m  (984 ft)  from
the road.   A vegetation survey  after  five years of  operation would determine
these  impacts and   could  recommend  additional dust  control  measures,  if
 necessary.
                                V  - 91

-------
Terrestrial Wildlife

Other  than the  insignificant  local  loss of  habitat  from construction of the
road  itself, the  major terrestrial wildlife  concern  would  be indirect habitat
loss  from disturbance  and possible  interference  with  caribou  movements.   A
program during  initial years  of project operation  to  monitor  caribou  move-
ments  as  a  basis  for  implementing NANA's authority to  close operation  of the
road  during major  caribou  movements would  mitigate  this  concern substan-
tially.

Freshwater  Resources

Within the Monument,  the southern  road  corridor would have only one  major
bridge  crossing the Omikviorok River, and  20 minor bridge or  culvert  cross-
ings.  The  road construction  and maintenance guidelines as described earlier
in this chapter would largely  protect against water quality degradation due
to sediment.

As described earlier,  the  most  serious potential  impact  to water quality would
be due to spills  of  oil, concentrates or toxic chemicals.  Use of spillage con-
trol  plans (draft  SPCC Plan outlined in Appendix  2)  and  rapid  response  to
spills  would significantly  reduce  the probability that a spill would  reach a
water  course via surface  or groundwater paths.

The  protection of freshwater  quality  would also serve  to  protect the  invei—
tebrate and fish  species and habitats  in those streams.

Air Quality

Vehicle traffic on  the road would be  the only  source of air pollutant  emis-
sions within the  Monument.  Pollutant concentrations from these vehicle  emis-
sions  would not reach significant levels  even  under  the  worst atmospheric
dispersal  conditions since the  number  of vehicles  using  the  road  per day
would  be  so low.

Visual Resources

The  degree of  visual impact of the road, port site and transfer facility would
be  dependent  on the  attitude of the viewers.   While  present  visitor  use  to
this  portion of  the  Monument  is very low, the road, port site and  the  trans-
fer facility  would be  obvious  to viewers from most  parts of the western por-
tion  of the Monument.  The  layout and  colors  of the  port facility could  be
made to conform with  the  partial  retention  objective to mitigate  much  of the
visual impact.  However,  if the offshore island transfer facility  were selected,
the  visual impact of the  large  ballasted tanker would  be high,  but not signi-
ficant considering  the purposes  for  which the  Monument was  established.
Dust plumes from road traffic  could  prove to be the  most visible manifesta-
tion  of the road.   Proper  use of dust suppressants  could substantially re-
duce that impact.
                                 V - 92

-------
Sound

Sound produced by  trucks using the  road  within  the  Monument would  nor-
mally be discernible  to  the human  ear  up to five miles  from  the road.   Hel-
icopters  and  light  aircraft following  the road  corridor,  while  considerably
less  frequent  in  number, would  generate  sound to greater  distances.   In
addition  to the  impacts  of  these  noises on  recreational  users within  the
Monument, they would  likely  cause some avoidance  of the corridor  by cari-
bou,  bears and muskoxen.

Cultural  Resources

There are  six archeological  sites  in  the  Monument  that would be  within
1.6 km  (1 mi)  of  the  southern  corridor road.   As presently  aligned,  the
road  would  not directly impact any  of these sites.   Potential  indirect impacts
would  be mitigated  by  protective measures  approved by the ACHP.   Provi-
sions would be made  for  emergency recovery  operations  under  ACHP  guide-
lines  at  sites  discovered during   construction.   Intensive  preconstruction
surveys  would make  the likelihood of such site  discovery during construction
unlikely.   If these measures were adhered to,  there would not be significant
impacts.

Subsistence

The  presence of the  road  would  likely have a  mixed impact  upon traditional
subsistence use  in  that portion  of the  Monument.   Road disturbance  noted
above  would likely  cause   some displacement of  large mammals and  could,  at
the extreme,  affect major   caribou movements that traditionally cross the cor-
ridor.   While  initially the  road  would not be  used  to any significant  extent
by persons from outside the region, use  of the road by people from outside
the area would eventually  increase.  If this increased  ease of access caused
substantial  numbers  of  hunters  and fishermen  to  use  the area, competition
for subsistence resources  could occur.

The  increased  ease  of  movement  within  the area,  however,  might  serve to
increase  success of  subsistence users by providing easier  and quicker  access
to subsistence  resources.

Recreation

The  road and  port  site would  also  likely have  a mixed  impact upon  recrea-
tional use.  If the general public was ever  permitted use  of the road,  easier
access would increase the  use  by photographers, birdwatchers,  hikers, etc.
However,  visitors to  the   Monument desiring a  more primitive or wilderness
experience would tend to avoid that area  of the  Monument.

The  de  facto  wilderness  nature of the  project  area  would  be  permanently
altered,  with  the  loss of  wilderness characteristics  such as solitude and the
opportunity for primitive  types of  recreational  experiences.   Also,  since the
Secretary of the Interior is required by Section  1317 of ANILCA  to conduct a
wilderness  suitability  study  of  Cape  Krusenstern National Monument  by
December 1985, issuance  of  a  right-of-way  permit might  preclude  a signifi-
cant  portion of the Monument from being  included in that study.


                                V  - 93

-------
Coastal  Geologic  Processes

While no project  related facility  actually within  the  Monument would affect the
transport of sediments, the  possibility of development of a port  facility has
raised questions concerning  potential  impact  upon the  historic beach  ridges
at Cape  Krusenstern.  As  discussed in greater detail earlier in this chapter,
the location  of a port site at VABM 28 with a  short causeway and ballasted
tanker would have only a relatively minor and  local effect on sediment  trans-
port, and no significant effect on the Cape  Krusenstern beach  ridges.

Cumulative  Impacts

Cumulative  impacts  are those which, when  viewed  individually, might  not be
significant,   but  which  when  viewed cumulatively  could  have  significant im-
pacts.   In  a project  such  as  this, which  would  represent the  first  major
development in  an  area, cumulative impacts would  be very few by definition.
Impacts which  might  qualify  as cumulative in  another area would be the first
impacts within  the Red Dog  project  area.   They would therefore need to be
taken  into   consideration  during  future  development  proposals  within the
region.   Still,  some cumulative impacts  would exist.

Development of  the Red Dog project, with its economic benefits including the
additional people who would  come into  the  region,  would put additional  pres-
sures on  existing  social  institutions  and cultural  traditions.  While measures
would  be taken  to minimize  the  impact  on existing social  and cultural pat-
terns,  particularly at  the  village  level,  the  increased  activity caused  by
project  development  would  incrementally  move the region toward a more
"developed"  status.   While  not necessarily negative, it would  represent a
cumulative impact to  an ongoing process.

The  construction of  a road would  ultimately make  human  access considerably
easier to this  presently isolated  area.   Easier access would likely result  in
increased use of the  area  by persons  from  outside the  region  for many pur-
poses.   This would  likely have a cumulative  impact on the subsistence use
and  lifestyles of the  current  residents  within the project area.

Also, the development of a port facility  on  the coast  with  associated  in-
creased  vessel  traffic  could cause  a  measure of disturbance to  migrating
endangered whale  species.   This  facility, when considered with the proposed
port facility at  Nome, the  possibility of  an OCS supply  base on St. Matthew
Island,  and the existing  oil  and gas  activity in  the Beaufort Sea,  must be
considered a cumulative impact.

While not recognized by  recent federal or state  actions  for  its  wilderness
quality,  the area  is  de facto  wilderness.   Increased use  of  airplanes, off-
road  vehicles,  and the exploration camps such as  those  which presently exist
in the  Red  Dog Valley have all  cumulatively  impacted  the wilderness  char-
acter of the area to  date.   Full development of the  Red Dog project with its
road  corridor  and  port  site  would  significantly increase the  cumulative im-
pacts upon  the  wilderness character  of the  area.
                                 V - 94

-------
UNAVOIDABLE  ADVERSE IMPACTS

With one possible  exception,  there  have been  no significant adverse impacts
identified  by this  EIS that could not  be markedly  reduced to minimal  levels
of  impact by  proper  selection of  alternatives and  application of  mitigation
measures in  the  design,  construction and operation of the project.

It is possible  that there  could  be  an unavoidable adverse  impact upon  the
major caribou migration  movements  within the  region, although this would  be
unlikely  strictly  from  implementation  of the  Red  Dog  Project  alone.   The
unpredictability  of  movements  of  this  species,  and  the  great  historical
changes  in  home   range  and  migration  of  this  species which  have  been
recorded without apparent cause,  make it  impossible to  predict the  specific
impact  of this  project.   However,  while construction  and operation of a port
and  road by this  project alone would  likely not cause major interruptions to
caribou  movements, it would  open a corridor to increased future traffic that
might  cumulatively cause  such  interruptions.  Selection of  the  preferred
alternative (Alternative  1)  would  avoid to a  large extent the current  primary
winter  habitat  of caribou in the project area.  Development of an  appropriate
monitoring program  to  identify and   track  major  caribou movements,  when
used  in conjunction with NANA's intention  and authority to  restrict or close
operation of the  road to  Red Dog  project  activity  during major  movements,
would probably  prevent  such  a  significant adverse  impact.
SHORT-TERM USES VERSUS LONG-TERM  PRODUCTIVITY

In this section  the short-term uses of resources are related  to the  long-term
effects  of  the  project on  productivity of those same resources.   The purpose
is to weigh  the project's net benefits  to  residents of  the  project  area,  the
region, and  society as  a  whole.   In general,  short-term uses would be those
which  would occur during the lifetime of the project.   Long-term productiv-
ity would generally refer  to the time beyond the life of  the project.

Estimated ore reserves  of the Red  Dog project area,  if developed  at  antici-
pated  rates, would last at  least 40 years.  There is a  reasonable probability
that additional  reserves will be identified  in  the  future which could  signifi-
cantly prolong the life of  the  project.

Many of the  impacts  discussed earlier in  this chapter  would be considered
short-term,  with  many  of the  greatest  impacts occurring during  the  initial
construction  and  early  operational  phases  of  the project.   If these  impacts
were  properly  mitigated,  as  also  discussed,  their  impacts  on  productivity
would be short-term.

Use and operation  of the  project facilities,  particularly the road,  would  cause
disturbance  to  fish  and  wildlife.   In  the  long-term,   depending  upon  the
magnitude  of such a  disturbance, behavior and movement patterns could be
significantly  affected.   In  particular,  the  major  seasonal caribou  migrations
could be  interrupted,  causing  a  major shift in  location of portions  of  the
western  Arctic  caribou  herd.  This  could have  a  very  definite  long-term
subsistence impact on residents  of the  region.
                                 V - 95

-------
In addition  to  possible direct long-term  impacts  upon subsistence,  the short-
term  benefits  of  project  employment  might have  long-term indirect  impacts
upon  traditional subsistence lifestyles.   Increasing dependence upon the  cash
economy caused by project employment could  lead to a lessening  of participa-
tion  in  the  subsistence lifestyle.  While this would not necessarily be  bad,  at
completion  of the project  villages and families might have  become  so depen-
dent  upon  the  cash economy that  they  would be unable to fully  readapt  to
the subsistence lifestyle  as an integral  part of their existence if other types
of employment  were not available.

In a  similar manner,  the  increase in economic  activity,  influx  of new  resi-
dents from  outside the region, and other pressures  associated with  increased
human  populations  in the short-term could  have a  significant  impact  upon
existing regional social and cultural traditions and values.

In other ways, long-term productivity might be increased.   The development
of the  project-related transportation  system could  lead  to a long-term in-
crease  in natural  resource productivity  in  the  western Brooks Range (e.g.,
hard  rock  minerals, coal, oil  and  gas).   An overall  improvement  in  marine
and  aircraft transportation systems,  with related increases  in economic bene-
fits  and  the efficiencies  of distribution,  could  also  accrue to the  region.

If archeological and other cultural  sites were properly mitigated during  pro-
ject  development  and  operation,  long-term  knowledge of  the region's  earlier
inhabitants  would be enhanced.   An adverse  impact  could occur, however,  in
the unlikely event that  subsurface  archeological  desposits undetected  in  pre-
construction surveys  were encountered  during construction.  An  emergency
salvage plan designed for this contingency  would be in place to mitigate  such
impact.

Also, there  would be the possibility  that  removal of the Red Dog ore body,
in conjunction  with proper wastewater  management  and treatment measures,
could   significantly  improve  the  water   quality  and  therefore   long-term
productivity of Red Dog Creek itself.


IRREVERSIBLE  AND  IRRETRIEVABLE  COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES

A decision  to  permit  the  Red Dog  mining  project,  and its subsequent  con-
struction and  operation,   would  irreversibly and  irretrievably commit several
resources.

At  least 85 million tons   of  ore, and perhaps  more,  would be  removed and
consumed.   A  lake would  be  created  at the mine  site in the main stem of Red
Dog  Creek, and  the  topographic features  of the South Fork would  be  per-
manently altered  by  the  creation  and  ultimate reclamation of the  tailings
pond.

If traditional caribou  movements  were significantly changed,  and their pres-
ent  winter  range  in the  project area abandoned, this could prove to be  an
irreversible loss.
                                 V - 96

-------
If  the southern transportation corridor  location was  chosen,  the land status
of  Cape Krusenstern  National Monument  would likely be  permanently altered
by  issuance of  a right-of-way,  or through  a  land  exchange.   In either
event,  the  de  facto wilderness  nature  of the project area  would be perman-
ently altered, with the loss  of wilderness characteristics such as solitude  and
the opportunity for primitive types of  recreational experiences.  Also, since
the Secretary of  the  Interior is required by Section  1317 of ANILCA to  con-
duct  a  wilderness suitability study  of  Cape  Krusenstern National  Monument
by  December 1985,  either action might  preclude  a significant  portion of the
Monument from being  included in that study.

The  extraction  and processing  of  the ore  would require a large commitment
of  energy  resources  (diesel  oil,  gasoline)  which  would be  irretrievably  con-
sumed.   Project  development would require a significant input  of capital  both
for  construction  and  operation.   Dollars  spent  would be irreversible  and,
depending   upon   the  amount of risk involved  and  success of the  project,
possibly irretrievable.


SECTION 810,  SUMMARY EVALUATION  AND FINDINGS

This  section was  prepared to comply with  Section  810  of the Alaska  National
Interest Lands  Conservation Act  of  1980  (ANILCA).   It summarizes  the
evaluation  of potential restrictions to subsistence  activities which could result
from  the granting of  a  right-of-way permit pursuant to  Title  XI of  ANILCA
across Cape Krusenstern National Monument.

Only  the environmentally preferred  alternative as identified  in  Chapter  III
for construction  of  an access road to the Red  Dog project has  been analyzed
here.   Further,  the  portion  of the  route  which crosses the  National Monu-
ment  is  the  focus of  this section.   The  entire evaluation of potential effects
upon  subsistence activities  is addressed in  Chapters III  and  V  of this  Red
Dog  project  EIS  with  explanation of  existing baseline conditions presented in
Chapter IV and in Braund & Associates  (1983).

ANILCA (Public Law 96-487)  provides in  Section 810(a)  that:

     In  determining whether  to withdraw,  reserve, lease,  or  otherwise
     permit the  use,  occupancy, or  disposition of public lands..., the
     head  of the  Federal  agency having primary jurisdiction over  such
     lands  or his designee shall evaluate the effect of such use, occu-
     pancy,  or disposition on subsistence uses and needs, the availabil-
     ity of other lands  for  the purposes  sought  to be achieved,  and
     other   alternatives which would  reduce or eliminate the use, occu-
     pancy,  or  disposition  of public  lands  needed  for  subsistence  pur-
     poses.  No  such  withdrawal,  reservation, lease,  permit,  or other
     use,  occupancy  or  disposition  of  such lands which  would signifi-
     cantly restrict subsistence  uses shall  be effected  until the head of
     such  Federal agency -

     (1) gives notice to the appropriate  State agency and the  appro-
         priate  local  committees and regional  councils  established  pur-
         suant to section 805;
                                V  -  97

-------
     (2)  gives  notice  of,  and  holds,  a hearing  in  the  vicinity of the
          area involved;  and

     (3)  determines that (A)  such  a  significant restriction of subsis-
          tence  uses  is  necessary,  consistent  with  sound  management
          principles for the utilization of the public lands,  (B) the pro-
          posed activity  will involve  the minimal amount  of  public lands
          necessary to accomplish  the purposes of such use, occupancy,
          or other  disposition,  and  (C) reasonable steps will  be taken
          to  minimize  adverse  impacts  upon   subsistence  uses  and
          resources resulting from  such actions.

ANILCA further  mandates  that  if  the federal  action  would  significantly
restrict  subsistence  uses and  if  an  EIS  is  prepared  on the  federal  action
then the Section 810(a)(3)  findings must appear in that EIS.

This  section  of the  EIS  represents a  summary  of  the evaluation process
which  has occurred among the applicant, the local  residents and the federal
agencies.

Baseline data were collected  in  the  summer  of  1982 (Braund &  Associates,
1983) to augment existing  subsistence  data.   This information  served  as the
basis for the evaluation  of  potential  impacts from the alternatives considered
for  the  project.    The  EIS process has  served  as  the  formal vehicle to
identify potential  impacts  to  subsistence  resources  and  to  obtain  public
input.

To keep  residents of the villages  of Noatak and  Kivalina informed as to how
the  project might  be  developed,  a committee of local residents was formed to
review  the development  plans.   This  committee was  given briefings on the
development alternatives and  was  asked by the co-lead  agencies to validate
baseline data gathered in 1982.

The 810 Evaluation  Process

ANILCA created  new  units and  additions  to existing units of  the National
Park System in  Alaska.   Cape  Krusenstern National Monument  was  estab-
lished  by Section 201(3) as  a  new  unit for the  following purposes,  among
others:

     To protect and  interpret a  series of archeological  sites  depicting
     every known cultural period in  arctic Alaska; to provide for scien-
     tific  study of the process of human population of the  area from the
     Asian Continent;  in cooperation with  Native Alaskans, to  preserve
     and interpret  evidence of  prehistoric and  historic Native cultures;
     to  protect  habitat  for seals  and  other  marine mammals;  to protect
     habitat for  and  populations  of,  birds  and  other wildlife  and fish
     resources;  and  to  protect  the  viability of  subsistence  resources.
     Subsistence  uses  by local residents shall be  permitted  in the monu-
     ment in accordance  with  the  provisions of title VIII.

 In addition,  Title  XI of  ANILCA  allowed for:   "transportation and  utility
 systems  in  and across,  and  access into,  conservation system units  as long
 as:

                                 V - 98

-------
      (1)  such systems would be compatible with the purpose for  which
          the  unit was established;  and

      (2)  there  is no economically feasible and prudent alternative route
          for the system  (Section 1105).

 The  potential  for significant restriction  of subsistence  uses  must be  evalu-
 ated  for  the proposed  action's  effect  upon "...subsistence uses  and  needs,
 the  availability  of other  lands  for the purposes sought to be achieved and
 other alternatives which  would  reduce  or eliminate  the use."   Restriction  of
 subsistence  uses would  be significant  if  there were  large  reductions  in the
 abundance of  harvestable  resources,  significant  losses  of habitat  supporting
 harvestable  resources,  major redistributions  of  those resources,  substantial
 interference with  harvester  access  to active subsistence  sites  or a  major
 increase in  non-resident hunting.

 By asking the following series  of questions relative to the area and the pro-
 posed action,  and analyzing the  responses, an evaluation of significance was
 possible.

      0  Would  the preferred  alternative cause a significant reduction  in the
        population of wildlife,  fish, or other resources  upon which subsis-
        tence  harvesting   depends;   and/or would  the  preferred  alternative
        cause  a  redistribution  in   those harvestable  resources  by  either
        causing  a  decline  in the  population of wildlife or fish harvested for
        subsistence  or  by  altering  the   distribution of  those  harvestable
        resources?

      0  Would  the preferred  alternative cause a  restriction of access  to the
        harvestable resources where harvesting  historically has taken  place?

      0  Would  the  preferred alternative   lead to  increased  competition for
        subsistence resources?

 Proposed  Action  on Federal Public Lands

 For  the  Red  Dog  Mine project,  a  permit for a right-of-way through Cape
 Krusenstern  National  Monument  is being  sought.   The National Park Service
 is considering this  right-of-way  request  under  Title XI  of  ANILCA.   The
 application  is  for  a  89.9  km (56.2  mi)  road, 38.4   km (24.0 mi)  of  which
 would traverse the northwest  corner  of  Cape Krusenstern National Monument.
 Figure M-6  shows the southern corridor  (Kruz route) preferred alternative.

 Affected  Environment

 This  section reviews  the  subsistence  activity areas  which are used by the
 residents  of Kivalina,  Noatak and Kotzebue.   Kivalina and Noatak are small
 Eskimo villages with  populations  of  approximately  260 and  273,  respectively
 (1982  estimates).  Kotzebue  is  a town  of approximately 2,470  and  is the
trade and service  center  for  the  NANA region.   Figure 1-1  shows the loca-
tion  of each population center.
                                V -  99

-------
Subsistence activities  greatly  add to  the  economic  well being and  nutrition of
most of the region's residents.   The extent of its importance is indicated by
the findings of a 1978 survey of about one-third of the region's  households.
Approximately  55 percent of  all  households  estimated  they obtained  half or
more  of their food  supply by  subsistence hunting,  fishing  and  gathering
(Table  IV-11).   This survey  found  that subsistence dependence was  wide-
spread  throughout  the  region,  but  was  much more  pronounced  in the out-
lying  villages, including  Kivalina and Noatak,  than in  Kotzebue.  In a region
where  imported  foodstuffs are costly and  cash income depressed, the eco-
nomic  importance of  the subsistence food  supply  is  evident.   Within this
general pattern of reliance on subsistence,  there  is a great deal  of variation
from  settlement  to  settlement, season to season,  and  year to year  in  sub-
sistence harvest  patterns  (Social  Research Institute, 1982).

The  region encompasses  a great diversity  of  terrestrial,  freshwater,  marine
and wetland habitat types which support many  valuable subsistence species.
Virtually  the  entire  region  and  most of  its  nearshore  marine  waters fall
within the subsistence use area of one or more villages (Fig.  IV-12).

Among  the  most  important   subsistence   food  resources  are  land  mammals
(caribou,   moose),  fish   (Arctic  char,   chum  salmon,  sheefish,  whitefish,
tomcod,  smelt),  sea  mammals  (bearded,  ringed and spotted  seals;  belukha
whales) and  waterfowl.    However, nearly  all  edible  animal  species are  used
to add variety to the customary diet or in times of scarcity.   Berries  and
other wild plant  foods are also extensively gathered  for consumption.

The  current  subsistence use areas  of  Kivalina  and  Noatak residents that
overlap the project  area were recently  described and mapped by  Braund  &
Associates  (1983).  The  two  communities make common use  of some  subsis-
tence  resource areas.   However,  a 1972  survey (Mauneluk Association, 1974)
of overall harvest  patterns found distinctive differences  in the subsistence
orientations  of  coastal Kivalina  and  inland  Noatak  residents  (Table  IV-12).
In general,  Kivalina was  most heavily dependent on sea mammal and fisheries
harvests,  with  land  mammals seasonally important.   Noatak  residents  were
mostly  dependent on  land  mammals and  fisheries;  sea  mammals were  of rela-
tively minor importance.

The   project  area  is  part of  the  western  Arctic caribou  herd's  range.
Changes  in  the  herd's  migration  routes  and winter  range conditions  greatly
influence  hunting success.

Subsistence  fishing  is  important to  both  Kivalina  and  Noatak  residents
throughout the  year.  The fall run  of Arctic  char  is  especially  important to
those  communities,  while the Noatak River  chum salmon  and  char  runs are
important  to  the villages of  Noatak,  Kivalina  and Kotzebue.   Kivalina marine
mammal hunters  intensively search the nearshore areas off Kivalina and  along
the coast  north  and  south of Kivalina in season.    Both  Kivalina and Noatak
residents  harvest waterfowl in coastal lagoons and wetlands.

Subsistence Uses and Needs Evaluation

The  traditional  cultural  system  in  this  region is based  upon a subsistence
economy  which is  reflected in all aspects of  the  social fabric.   The  specific


                                 V - 100

-------
evaluation  of  physical  changes  in the  subsistence  resources  is easier  to
quantify than  the potential  modification in  the  subsistence lifestyle.   This
evaluation  considers  the  "opportunity"  for  subsistence activities to occur.

To  determine  the  potential impact  on existing subsistence activities,  three
evaluation  criteria were  analyzed  relative  to existing subsistence resources
which  could  be impacted.  The range of potential  impacts  which might occur
are described in Chapter V.   The evaluation  criteria were:

     0  The  potential to  reduce important subsistence fish  and wildlife  popu-
        lations  by  a) reductions  in  numbers, b)  redistribution of  subsistence
        resources, or c)  habitat  losses;

     0  What effect the action might have on  subsistence fisherman or hunter
        access;

     0  The  potential for the action to increase fisherman or hunter  competi-
        tion .

The  subsistence  resources which  are  utilized in  the  project  area include
caribou, anadromous fish  (specifically Arctic char), marine mammals, moose,
furbearers and  waterfowl.  The potential impacts on subsistence  are reviewed
on  pages  V-72  through   V-74.  A summary of those  impacts  is presented
below.

Arctic Char

     Potential to Reduce  Populations

     The  major Arctic  char resources  that could be affected within the pro-
     ject area  exist in  the  Wulik  and Kivalina Rivers.  The southern  corridor
     would  pass  no  closer than  10  km (6  mi) from the  Wulik  River,  but
     above  Arctic  char  spawning areas  (Fig.   11-6).   Along  the  entire
     southern  corridor  route five  tributaries  to the Wulik  River would  be
     crossed well  away from  the main  stem  of the Wulik River.   A total  of
     187  stream  crossings  would  occur along this  route.   Eleven  of  the
     streams crossed are fished in their  lower  portions.   Assuming proper
     stream crossing techniques  were  used,  the  road would not significantly
     affect  existing  fish  habitat,  reduce populations or cause  the redistri-
     bution  of  fish   in  the  Wulik or  Kivalina  Rivers.    In  addition,  the
     Omikviorok River,  located  within  the  National  Monument,   would  be
     crossed above Arctic  char spawning areas.  Chapter V does  not predict
     a  significant  loss of  habitat,  or  redistribution or  reduction  in fish
     populations.    Mitigation   proposed  to  ensure  reduction    of  impacts
     includes   proper  stream  crossing  location,  proper  crossing  design,
     sediment  control during  construction,  and  proper  construction timing.

     Restriction of Fishing  Access

     Development of  the  southern corridor would not restrict  fishing access.
     Present  access  to  the  Arctic char  fishery   is via  river   boat.   The
     development  of  the  roadway would  not  reduce present access available
     to subsistence  fishermen  in  the  Wulik,  Kivalina or Omikviorok Rivers.
                                V -  101

-------
     Increase  in Fishing Competition

     The  NANA/Cominco  agreement  gives  as  one of  its goals  100  percent
     Native  hire for the  Red Dog  project.   The employees  would come from
     surrounding villages  and would live in a hotel-type complex accommoda-
     tion.  Workers would be employed  on a shift basis  which would call for
     them to  return to  the  villages on  a  regular  basis.   No new town  would
     be developed  as part  of  the Red  Dog  project.    Chapter V  states that
     only limited population growth would occur,  and  this is not anticipated
     to  have  a  significant effect on  fishing competition.  Chapter V  states
     the  applicant's  decision  to  mitigate  possible  impacts  by  restricting
     fishing activities of  project personnel while on duty in  order  to protect
     traditional  subsistence values.

     The  route would  be public in that it would be  available for use  by
     other future resource developments in  the region  (but  not by the gen-
     eral  public).

Caribou

     Potential  to Reduce Subsistence Wildlife  Populations

     Development  of the entire  southern road corridor  would eliminate 201 ha
     (497 ac)  of caribou  habitat.  This direct  loss of  habitat would result  in
     an insignificant loss  of caribou habitat  within  the  project area.

     Without  proper management and  precautions,  indirect habitat  loss would
     likely be significant  for caribou on a  local  basis, and could even  be  of
     greater  than  local  significance.  The southern  corridor  passes  between
     current  primary caribou  low  tussock tundra  winter range  in the  Wulik
     and  Kivalina  lowlands,  and  secondary  winter range on  the  more wind-
     swept  slopes  of  the  Mulgrave  Hills to  the southeast (Fig.  IV-5).   Road
     activity  would cause avoidance  of the corridor,  and  hence  displacement,
     thereby  limiting to  some extent the  use of  otherwise  available  winter
     habitat.   There  could  also  be some mortality  due  to vehicle collisions  or
     added  stress  from winter  traffic.   Chapter V  states that,  based upon
     experience  with  other  roads  in Alaska and  the  Arctic  in  general, the
     approximately  20  to 25  vehicle  round  trips  per  day  (excluding  main-
     tenance) associated  just with the  Red  Dog  project  would be unlikely  to
     cause a  major  shift in movement  patterns.

     To maximize  the possibility  that road  construction and  operation  would
     not  affect the distribution  of  caribou,  a  specific  monitoring plan  would
     be  developed  to  track  major  movements  and  make   project activity
     suspension decisions.   This  plan  would  be established  before  actual
     construction  begins  so  adequate baseline  data  would  be  available.
     Therefore, road  construction  and  operation  should   not result  in  a
     significant  loss  of habitat  or result  in a  redistribution of the  caribou
     herd.
                                 V  -  102

-------
     Effect on Hunter  Access

     Chapter V  states that  development of a  road  would not  limit  access  to
     subsistence activities.

     Increase in Hunter  Competition

     The impact for caribou would  be essentially  the  same as for Arctic char
     as described above.

Marine Mammals

Marine mammal hunting is generally confined to the  winter and spring months
when the port would be ice-bound,  so ship traffic from the  port should not
significantly  disrupt  harvest  activities.    However,  port  construction  and
year-round activities  aboard  the offshore transfer facility  would likely  dis-
place some  marine mammals  from the  immediate  area,  resulting in a  reduction
in size  of the local  marine  mammal  harvest area.   Any mishaps  such as  epi-
sodic or  chronic  spillage of fuels  or chemicals that  could  seriously damage
habitat  quality  might adversely affect marine mammal  populations.   However,
the  net  impact of ordinary  port operations on marine mammal resource avail-
ability would  not  be significant.   Pages V-55 to V-57  provide a more detailed
discussion of potential  impacts.

Other Subsistence Resources

Chapter  V  reviews  the potential effects to furbearers,  moose and waterfowl.
The  level of  impact  from development  of the  southern corridor is considered
insignificant.   (See  pages V-72  through V-74.)

Availability of Other Lands

The  development of  the  Red Dog lead/zinc deposit  is  the impetus behind the
analysis  of alternatives  for  developing an  access road  to  remove  the metal
concentrates.   The   location  of  the  deposit determines the area  which would
be considered for potential  development.    This document has  reviewed  and
evaluated  all  reasonable options  to  provide  access  to  the  mine.   It  has
identified the environmentally preferred alternative  which has been the sub-
ject  of this Section  810 compliance review.   Pages III-8 through 111-51 review
how  the  preferred alternative was identified.

The  only alternative identified  which  would  use  another corridor  and port
site,  Alternative  2,  would  have greater  subsistence  impacts than  the pre-
ferred alternative.   Pages  V-73 and V-74  provide a more detailed discussion
of those  potential  impacts.

Alternatives Considered

Table III-9  identifies the options  which were  used  to form the project alter-
natives.   Figure III-3  identifies the  alternatives considered for the  Red  Dog
project.   Alternative 1 was  selected by the co-lead agencies as the preferred
alternative  and  has  been the subject of this  Section  810 compliance review.
                                V  -  103

-------
Consultation  and Coordination

The  following individuals  and their respective agencies have  been consulted
on this Section  810 Summary  Evaluation.  Their  comments were noted and in
most  cases   incorporated  into  this  section  as part  of the EIS  consultation
process.
     0  FWS -  Robert Leedy
     0  EPA -  William Riley
     0  ADF&G  - Steve  Behnke,  Richard Stern
     0  BLM -  Laun  Buoy
     0  Corps  - Joe Williamson


Findings

Based  upon  the above process  and considering all the  available information,
this evaluation could  not forecast any  reasonable  foreseeable  events  that
would  entail  a  significant  restriction of subsistence use.
                                 V - 104

-------
	Chapter VI
Permit and Regulatory
             Programs

-------
         VI.  SUMMARY  OF PERMIT AND  REGULATORY PROGRAMS
 INTRODUCTION

 One of  the purposes of  an  Environmental  Impact  Statement  process  is to
 address  the  environmental and  other  concerns of  federal, state and  local
 agencies  responsible  for  the  various  regulatory  functions associated  with
 ultimate  approval of a project.   The EIS process recognizes the informational
 needs  of these agencies  as they proceed  through  their permitting processes
 and seeks  to  incorporate  relevant  information  to assist  those  agencies in
 their permitting  decisions.  The public hearings,  which  are an integral part
 of  the   EIS  process  and  cover  all  concerns pertinent to  the project,  also
 serve  as public participation forums for  state and  federal permitting proc-
 esses.

 The major  federal, state  and  local  permits,  contracts and  other approvals
 required  for development of  the  Red  Dog  project are described  in  Table
 VI-1.   How each  of  these  is  addressed  in this   EIS is   briefly discussed
 below.   These descriptions are not  detailed  and are only  meant  to give the
 reader  a  general   idea  of  how the EIS  process   complements the  various
 individual  permitting processes.
FEDERAL APPROVALS

NPDES  Permit (EPA)

The EIS describes the existing water quality and  quantity  conditions in the
project  area; the  expected pollutants,  concentrations,  quality and  locations
of  wastewater  treatment  facilities and  discharges;  and  the  expected impacts
resulting  from discharges.  It identifies  the type and location of the various
project  components,  and  also describes  the process  by  which  they  were
sited.   The  EIS discusses  the need  for  monitoring  of  water quality  during
operation  of  the  project  and  generally  describes  the  type of  monitoring
program that might  be used.   It  also  discusses reclamation  plans  and the
need to ultimately  discharge water in order  to  reclaim the tailings pond.   A
copy of the  Draft NPDES  Permit, fact sheet and public notice are included in
Appendix  4.   A second NPDES Permit (separate  from the major permit) would
be  required for the port  facility.

Department of the Army (Section 404 - dredged  or fill material) Permit
Review  (EPA)

The same information provided by  the EIS which  is  needed by the  Corps in
its  Clean  Water Act  Section 404 permitting process  (discussed below)  is also


                                VI  -  1

-------
                                                                          Table VI-1

                                     MAJOR FEDERAL, STATE  AND  LOCAL PERMITS, CONTRACTS OR OTHER  APPROVALS
                                                            REQUIRED FOR PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
               Regulated Activity
              (Required Approval)
ro
       Federal Authority

       Waste discharge  into a waterway
       (National  Pollutant Discharge
       Elimination System [NPDES] Permit)
       Discharge of dredged or fill mate-
       rial into U.S.  waters,  including
       wetlands  (Review of  Corps'  Depart-
       ment of Army Section 404 Permit)

       Discharge of dredged or fill mate-
       rial into U.S.  waters,  including
       wetlands  (Department of Army  Permit)
       Construction of structures or work
       in or affecting navigable waters of
       the U.S.  (Department of Army
       Permit)
       Construction of transportation system
       in and across conservation system
       unit (Right-of-Way Permit for Trans-
       portation System)
      Construction of transportation system
      in and across conservation system
      unit (NPDES Permit and Department
      or Army Permit, respectively)
 Regulatory Agency
U. S.  Environmental
Protection Agency
(EPA)
EPA
U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps)
Corps
             Authority
U. S. National  Park
Service  (NPS)
EPA & Corps
Section 402,  Federal Water
Pollution Control Act of 1972,
as amended in  1977 (Clean
Water Act) (33 USC 1251)

Section 404,  Federal Water Pol-
lution Control Act of 1972, as
amended in 1977  (Clean Water
Act) (33 USC 1344)

Section 404,  Federal Water Pollu-
tion  Control  Act  of 1972, as
amended in 1977  (Clean Water
Act) (33 USC 1344)
Section  10,  River  and Harbor Act
of 1899  (33  USC 403)
Title XI, Alaska National  Interest
Lands Conservation Act of 1980
(ANILCA) (16 USC 3161)
Title XI, Alaska National  Interest
Lands Conservation Act of 1980
(ANILCA) (16 USC 3161)
                    Description
EPA must authorize any activity or wastewater
system which would discharge waste from one or
more points into a waterway.
EPA reviews Corps' Department of Army Section
404 Permit under its Section 404(b)(1) "Guidelines
for Specifications of  Disposal Sites for Dredged or
Fill Material".

The Corps must authorize the discharge of
dredged or fill material Into U. S. waters,
including wetlands.   Includes  siting of facilities,
roads, etc.  Corps determines compliance with
the Section 404(b)(1) guidelines.

The Corps must authorize:  the construction of
any structure in or over navigable waters of the
U.  S.;  the excavation of material in such; or the
accomplishment of any other work affecting the
course, location, condition or  capacity of such
waters.

NPS must determine that a proposed transporta-
tion system would be compatible with the
purposes  for which the conservation unit was
established, and that there is no  economically
feasible and prudent alternative route for the
system.

EPA,  Corps & NPS would concurrently Issue  their
respective permits for the transportation system.

-------
                                                                            Table VI-1

                                                                            (Continued)

                                       MAJOR  FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL  PERMITS, CONTRACTS OR OTHER APPROVALS
                                                              REQUIRED FOR  PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
                 Regulated Activity
                (Required Approval)
CO
        Federal Authority (Continued)

        Use, occupancy or disposition
        of public  lands  having subsistence
        uses (Subsistence Compliance
        Findings)
        Development possibly affecting
        threatened or endangered terrestrial
        plant or animal  species (Section 7
        Consultation)
        Development possibly affecting
        threatened or endangered marine
        fish, reptile and mammal species
        (Section 7 Consultation)

        Development possibly affecting
        historical or archeological sites
        (Review and Comment)
 Regulatory Agency
NPS
                                                                                     Authority
U. S.  Fish & Wildlife
Service (FWS)
                       Section 810, Alaska National
                       Interest Lands  Conservation
                       Act of 1980 (ANILCA)
                       (16 USC 3120)
Section  7,  Endangered  Species
Act of 1973,  as amended
(16 USC 1531)
                                                       Description
U. S.  National Marine
Fisheries Service
(NMFS)
Section  7,  Endangered  Species
Act of 1973, as amended
(16 USC 1531)
Advisory  Council        National Historic  Preservation
on Historical Preserv-   Act of  1966,  as amended
ation  (ACHP)           (16 USC 470)
        Occupancy and modification  of flood-
        plains (Floodplain Management
        Considerations )
All  federal agencies
Executive Order 11988
(Floodplain  Management)
May  Z4,  1977
NPS must determine If issuance of a Title  XI
ROW would significantly  restrict subsistence
uses.  If it would, a finding must be  made
that:   such ROW is necessary  and consistent
with sound management principles;  it  would
involve the minimal amount of lands  neces-
sary; and reasonable steps would be taken to
minimize impacts on subsistence resources.

If  threatened  or endangered terrestrial or fresh-
water plant or animal species were determined to
be present in the project area, biological assess-
ments of potential impacts to those species would
be required.  If impacts were  anticipated, a for-
mal Section 7  consultation with  FWS  would be
required to determine conditions under which
the project should  be permitted.

Same as  above,  except for marine fish, reptile
and mammal species,  and consultation  with NMFS.
ACHP must be given a reasonable opportunity to
review and comment on the adequacy of the man-
agement  plan  for historic or archeological  sites
potentially impacted by any federally permitted or
licensed  project.  This may include concurrence
with a Memorandum of Agreement among the
appropriate federal  agency, the  SHPO and the
ACHP.

All federal agencies must avoid,  to  the extent
possible,  adverse impacts associated with  occu-
pancy and modifications of floodplains, including
direct or indirect support of  floodplain devel-
opment whenever there Is  a practicable alterna-
tive.

-------
                                                                    Table VI-1

                                                                    (Continued)

                               MAJOR  FEDERAL, STATE  AND LOCAL PERMITS,  CONTRACTS OR  OTHER APPROVALS
                                                      REQUIRED  FOR PROJECT  DEVELOPMENT
         Regulated Activity
        (Required Approval)
Federal  Authority (Continued)

Destruction or modification  of
wetlands (Wetlands Protection
Considerations)
 Regulatory Agency
All federal agencies
                                    Authority
Executive Order 11990
(Protection of Wetlands)
May  24,  1977
                                                       Description
All  federal agencies must avoid, to the extent
possible,  adverse impacts associated with
destruction  and modification of  wetlands,  in-
cluding direct or indirect support of  new con-
struction  in wetlands wherever  there  is a
practicable alternative.
State  of Alaska Authority

New sources  of air pollution
(Air Quality  Permit to Operate)
(Prevention of Significant
Deterioration [PSD]  Permit)
Discharge into  navigable  waters
(Certificate  of  Reasonable Assurance)
Department of Envi-
ronmental Conserva-
tion (DEC)
                                        DEC
AS  46.03.140 to  .170
Clean Air Act of 1963, as
amended (42 USC 1857)
                       Section 401, Federal Water
                       Pollution  Control Act of 1972,
                       as amended in 1977 (Clean
                       Water  Act)  (33 USC  466)
DEC must authorize plans and specifications for
construction  that would be undertaken and must
assess emission standards and possible air con-
tamination resulting from that construction.  As
of July 1983, the Prevention  of Significant Deter-
ioration (PSD)  Permit formerly granted by EPA
was incorporated under DEC'S authorization.

DEC must issue a certificate stating  that the
proposed activity would comply with  the  require-
ments of the Federal Water Pollution  Control Act.
Completion of all federal permits, including
NPDES, Section 404 and Section  10,  would
depend upon DEC'S granting  of a Certificate of
Reasonable Assurance.
Wastewater discharge into all waters
of the  state
(Wastewater Disposal Permit)
Solid  waste disposal
(Solid Waste  Disposal Permit)
Alteration of stream flow (Title 16,
Anadromous Fish Stream  Permit)
                                        DEC
                       AS 46.03.090 to .110
                       AS 46.03.720
                                        DEC
Department of Fish
and Game (ADF&G)
                       AS 46.03.020
                       AS 46.03.100
AS  16.05.840
AS  16.05.870
DEC must authorize the discharge of wastewater
into or upon all waters or land surface of the
state.  Includes review and approval of treatment
facility plans.  For projects  requiring  a federal
Section 402  (NPDES)  Permit,  DEC's Certificate
of Reasonable Assurance serves as the Wastewater
Disposal  Permit.

DEC must authorize plans, specifications and pro-
posed methods of operation for a  facility to  dispose
of solid waste.

ADF&G must approve methods and schedule  of  any
project which would alter the natural flow or bed,
or use equipment in specified anadromous rivers,
lakes, or streams.

-------
                                                                           Table VI-1

                                                                           (Continued)

                                      MAJOR  FEDERAL, STATE AND  LOCAL PERMITS,  CONTRACTS OR OTHER  APPROVALS
                                                            REQUIRED FOR PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
                Regulated Activity
               (Required Approval)
 i
cn
       State of Alaska  Authority  (Continued)

       Transportation across state lands
       (Right-of-way Permit)
       Use of public water
       (Water Rights Permit)
       Dam construction
       (Dam Safety Permit)
       Temporary use of tidelands
       (Tidelands Use Permit)
       Permanent use of tidelands
       (Tidelands Lease)
       Materials (gravel) sale
       (Materials Sale Contract)
       Development possibly affecting
       historic or archeological sites
       (Cultural  Resources Concurrence)
       Development within the coastal zone
       (Coastal Zone Management Consistency
       Determination)
 Regulatory Agency
Department of Natural
Resources (DNR)
                                               DNR
                                               DNR
                                               DNR
                                               DNR
DNR
Office of History and
Archeology/State
Historic Preservation
Office (SHPO)
Governor's Office of
Management and
Budget (OMB),
Division of Govern-
mental Coordination
             Authority
                    Description
AS  38.05.035
AS  38.05.330
                       AS 46.15.030 to  .185
                       AS 46.15.020 to  .180
                       AS 38.05.330
                       AS 38.05.330
                       AS 38.05.070 to  .300
                       AS 38.05.110
National  Historic Preservation Act
of 1966,  as amended  (16 USC 470)
AS  41.35.010  to  .240, Alaska
Historic  Preservation Act
Coastal Zone Management Act of
1972, as amended in 1976
(16 USC 1451)
AS 46.40 Alaska Coastal Manage-
ment  Program Act of 1977
DNR must issue a right-of-way or  easement  per-
mit for any  road,  pipeline,  transmission line or
other improvement that crosses state lands.

DNR must issue a permit before appropriation  of
state waters can be  made.  Once use of appro-
priated water  has  commenced,  rights to that
water can be secured by a  "Certificate of
Appropriation".

DNR must approve construction of  any dam
structure over 3  m (10 ft)  high or which im-
pounds over 62 dam3 (50 ac-ft) of  water.

DNR must grant a one year land use permit for
use of tidelands for  nonrecurring activities which
do not involve permanent structures.

DNR must issue a tidelands lease for projects
involving permanent structures on  tidelands.
Issuance of  lease would  be  competitive.

DNR must issue a Materials Sale Contract for
use of gravel  or other materials from state  lands.
Volumes  over  19,114 m3  (25,000 yd3) would  be
sold by competitive bid.

For any  federally  permitted, licensed or funded
project,  the SHPO must  concur that cultural
resources would not be adversely impacted,  or
that proper  methods would  be  used to minimize
or mitigate impacts which would take place.
Concurrence must be received  before federal
permits can  be granted.

OMB must concur  with the  applicant's Coastal
Zone Management Consistency  Determination  that,
to the extent  practicable, a development project
would be consistent  with the approved State
Coastal  Zone Management Plan.

-------
                                                                  Table  VI-1

                                                                  (Continued)

                               MAJOR FEDERAL, STATE  AND  LOCAL  PERMITS, CONTRACTS OR  OTHER APPROVALS
                                                     REQUIRED FOR  PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
         Regulated  Activity
        (Required Approval)
Local Authority

Major project development
(Land Use Permit)
 Regulatory Agency
North Slope Borough
(NSB)
                                   Authority
Title 19, North Slope Borough
Municipal Code
                                                      Description
NSB must issue a land use permit indicating the
proposed project would be  consistent with the
approved Master Plan.

-------
used  by  the  EPA  for its  Section  404(b)(1)  review  of Corps Section 404
Permit applications.

Title  XI  Application Review  (EPA)

The same  information  provided  by the  EIS  which is needed  by the  NPS for
its  Title XI review and permitting  responsibilities  is also  used by EPA for its
Title  XI  review and permit responsibility.

Department of the  Army (DA) Permit (Corps)

The Corps issues a DA Permit that combines its authorities under Section 404
(dredged or fill  material)  and Section 10 (navigable  waters).  To address the
Section 404 requirements  the  EIS identifies  the existing  waterways  and wet-
lands within the project area,  and  describes the  various wetlands types and
their  importance from  functional and productivity standpoints.   It describes
the type  and  location  of  project components,  and also describes the process
by  which they were sited.   The  EIS identifies  the  type and amount of wet-
lands  and  other waters  that  would be  impacted by  each alternative,  and
discusses mitigating  measures that might  be  used to minimize waters or wet-
lands impacts.   It also describes  reclamation  plans.   The  Corps evaluation of
compliance  with Section  404(b)(1)  guidelines   is included  as  Appendix  5.

To  address  the  Section  10 requirements,  the  EIS  describes  the   existing
navigable  waters within  the  project area and how the  project components
would  affect them.  It discusses the  types of facilities, the process by  which
they  were sited, and how they  would be constructed and operated.   The EIS
describes the  various  options (e.g./  short causeway/lightering  versus short
causeway/offshore  island),  and  compares  them with  respect to  impacts  upon
the integrity  of the  coastline and  sediment  movements past the  facilities.  It
also discusses mitigative measures to minimize impacts,  and reclamation of the
structures.

Title  XI  Application Review  (Corps)

The same  information provided  by the  EIS which is needed  by the  NPS for
its  Title XI review  and permitting responsibilities is also used by the  Corps
for its Title XI review and permit responsibility.

Title  XI  Right-of-Way Permit (NPS)

The EIS describes the existing  land status  situation within the project area
and the  potential impacts  of various  project components on Cape Krusenstern
National  Monument.    It discusses the transportation corridor,  port  site  and
transfer  facility  options individually  and describes the process by which the
alternatives were identified  and  the  preferred  alternative selected.   A  copy
of the Title XI  Application  is  included in Appendix  6.   The NPS would  be
the agency that would actually  issue the  right-of-way permit for the trans-
portation corridor.

Section  810 Subsistence Compliance Findings  (NPS)

The EIS  describes the subsistence resources in the  vicinity  of  the  southern
corridor,  within the  Monument  and  in  surrounding  areas,  as  well  as their

                                 VI  - 7

-------
uses by time  and location.   It describes the significance of potential  impacts
to subsistence resources and  uses  from a corridor through the  Monument as
well  as  alternative  corridors that  avoid  the Monument.   It  describes  mit-
igative  measures that would  be  taken to minimize  adverse impacts upon sub-
sistence uses and  resources, and  it discusses the reasons why  selection of
the preferred alternative through the Monument is  consistent with sound  land
management principles.  The Section  810 Subsistence Compliance  Findings  are
contained near the end of Chapter V.

Section  7 (Endangered  Species)  Consultations (FWS and NMFS)

The  EIS process identified the endangered peregrine falcon as nesting within
the project area.   This finding  required that a biological assessment  be pre-
pared to  determine  if the project might affect this species.  The assessment
was prepared  and submitted to FWS.

The  EIS process also identified  the endangered bowhead and Gray  whales as
using the  area  off  the proposed  port  sites  during migration.   This  finding
required that a biological assessment be prepared to determine if the project
might affect these species.   The assessment was  prepared and  submitted to
FWS.    A  more  detailed  discussion  of  endangered species considerations is
included in Appendix 3  (Endangered  Species  Biological Assessment).

Historic and Archeological Review and Comment (ACHP)

The  EIS  identifies  the  reports  and  other   documents  that  describe known
archeological  and  other cultural resources  which  might  be impacted by  the
project.  It also discusses potential  impacts  and suggests mitigative measures
to be taken to  protect  historic  and  archeological  resources.  Correspondence
between the ACHP  and co-lead  agencies is  included  in  Appendix  7 (Protec-
tion of  Cultural Resources).

Floodplain  Management  Considerations (All  Federal  Agencies)

The  EIS  identifies  existing  floodplains  within  the project area, locates  the
various  project options  as  being  within  or  outside  those floodplains,  and
describes  the  potential  impacts  of  facilities  located  within  floodplains.  This
information is used  by all  federal  agencies for  their floodplain  management
considerations as  required  by Executive Order 11988.

Wetlands Protection  Considerations (All  Federal Agencies)

The  same  information provided  by  the  EIS  which  is  needed by  the Corps in
its Section 404 permitting  process  (discussed earlier) is also used by other
federal  agencies for their  wetlands  protection  considerations as required  by
Executive  Order 11990.
STATE APPROVALS

Air Quality Permit to  Operate (DEC)

The EIS describes the existing  air quality  conditions and parameters,  as  well
as  the quality  and  quantity of  pollutants that would  be  emitted  from  the

                                 VI - 8

-------
facilities.   Analysis of  this information would  indicate whether  a Prevention
of Significant Deterioration (PSD)  Permit would be required.  Additional  base-
line  information and analyses  would likely  be needed  after completion of the
EIS before the permit  could be issued.

Certificate of Reasonable Assurance  (DEC)

The  EIS provides analysis of  hydrology and  water quality baseline  conditions
and  predicts  the hydrology and  water quality of receiving streams  during
operation  and  after   reclamation.   Water  quality  monitoring would continue
through  the life of the project to verify  the water quality projections  made
in the EIS.   Refer to  the  NPDES description  for additional details.

The  same information  provided  by the EIS which is needed by  the  Corps for
its Sections  404  and  10 permitting processes  (discussed  earlier)  is also  used
by DEC  in  its consideration of issuance of a  Certificate of Reasonable  Assui—
ance.

An  NPDES  permit with the required  state Certificate of Reasonable  Assur-
ance,  when  issued,  serves  as  the   state  wastewater  disposal  permit for
projects  such as  Red  Dog.  DEC  may issue individual wastewater permits for
small  discharges which  do not require an  NPDES permit.  The EIS describes
the mine  area  wastewater treatment process.   Estimates are provided  for the
type  and  concentrations  of all significant water quality parameters  in the
tailings pond,  and for the projected water  quality of  the  treated  effluent.   A
complete water  balance  for the mill process and the tailings  pond is provided
as the basis for  these projections.

Solid  Waste  Disposal Permit (DEC)

Some  elements of a solid  waste disposal  plan (e.g.,  tailings pond location,
overburden  disposition) are  presented in  the EIS.    Incineration  would  be
used  for  all wastes whose burning  would not violate air  quality  restrictions.
Other  wastes would be  incorporated in  the tailings  pond.  The ultimate dis-
posal  of  buildings and discarded  equipment  would be  determined  near the
time  of mine closure.

Title  16 (Anadromous  Fish  Stream) Permit  (ADF&G)

Streams containing anadromous  fish within the project area are  identified in
the EIS,  and the locations of  project components which might affect them are
described  (e.g., impoundment  and  drainage  structures,  bridge crossings,
port  facilities).   Design,  construction and  operational  measures  are  sug-
gested to mitigate potential impacts.

Right-of-Way  Permit (DNR)

Descriptions and  maps,  including  land ownership status,  are provided in the
EIS for proposed transportation corridors  across state lands.   Detailed plans
for the selected  road  corridor would  be provided after completion of the EIS
process and  additional field surveys.
                                 VI  -  9

-------
Water Rights Permit (DNR)

The  EIS provides detailed  descriptions of the  location  and  type  of  proposed
water diversions,  and estimated amounts of water consumption.

Dam  Safety Permit (DNR)

The  EIS describes the  location,  size  and general composition of the tailings
pond  and water supply  dams and associated  impoundments.

Tidelands  Use  Permit  (DNR)

A  conceptual  plan for tidelands use during project mobilization  and construc-
tion  of  the dock  and offshore island  is presented  in the EIS.   Detailed con-
struction  plans  concerning  dredging, fill  and  grading would  be  provided
after  the EIS  process has identified the location and type of facilities.

Tidelands  Lease (DNR)

Plans for  the  long-term use of tidelands  facilities  would be provided to DNR
after  completion of the  EIS process.

Materials Sale  Contract  (DNR)

The  location and  size of alternative project  components requiring gravel  for
construction  are  identified   in  the  EIS.   Detailed  information about   the
amounts and  location of gravel  or rock  needed  from  state lands  would  be
developed  by  field  survey after the  EIS  process has determined the specific
facility  and route locations.

Cultural Resources  Concurrence  (SHPO)

The  EIS  identifies  the reports and  other  documents  that describe  known
archeological  and  other cultural resources  which  might be impacted by  the
project.   It also  discusses potential impacts and  suggests m'itigative measures
to  be  taken  to  protect cultural   resources.   Correspondence  between   the
SHPO and  co-lead agencies  is included in Appendix  7 (Protection of Cultural
Resources).

Coastal  Zone Management Consistency Determination (OMB)

The EIS provides a  sufficient description of the location, type and operation
of  the   proposed  road  corridor, port site  and  marine transfer facilities to
allow OMB to  review the applicant's determination  of  consistency  with  the
approved  State Coastal  Zone Management Plan.   A  draft Coastal Zone Manage-
ment Plan has been  prepared for the  NAN A  region, but the state master  plan
will  be  followed until the  regional  plan is finalized.  If the State's  response
to  the   applicant's  consistency determination is available, it will be included
in the  FEIS.
                                 VI  -  10

-------
LOCAL APPROVALS

Land  Use Permit (NSB)

The  EIS  describes  the  locations and  types of project  facilities,  the  process
by  which they  were  sited,  and some of  the  solid waste  disposal plans.   It
also  points  out  potential environmental impacts  which  might be  of  specific
concern  to  the  Borough  (e.g.,  possible  effects  upon  endangered  whale
migration movements).   Detailed construction  plans and specifications  would
be provided for individual project elements after completion of the EIS.
                                VI - 11

-------
	Chapter VI
Consultation and Coordination

-------
                VII.   CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION
INTRODUCTION

A  designated  purpose  of  an EIS  is  to  actively involve regulatory agencies
and  the  public  in  the decision-making process.   EPA  and DOI,  as co-lead
agencies,   conducted  a   broad   public  and   interagency  consultation  and
coordination program  throughout the  development  of this  DEIS.   Input was
solicited  from  the beginning  of  the  project, and this input has been incoi—
porated  into  the  document.   Specific  public and  agency  involvement  is
described below.
SCOPING

The  scoping  process conducted by  EPA provided an opportunity for members
of the  public,  special  interest groups,  and  agencies  involved  in the  EIS
process to assist  in defining  significant  environmental  issues.   Main  objec-
tives of these scoping meetings were:

  0  To present an overview of the  proposed Red  Dog Project;

  0  To identify the major  environmental  issues to be addressed  in the  EIS;

  0  To receive comments  and questions regarding environmental  impact  con-
     cerns;  and

  0  To  incorporate  those  comments and  questions  into the  EIS  planning
     process.

The scoping meetings, and  the approximate number of persons in  attendance,
were as follows:
    Date
Location
Feb. 14, 1983   Anchorage
Feb. 16, 1983   Fairbanks
Attendance
    10
          Participants
                34

                 7

                16
Alaska Center for the Environ-
ment; Trustees for Alaska;
National Audubon  Society;
public

State and  federal agencies

Northern  Environmental Center

Public meeting
                               VII - 1

-------
    Pate	     Location     Attendance   	Participants	
Mar. 9, 1983     Kotzebue         34       Maniilaq Association; state,
                                           federal, and local agencies;
                                           public

   "               "              15       Public meeting

Apr. 1, 1983     Barrow            7       North  Slope  Borough


The  oral  and written  comments and  questions  received during  and following
the scoping  meetings  were documented in  a Responsiveness  Summary  (EPA,
1983).   Its  purpose  was to provide a public  record of the issues and con-
cerns  raised, to  provide  a response  to those  issues and concerns,  and  to
serve as a  blueprint for the  EIS process to follow.  A  summary of the com-
ments  received at the scoping meetings and from written responses is  shown
in Table Vll-l.


AGENCY INVOLVEMENT

The  federal, state and local agencies  involved with this  EIS and  the nature
of their involvement  is  described  in Chapter  VI   (Summary of Permit  and
Regulatory   Programs).     The  first   formal   agency   meeting  was  held
February  16, 1983 in Fairbanks.   Agency involvement has continued through-
out the study  via:   1) formal review of  the  Responsiveness  Summary  and
issue identification process; 2) field visits to the Red Dog project site; 3) an
August 10,  1983  meeting  to  describe the options  elimination  and  project
alternatives  selection process;  4)  agency review of  a preliminary draft  of the
DEIS and  a  November 3, 1983 meeting to discuss the draft; and 5) informal
phone  calls  between EIS  team  members and  agency  personnel and the  public.

In addition,  the  Corps is a formal  cooperating  agency for the EIS, as pro-
vided  for  in  the  Council  or  Environmental  Quality  Regulations  governing
preparation  of  an  EIS.   As such,  the Corps provided  throughout the EIS
process technical  assistance in its area of  expertise and in  matters relating
to permits within its jurisdiction.


PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

Public  meetings  were held  in  Anchorage,  Fairbanks and  Kotzebue in  Febru-
ary  and March,  1983.   In addition,  meetings were  also held with environ-
mental  groups  in Anchorage  and  Fairbanks during that time period.   Com-
ments  from  the   general  public  and  these  groups  were  documented  and
addressed in the Responsiveness Summary (Table VI1-1).

Environmental groups in  Anchorage  and  Fairbanks reviewed  a preliminary
draft of the DEIS,  and  a meeting with these  groups  was held on  November
4, 1983 to discuss that draft.
                                VII - 2

-------
                                                 Table VII-1

            MATRIX OF  COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM SCOPING MEETINGS AND WRITTEN RESPONSES
              Issue
A.  PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
    1.  Water:
          Quality
          Appropriation
    2.  Littoral  Processes
    3.  Air Quality

B.  BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
    1.  Vegetation & Wetlands
    2.  Freshwater Biology
    3.  Marine Biology
    4.  Wildlife

C.  HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
    1.  Employment:
          Opportunities
          Conditions
    2.  Economic
    3.  Social/Cultural
    4.  Subsistence
    5.  Archeology
    6.  Local  Government
    7.  Land Use
    8.  Visual
    9.  Recreation

D.  PROJECT  DESIGN &
    CONSTRUCTION
    1.  Port & Housing  Facilities
    2.  Blasting
    3.   Mill Processes
    4.   Tailings Pond & Dam
    5.   Wastewater Treatment
    6.   Transportation System
    7.   Spills
    8.   Economics
    9.   Mitigation & Reclamation

E.  EIS PROCEDURES
    1.   General  Comments
    2.   Address All Options
    3.   Regional Perspective:
          Accommodate Others
          Secondary  Impacts
                                                   Comment Sources
Meetings

M
0.
3
O
O
c
UJ
u
c
3

1

1
2

3

1
1

1


1
1

1


1

2
1

3

2
1
2

N. Environ. Center


1
1
1

2
1















1

1






Maniilaq Association
1





3
3
8
2
9
10
2

1


2





4

1
1



1

[Fairbanks Public
2






1





2












1





Kotzebue Public








3
3
2
1











1

1
1





[Public
3






























Written Comments

IN. Slope Borough
4






1
1
1


1

1



1


1



1

1

1


Nat'l Park Service
1

2









1
2














2
1


c
01
01
ID
c
rc
TJ
C
rc
-J
D
01
1

2




2




1














2




3
in
£
5
eg
£
V)
IT
8

1
1
1
2
4
4




2
2

1

1


1
2

2


1
2
3
4



u
V
c
c
UJ
o
I/I
Q.
O
U



























3
1
1

u
'5
0)
I/I
V)
iZ
4)
'C
(D
1^
(a
Z


1


1
2











2




1








ources
01
a
a
Z
4-1
a
0)
0
3
1
1


S

















3





3



5
o
•B
C.
M
iZ
a
ot
a
S

1


4
3
6











1



1



1
2
3
1

s
o
a
V)
c
(Q
I-
'o
a




























1
1


Dept. Environ. Conserv
4

1


2
3















2
1
4




1

                                                                                              Summary
Comments
35
1
11
2
3
16
17
21
12
7
12
11
8
6
2
2
1
3
4
1
1
4
2
16
S
4
7
9
11
16
4
Sources
11
1
9
2
3
6
6
8
3
4
3
2
6
3
2
2
1
2
3
1
1
3
1
9
2
4
5
S
6
9
3
                                          VII   -  3

-------
FUTURE PARTICIPATION

Future  public  participation  aspects of the  Red Dog EIS process will include:

  0  Ongoing public involvement through the  submission of questions, infor-
     mation  and the expression of concerns,  which are welcome  at any time
     (see the agency contact addresses below).

  0  The formal period for public  review and written  comments will occur fol-
     lowing publication of this  DEIS.

  0  Public  meetings/hearings  to  discuss   updated  project  status,  answer
     questions  and receive comments will  be held  during the  DEIS  review
     period.  All  written comments received during  the DEIS  review  period
     will be  individually  addressed in the final EIS.


TENTATIVE  EIS SCHEDULE

The following  is  a tentative  schedule  for the  remainder of  the Red  Dog
Project  EIS process:

      Public hearings on DEIS:  April 24,  May 2-3, 1984
      Close of  public comment period:  May  14, 1984
      FEIS distributed  for  review:  July 13, 1984
      Close of  public comment period  on  FEIS:   August 12, 1934
      Record of Decision published:   August 26, 1984
PROJECT INFORMATION  CENTERS

Project  information and related  documents such  as the baseline  studies,  the
project  overview, and the draft EIS  with appendices  (when completed)  are
available for review during  normal  business hours at  the  EPA and  Ott Water
Engineers offices listed above, and  also at the following locations:

Z. J. Loussac Library                Maniilaq  Association Offices
524 West 6th Avenue                  Shore Street
Anchorage,  AK   99501                Kotzebue,  AK  99752

Noel Wien Public Library              Environmental Protection Agency
1215 Cowles                          3200 Hospital Drive,  Suite 101
Fairbanks, AK  99701                 Juneau,  AK  99801
AGENCY CONTACTS

For additional  information or submittal  of  questions  and concerns  relating to
the proposed Red Dog Project or the  EIS,  please contact:
                                VII  - 4

-------
               EPA
William M. Riley
EIS Project Officer
Environmental Evaluation  Branch
  (M/S 443)
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA   98101
Telephone:  (206) 442-1760
EIS Third Party Consultant

Michael  C.  T. Smith
Project  Manager
Ott Water Engineers, Inc.
4790 Business Park  Blvd.
Building D, Suite  1
Anchorage,  AK  99503
Telephone:  (907) 562-2514
               DO I
Paul D. Gates
Regional  Environmental  Officer
Department of Interior
Box  100120
Anchorage, AK  99510
Telephone:  (907) 271-5011
                               VII - 5

-------
	Chapter VIII
 List of Preparers

-------
                       VIM.  LIST  OF PREPARERS
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY  (Lead  Agency)
     William  M.  Riley
     Red Dog EIS  Project Officer
U.S. NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
     Floyd  Sharrock
     Special Assistant
OTT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. (Third Party EIS Consultant)
                  Name
     Michael C. T.  Smith,  Ph.D.
        (Terra  Nord, Inc.)
     Roderick W.  Hoffman, Ph.D.
     Joanne E.  Richter, M.S.

     James K. Barrett,  M.S.
     Patricia  Bendz
     Sandra L.  Christy, M.S.
     Gene R. Crook,  M.S., P.E.

     Dennis E.  Dorratcague, M.S., P.E.
     John H. Humphrey, Ph.D.,  P.E.

     Arthur J.  LaPerriere,  Ph.D.
     Anne S. Leggett, B.A.
	Responsibility/Discipline	
Project Manager and Wildlife

OTT Project Manager,  Freshwater
and Marine Biology
Assistant  Project Manager and
Editor
Groundwater  Hydrology
Draftsperson
Vegetation and Recreation
Marine Water  and Wastewater
Quality
Coastal Geologic Processes
Surface Water Quality and
Hydrology, Air Quality,  Sound and
Visual  Resources
Vegetation
Proofer
                               VIM - 1

-------
                  Name
     John E.  Lobdell, Ph.D.
     James G. Malick, Ph.D.
        (Norecol Environmental
        Consultants)
     William L.  Ryan, Ph.D.,  P.E.
     Kevin Waring,  B.A.
        (Kevin  Waring  Associates)
	Responsibility/Discipline
Cultural  Resources
Fishery Resources
Geological, Geoteehnical and
Permafrost
Subsistence and Socioeconomics
ROSS & MOORE ASSOCIATES, INC.  (Word Processing)
     Marilee Moore Bourne
     Tami Jean Fillbrandt
     Judith  Ross  Fowler
ADDITIONAL STUDIES, REPORTS AND INFORMATION CONTRIBUTED BY:
     Gerald  G.  Booth, Cominco Alaska, Inc.
     Henry M.  Giergich, Cominco Alaska, Inc.
     Walter J.  Kuit,  Cominco Alaska,  Inc.
     Terry J. Mannings, Cominco Alaska, Inc.
     Harry A.  Noah,  Cominco Alaska,  Inc.
     James A.  Rae, Cominco  Alaska, Inc.

     Stephen R. Braund & Associates
     Dames & Moore
     Thomas  J. Gallagher
     Edwin E.  Hall &  Associates
     Larry A.  Peterson & Associates
     R & M  Consultants
     Woodward-Clyde  Consultants
                               VIII  -  2

-------
     Chapter IX
Distribution

-------
                       IX.  EIS DISTRIBUTION LIST
The  following list of  recipients of  the  EIS  is arranged with  federal agencies
first, followed  by state  agencies,  local agencies, media,  interested groups
and  businesses and citizens.
FEDERAL AGENCIES

U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency

     Office of Environmental  Review EIS Filing Section

     Alaska Operations Office

     Office of Federal Activities

     Regional  Offices

U.S.  Department of the Interior

     Office of Environmental  Project Review, Washington,  D.C.
        Regional  Environmental Officer,  Anchorage

     Office of Assistant to the Secretary of the  Interior

     Bureau of Land  Management
        State  Director's Office, Anchorage
        Fairbanks District Office
        Minerals  Management  Service,  Denver, CO
        Bureau of Indian Affairs,  Juneau

     U.S.  Fish and Wildlife Service
        State  Director's Office, Anchorage
        Fairbanks District Office
        Selawik  National Wildlife Refuge

     National  Park  Service
        Regional  Director's Office,  Anchorage
        Cape  Krusenstern National  Monument
        Denali National Park  and  Preserve
        Denver Service  Center

     Alaska Resources  Library
                                   IX -  1

-------
U.S. Department of Commerce
     National Marine Fisheries Service,  Anchorage
        Director's Office,  Juneau
     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Juneau
     Federal Highway Administration, Juneau
     Office of  Coastal Management,  Washington,  D.C.
U.S. Department of Agriculture
     Coordinator of Environmental  Quality, Washington, D.C.
     Soil Conservation Service, Anchorage
     U.S. Forest Service, Juneau
U.S. Department of Transportation
     U.S. Coast Guard, Anchorage
U.S. Department of Defense
     Department of  the Army, Alaska District,  Corps of Engineers,  Anchorage
        District Engineer
        Regulatory  Functions Branch
        Environmental Resources Section
     Department of  the Army, North Pacific Division, Corps of  Engineers,
        Portland, OR
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
     Regional  Environmental Officer, Seattle, WA
     Advisory Council on  Historic  Preservation,   Washington,  D.C.
U.S. Federal Energy  Regulatory Commission
     Regional  Office,  San Francisco, CA
U.S. Department of Housing  and Urban Development, Anchorage
U.S. Congress
     Honorable Ted Stevens, U.S.  Senator
     Honorable Frank Murkowski, U.S.  Senator
     Honorable Don Young,  U.S. Congressman
                                  IX -  2

-------
JOINT FEDERAL/STATE
Alaska Land  Use Council
     State Co-Chairman
     Federal  Co-Chairman

STATE AGENCIES
Office of  the Governor
     Honorable William Sheffield, Governor
     Office of Management and Budget, Division of Governmental Coordination
     Governor's Office, Kotzebue
Department of Environmental Conservation
     Commissioner's Office, Juneau
     Northern Regional Office, Fairbanks
     Nome Area  Office
     Water Quality  Management Office, Juneau
Department of Fish and Game
     Commissioner's Office, Juneau
     Habitat  Protection Division, Fairbanks
     Nome Regional Office
     Kotzebue Area Office
Department of Natural Resources
     Commissioner's Office, Juneau
     Division of Land  and  Water  Management,  Anchorage
     Northcentral District  Office, Fairbanks
     State Historic  Preservation Office, Anchorage
     Division of Mining,  Anchorage
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
     Commissioner's Office, Juneau
     Regional  Environmental  Coordinator,  Fairbanks
     Office of Planning,  Fairbanks
Department of Community and Regional Affairs
     Division of  Community Planning,  Juneau
                                  IX - 3

-------
Department of Commerce and Economic Development

     Office of Minerals Development

Department of Revenue

     Commissioner's Office

Department of Labor, Juneau

     Commissioner's Office

Department of Law

     Office of the Attorney General,  Juneau


LOCAL AGENCIES

     Mayor Clement Frankson,  Sr.,  Point Hope
     Mayor Amos Agnasagga, Point Lay
     IRA Council, Noatak
     Ukpeagvik  Inupiat Corporation,  Barrow
     Mayor Raymond Hawley, Kivalina
     Tagara Village Corporation, Point Hope
     Fish  and Game Advisory Board, Deering
     Kikiktakruk Inupiat  Corporation, Kotzebue
     Kotzebue Elders Council
     Alaska Area Native Health  Service, Anchorage
     Kotzebue Fire Department
     Ninilchik Native  Association
     Mayor Sigfried Aukongak,  Golovin
     Village Council,  Nuiqsut
     City  Council, Barrow
     Point  Lay Village Council,  Point Lay
     Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation, Kaktovik
     Olgoonik Corporation,  Wainwright
     Village Council,  Kaktovik
     Village Council,  Point  Hope
     Anaktuvuk Pass Village Council, Anaktuvuk Pass
     Atkasook Village Council,  Barrow
     Village Council,  Atkasook
     Wainwright City Council, Wainwright
     Kuukpik Corporation,  Nuiquat
     Maniilaq, Kotzebue
     Mayor Joe  Hill, Kotzebue
     Mayor Eugene Brower, North Slope Borough, Barrow
     Kotzebue Technical Center
     Northwest  Arctic School District,  Kotzebue
     Golovin  Native Corporation, Golovin
     Ahtna,  Inc., Anchorage
     Aleut Corporation,  Anchorage
     Arctic Slope  Regional Corporation, Barrow


                                  IX - 4

-------
JOINT FEDERAL/STATE
Alaska Land  Use Council
     State Co-Chairman
     Federal  Co-Chairman

STATE AGENCIES
Office of  the Governor
     Honorable William Sheffield, Governor
     Office of Management and Budget, Division of Governmental  Coordination
     Governor's Office, Kotzebue
Department of Environmental Conservation
     Commissioner's Office, Juneau
     Northern Regional Office, Fairbanks
     Nome Area  Office
     Water Quality  Management Office, Juneau
Department of Fish and Game
     Commissioner's Office, Juneau
     Habitat  Protection Division, Fairbanks
     Nome Regional Office
     Kotzebue Area Office
Department of Natural Resources
     Commissioner's Office, Juneau
     Division of Land  and  Water  Management,  Anchorage
     Northcentral District  Office, Fairbanks
     State Historic  Preservation Office, Anchorage
     Division of Mining,  Anchorage
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
     Commissioner's Office, Juneau
     Regional  Environmental  Coordinator,  Fairbanks
     Office of Planning,  Fairbanks
Department of Community and Regional Affairs
     Division of  Community Planning,  Juneau
                                  IX - 3

-------
Department of Commerce and Economic Development

     Office of Minerals Development

Department of Revenue

     Commissioner's Office

Department of Labor, Juneau

     Commissioner's Office

Department of Law

     Office of the Attorney General,  Juneau


LOCAL AGENCIES

     Mayor Clement Frankson,  Sr.,  Point Hope
     Mayor Amos Agnasagga, Point Lay
     IRA Council, Noatak
     Ukpeagvik  Inupiat Corporation,  Barrow
     Mayor Raymond Hawley, Kivalina
     Tagara Village Corporation, Point Hope
     Fish  and Game Advisory Board, Deering
     Kikiktakruk Inupiat  Corporation, Kotzebue
     Kotzebue Elders Council
     Alaska Area Native Health  Service, Anchorage
     Kotzebue Fire Department
     Ninilchik Native  Association
     Mayor Sigfried Aukongak,  Golovin
     Village Council,  Nuiqsut
     City  Council, Barrow
     Point  Lay Village Council,  Point Lay
     Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation, Kaktovik
     Olgoonik Corporation,  Wainwright
     Village Council,  Kaktovik
     Village Council,  Point  Hope
     Anaktuvuk Pass Village Council, Anaktuvuk Pass
     Atkasook Village Council,  Barrow
     Village Council,  Atkasook
     Wainwright City Council, Wainwright
     Kuukpik Corporation,  Nuiquat
     Maniilaq, Kotzebue
     Mayor Joe  Hill, Kotzebue
     Mayor Eugene Brower,  North Slope Borough, Barrow
     Kotzebue Technical Center
     Northwest  Arctic School District,  Kotzebue
     Golovin  Native Corporation, Golovin
     Ahtna,  Inc., Anchorage
     Aleut Corporation,  Anchorage
     Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, Barrow


                                  IX - 4

-------
     Bering Straits Native  Corporation, Nome
     Bristol Bay Native Corporation, Anchorage and Dillingham
     Callsta Corporation, Anchorage
     Chugach  Natives, Inc.,  Anchorage
     Cook Inlet Region, Inc., Anchorage
     Doyon Ltd., Fairbanks
     Koniag,  Inc.,  Kodiak
     NANA Regional Corporation, Anchorage and Kotzebue
     Sealaska  Corporation,  Juneau


MEDIA

     KOTZ, Kotzebue
     KUAC-FM,  Fairbanks
     Tundra Times,  Anchorage
     All-Alaska Weekly, Fairbanks
     Yukon Sentinel, Fort  Wainwright
     Alaska Industry Magazine,  Anchorage
     Anchorage Daily News
     Anchorage Times
     Marine Digest,  Seattle, WA
     Cheechako News,  Kenai
     Nome  Nugget
     The Peninsula Clarion, Kenai
     Alaska Construction and  Oil Report,  Anchorage
     The Associated Press, Anchorage
     Daily Journal of Commerce, Seattle, WA
     Daily  News Miner, Fairbanks


INTERESTED GROUPS  AND BUSINESSES

     National Parks and Conservation Association, Washington, D.C,
     AEIDC,  University of  Alaska,  Anchorage
     Alaska Center for the Environment, Anchorage
     National Audubon Society,  Anchorage
     Sierra Club, Anchorage
     Trustees for Alaska,  Anchorage
     Northern Alaska Environmental  Center, Fairbanks
     National Wildlife Federation, Washington,  D.C.
     Everest  Minerals Corporation,  Corpus Christi, TX
     Pierce-Atwood-Scribner,  Portland, ME
     GCO Minerals, Anchorage,  Kotzebue;  and Houston, TX
     Cominco Engineering Services,  Ltd., Northport, WA
     Dames &  Moore, Anchorage; Seattle,  WA  and Golden,  CO
     EVS Consultants, Sidney, British Columbia, Canada
     L.A. Peterson and Associates,  Fairbanks
     Robertson, Monagle,  Eastaugh and Bradley, Juneau
     Getty  Mining  Company,  Salt Lake City, UT
     Wright-Forssen Association, Seattle,  WA
     U.S. Borax, San  Francisco, CA
     Northwest Alaska Chamber  of Commerce,  Nome
     Kotzebue Sound Area  Fisheries, Kotzebue
                                  IX  - 5

-------
Yutana Barge Lines,  Nenana
Alaska Legal  Services, Barrow
Golovin  Fisheries, Golovin
Alaska Riverways, Inc.,  Fairbanks
Arctic Lighterage, Kotzebue
Doyon Construction,  Fairbanks
I.U.O.E.  Local 302,  Fairbanks and Juneau
Labor Local 942,  Fairbanks
Alaska Oilfield Services,  Anchorage
Shell  Oil Co., Anchorage
District Council of Laborers, Anchorage
Alaska Pacific Bank,  Anchorage
Alaska International  Air, Anchorage
ARCO Alaska, Anchorage
Woodward-Clyde Consultants,  Anchorage
Yutan Construction,  Fairbanks
Fairbanks Sand and  Gravel, Fairbanks
Bering Straits CRSA  Board, Unalakleet
Rural CAP, Anchorage
Alaska Miners Association,  Anchorage
Envirosphere Company, Bellevue, WA
Boatel Rocky Mountain, Denver,  CO
Agri  Environment Systems,  Hudsonville, Ml
Pacific Marine Center, Seattle, WA
Alaska Railroad,  Anchorage
Sitka Conservation  Society, Sitka
Alaska Maritime Agencies,  Inc.,  Valdez
Foss  Launch  and  Tug Co.,  Anchorage and  Seattle,  WA
Campbell Towing  Co., Wrangell
Crowley  Maritime  Corp., Seattle,  WA
Canonie  Pacific,  Portland,  OR
AMMCO,  Nashville, TN
Sliattery Equipment,  Seattle, WA
EMRA, Gresham,  OR
Foss  Alaska  Lines,  Sitka
Alaska Freight Services, Seattle, WA
Best  Pipe and Steel,  Seattle,  WA
Raymond  International Builders,  Houston,  TX
Skyline Steel Corp.,  Larkspur, CA
Wright Construction Co., Seattle, WA
Only Way Construction,  Sitka
Underwater Construction,  Inc.,  Anchorage
Chevron Shipping Co., Edmonds, WA
Samson  Tug  and  Barge Co., Sitka
Puget Sound Tug and Barge, Anchorage
Maskell-Robbins,  Inc., Anchorage
Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 262, Juneau
Blue  Water Marine Supply,  Houston, TX
Swalling Construction Co.,  Anchorage
Sandstrom Sons,  Inc., Anchorage
Leigh Flexible Structures Ltd.,  Buffalo,  NY
United McGill Corp., Columbus,  OH
HWW Consultants, Anchorage
                              IX  - 6

-------
Moolin  and Associates, Anchorage
Alaska Explosives  Ltd.,  Anchorage
Great Lakes Dredge and Dock Co., Oak Brook, IL
Lounsbury and Associates, Anchorage
S&G Construction  Co.,  Anchorage
Burrell  Heppner Construction Co., Anchorage
Oceaneering International,  Inc.,  Santa  Barbara,  CA
Marinas International Ltd., McLean, VA
Associated Sand and Gravel Co.,  Elma, WA
Reidel  International, Portland,  OR
Mississippi Valley  Equipment, Ontario,  CA
Nordic Marine Floats, Everett,  WA
MEECO  Marinas, Inc., McAlester, OK
Alaska Resource Analysts,  Inc.,  Anchorage
ABAM  Engineers,  Inc.,  Federal  Way, WA
ERTEC  Northwest,  Anchorage
A.C.  Hoyle Co.,  Iron  Mountain,  Ml
Peter Kiewit Sons,  Anchorage
Petroleum Information Corp., Anchorage
NORTEC, Anchorage
J.G. Fisher and Associates,  Anchorage
Thompson Flotation, Inc.,  Newport Beach, CA
Alaska Diving Service,  Ketchikan
I.U.O.E.,  Anchorage
Johnson  Division,  UOP,  St. Paul, MN
Coast Marine Construction, Portland, OR
Teledyne  Pipe, Galveston,  TX
Construction and Rigging,  Anchorage
Pacific NW Waterways Association, Vancouver,  WA
Project  Proposal Northwest, Seattle, WA
Bellingham Marine  Industries, Bellingham, WA
SKW Clinton,  Inc., Anchorage
Dravo  Corporation, Pittsburgh,  PA
Green  Construction Co., Anchorage
Amak Towing,  Ketchikan
Willamette-Western  Corp., Portland, OR
L.B.  Foster Co.,  Anchorage  and  Federal Way, WA
Teamster  Local 959, Anchorage
Dillingham  Construction, Anchorage
Chevron USA,  Anchorage
Trident Marine, South Haven, Ml
Alaska Oil  &  Gas Commission, Anchorage
Kaiser Steel Corp.,  Oakland, CA
Rotocast Plastic Products,  Brownwood,  TX
TAMS Engineers, Anchorage
Washington Fish & Oyster Co., Seattle, WA
Pan-Alaska Fisheries,  Inc., Kodiak
Mitchell Marine, Lafayette,  LA
Columbia-Ward  Fisheries, Seattle, WA
Topper  Industries, Inc., Vancouver, WA
Kalispel Marine Structures, Cusick, WA
West Build Structures,  Portland,  OR
Morrison-Knudsen  Co., Boise,  ID
                             IX - 7

-------
    Far West Modular,  Inc., Jefferson,  OR
    Zebron  Corp., Tualatin, OR
    Gulf-Navigation,  Seward
    Martech International, Anchorage
    General Construction Co., Seattle, WA
    Piledrivers Local 2520,  Anchorage
    Elmer Rasmussen Library, University  of Alaska, Fairbanks
    Earthmovers  of  Fairbanks, Fairbanks
    DMC Properties,  Inc.,  Redmond, WA
    National Mechanical Contractors, Anchorage
    BP AK  Exploration, Inc.,  San Francisco, CA
    Nicolon  Corp., Atlanta,  GA
    ERIS, Anchorage
    Reading & Bates Construction,  Houston, TX
    Marathon  Oil Co.,  Anchorage
    McDonald  Industries, Anchorage
    Morris Marine Consultants, Anchorage
    Harding  Lawson Associates,  Anchorage and Novato, CA
    Texota, Inc., Rochester,  MN
    Pacific Management and  Engineering, Anchorage
    Construction Resources, Anchorage
    Roger and Babler,  Anchorage
    Armortec,  Norcross,  GA
    Gulf Oil,  Anchorage
    Emerald International Sales,  Houston,  TX
    Yutana  Barge Lines,  Inc., Nenana
    Alaska Legal Services Corp., Barrow
    Alaska Riverways,  Fairbanks
    Arktos  Associates,  Anchorage
    Steffen  Robertson  and  Kirsten, Lakewood, CO
    Union Oil Co., Anchorage
    Sohio Alaska Petroleum Co.,  Anchorage
INTERESTED CITIZENS

     Mike Nies, Boulder, CO
     Robert Weeden, Fairbanks
     Robert W. Sprague, Placentia, CA
     Judy Larquiere,  Fairbanks
     Louie  Larquiere, Fairbanks
     Kate Wedemeyer, Fairbanks
     Mark Standley, Fairbanks
     Bob Ritchie, Fairbanks
     Paul  R. Huff,  Fairbanks
     Jacquelline La  Perriere, College
     James W. Alderich,  Fairbanks
     Nina Mollett, Fairbanks
     Bob Dittrick, Anchorage
     Mike Holloway,  Indian
     H. Paul Friesema,  Evanston,  IL
     Pat Metz,  Anchorage
     Rachel Craig,  Kotzebue
                                  IX  -  8

-------
 Rita E. Ryder,  Kotzebue
 Clara Taylor, Kotzebue
 Paula Anderson,  Kotzebue
 Henry McLuke,  Kotzebue
 Joe Hill, Kotzebue
 Lou Jones,  Kotzebue
 Reggie  Joule, Kotzebue
 Kent  Hall,  Kotzebue
 Bev Minn,  Kotzebue
 Reed  Henry, Kotzebue
 Boris McLuke,  Kotzebue
 Marie A. Jones, Deering
 Robin  Pritkin,  Seattle,  WA
 Roger Burggriff, Fairbanks
 Ed  Bur, College
 Burt  Adams, Kivalina
 Jack Morrow, Valdez
 Herbert Zieske, Pt.  Baker
 George  Atkinson, Jr., Anchorage
 Bruce Barrett,  Craig
 Andrew Hughes,  Juneau
 J. Phillip  Henry, Anchorage
 John  Osias, Seattle, WA
 Tim Sutherland, Vancouver, WA
 Bill Miller, Olympia, WA
 Jim Glaspell, Eagle  River
 Nancy Hemming, Anchorage
 Leo Roberts, Kenai
 Chuck Muscio,  Anchorage
 P. Massey,  Juneau
 James McElroy,  Anchorage
 Felix  Toner, Juneau
 Betzi  Woodman, Anchorage
 Phillip Mathew,  Sherman Oaks, CA
 P. Robinson, San Francisco,  CA
 Robert Arvidson, Cordova
John Spencer,  Portland, OR
David Vick, Houston, TX
 Frederick  Goettel, Leonard, MD
Marie  Adams, Anchorage
Scott  Edson, Palmer
Bob Kent,  Washington,  D.C.
Richard Ehrlich,  Kotzebue
                            IX - 9

-------
	Chapter >
Public Response

-------
         X.   PUBLIC RESPONSE TO DEIS
To be completed after formal DEIS comment  period,

-------
   Chapter XI
References

-------
                         XI.   REFERENCES CITED
REFERENCES

Alaska  Department  of Fish  & Game.   1981.   Management units pamphlet.
     Valid  as of July 1,  1981.

Alaska Department of Labor.  1970.  Statistical quarterly.

	.   1980.  Statistical  quarterly.

	.   1983.  Alaska population overview, 1982.

Alt,   K.  T.   1978.    Inventory  of cataloging of sport fish and  sport fish
     waters of western  Alaska.   Wulik-Kivalina  Rivers  study.   In:   Alaska
     Department  of  Fish  &  Game,  Sport Fish Investigations, Vol.  19, Study
     G-I-P.

            1983a.   Alaska  Department of Fish & Game internal  memo to Scott
     Grundy,  Habitat Division,  January 6,  1983.

	.   1983b.  Alaska  Department of  Fish &  Game  internal  memo  to  Al
     Townsend, Habitat  Division,  November  1,  1983.

	.   1983c.  Pers.  Comm.  Fisheries  Biologist,  Alaska Department  of
     Fish & Game,  Fairbanks, AK.

Balding, G. O.  1976.   Water availability,  quality, and use in Alaska.  U.S.
     Geological Survey Open-File  Report 76-513.  236 pp.

Barnes,  C. A.  and T.  G.  Thompson.  1938.  Physical and  chemical  investi-
     gation in  the  Bering  Sea  and  portions  of  the  north  Pacific  Ocean.
     Univ. of Washington  Publications in Oceanography,  Vol.  3,  No. 2, pp.
     35-79. Seattle, WA.

Bear Creek Mining Company.   1983.  Testimony  of Bear Creek  Mining  Com-
     pany  concerning  proposed  rule:  Transportation and utility  systems  in
     and  across,  and   access  into,  conservation  system  units   in  Alaska,
     September  16, 1983, Anchorage,  AK.

Bendock, T.  N. and K.  T. Alt.   1981.   Sport fish  investigations of Alaska
     inventory and cataloging:   annual  performance report.   Alaska  Depart-
     ment of Fish  & Game, Sport  Fish Division, Juneau,  AK,  Vol.  22.
                                  XI - 1

-------
Benoit,  D.  A.,  E.  N.,  Leonard,  G.  M.,  Christensen,  and J.  T.  Fiandt.
     1976.   Toxic  effects of cadmium on  three  generations  of brook trout
     (Salvelinus  fontinalis).   Trans.  Amer.  Fish.  Soc.   105(4):  550-560.

Braham,  H. W.  and B.  D. Krogman.  1977.  Population  biology of the bow-
     head (Balaena mysticetus) and  beluga  (Delphinapterus  leucas) whale  in
     the  Bering, Chukchi,  and Beaufort Seas.  Northwest and Alaska Fish-
     eries Center Processed Report,  Seattle, WA.  29 pp.

	,  M.  A.  Fraker, and  B.  D.  Krogman.   1980.   Spring migration  of
     the  western Arctic  population  of bowhead  whales.   Marine Fishery  Re-
     view 42(9-10):36-46.

Braund  & Associates.   1983.   Kivalina and  Noatak subsistence  use  patterns.
     Ch. 7.  Environmental  baseline studies,  Red  Dog Project.  Prepared for
     Cominco Alaska, Inc.

Brower,  W.  A. et al.    1977.  Climatic  atlas of  the  outer  continental shelf
     waters and coastal  regions of Alaska.   Vol.  III.  Chukchi-Beaufort Sea.
     National Climatic  Center  and Arctic Environmental Information  and Data
     Center.

Brown,  J.  and  R.  Berg  (eds.).   1980.   Environmental engineering and eco-
     logical  baseline investigations along the Yukon River-Prudhoe  Bay haul
     road.   CRREL Report No.  80-19.  187 pp.

	,  P. C. Miller,  L.  L. Tieszen, and  F.   Bunnell.  1980.   An Arctic
     ecosystem.  Stroudsburg,  PA:   Dowden,  Hutchingon &  Ross.   571  pp.

Burns,  J.  J.    1983.   Pers.  Comm.  Marine Mammal  Research  Supervisor,
     Alaska Department of Fish & Game,  Fairbanks,  AK.

Burns,  J.   J.  and  T.  J. Eley.  1978.  The  natural  history and ecology  of
     bearded  seal  (Erignathus barbatus)  and ringed  seal  (Phasa  hispids).
     In:   Environmental  Assessment  of the  Alaska Continental Shelf,  Vol.  1.
     OCSEAP,  NOAA/BLM,  Boulder,  CO.

         ,   and  S.  J.  Harbo, Jr.   1972.   An aerial census of ringed seals,
     northern coast of  Alaska.  Arctic 25(4).

	,   L.  H.  Shapiro,  and  F.  H.  Fay.   1981.   Ice as  marine mammal
     habitat in the  Bering  Sea.   pp.  781-797.   ^n:   D. W. Hood and  J.
     Calder (eds.).  The eastern Bering Sea shelf.  Inst. Mar.  Sci.,  Fair-
     banks.

Childers, J.  M. and D.  R.  Kernodle.  1981.   Hydrologic reconnaissance of
     the Noatak River basin,  Alaska,  1978.   U.S.  Geological Survey  Water
     Resources  Investigations Open-File Report 81-1005.  38  pp.

	, and R.  M.  Loeffler.   1979.   Hydrologic  reconnaissance of
     western  Arctic  Alaska,  1976 and  1977.  U.S. Geological  Survey Open-
     File Report 79-699.  70 pp.
                                  XI - 2

-------
Clarke, R.  McV.  1974.  The effects  of effluents from  metal mines on aquatic
     ecosystems  in   Canada.   A  literature review.   Environment  Canada,
     Fisheries and Marine  Service, Technical Report No.  488.

Cominco  Alaska, Inc.   1983a.   Red  Dog Mine,  Project  Overview.  January
     1983.

	.   1983b.    Draft  recreation  report,  Red Dog  Project.   July 1983.

	.   1983c.   Draft,  Analysis of options, Red Dog Project.  July 1983.
Cominco  Engineering  Services,  Ltd.   1983a.   Application of the HDS process
     in the  treatment of Red  Dog tailings pond water.  January  1983.

	.   1983b.  Wastewater  collection and  management,  Red Dog  Project.
     May  1983.

Cowles,  C. J.   1981.   Biological  assessment for endangered  whales  of the
     Arctic Region with respect  to proposed  offshore oil and  gas  exploration.
     Bureau of Land  Management, Alaska  OCS office.  42 pp.

Dames & Moore.   1982a.  Vegetation  - wetland  communities,  Red Dog Project.
     Prepared for Cominco Alaska, Inc.  31 pp.

	.   1982b.  Final  report.  Port  site preliminary studies  for Cominco
     Alaska, Inc.  5438-055-20, October  8,  1982.

	.   1983a.  Environmental  baseline studies,  Red  Dog Project.   Pre-
     pared for Cominco Alaska, Inc., Anchorage,  AK.

	.   1983b.  Supplement to  environmental  baseline studies,  Red  Dog
     Project.  Prepared for Cominco Alaska,  Inc.,  Anchorage, AK.

	.   1983c.  Air  quality impact  analysis,  Red  Dog Project.   Prepared
     for  Cominco Alaska,  Inc.,  Anchorage, AK.

De  Cicco,  A.   1982.   Inventory and cataloging of sport fish and sport  fish
     waters of  western   Alaska.   Part A:   Arctic char  life  history  study.
     In:   Alaska  Department  of Fish  &  Game, Sport Fish Investigations, Vol.
     23,  Study G-I-P-A.

	.   1983.   Pers.  Comm.  Fisheries  Biologist,  Alaska Department of
     Fish & Game,  Fairbanks,  AK.

	.   (In press).   Inventory and  cataloging  of  sport  fish  and sport
     fish waters of western Alaska.  In:  Alaska Department of Fish & Game,
     Sport Fish Investigations, Vol.  24, Study G-I-P.

E.V.S.   Consultants  Ltd.   1983.   Toxicological,  biophysical  and chemical
     assessment of Red  Dog Creek, De Long Mountains, Alaska,  1982.  Pre-
     pared  for  Alaska  Department  of  Environmental Conservation, Juneau,
     AK.   245  pp.
                                  XI - 3

-------
Feulner, A.  J., J. M.  Childers, and  V.  W. Norman.   1971.  Water  resources
     of  Alaska.  U.S.  Geological Survey  Open-File Report.  60 pp.

Fleming, R.  H.  and D. Heggarty.  1966.  Oceanography of the  southeastern
     Chukchi  Sea.   pp.   697-754.   Mi:   N.  J.  Wilimovsky and J. N.  Wolfe
     (eds.).   Environment  of  the Cape  Thompson  region,  Alaska.   U.S.
     Atomic Energy Commission, Oak Ridge, TN,  Pub. PNE-481.

Frost,   C.   1983.   Pers.  Comm.  Marine  Mammal  Research Biologist,  Alaska
     Department of Fish & Game, Fairbanks, AK.

Giddings, J.  L.   1967.   Ancient men of the Arctic.   New York:   Alfred A.
     Knopf.

	 and D.  D.  Anderson.  In press.  Prehistory of northwest Alaskan
     Eskimo  settlements  and  culture:   Beach   ridge  archaeology of  Cape
     Krusenstern and other  sites around  Kotzebue Sound.

Gregory,  L.   1974.    The  effect  of  effluent components from  chlor-alkali
     plants  on aquatic  organisms.   A  literature  review.   Fisheries Research
     Board of Canada.   Technical Report No. 228.

Hall,  E. S., Jr.   1982a.  A cultural  resource site reconnaissance  performed
     in  conjunction  with  development of  the  Red  Dog  mine,  northwestern
     Alaska.   Report to Cominco Alaska,  Inc.   Edwin S. Hall and Associates,
     Technical Memorandum #1.

	.   1982b.  Project specific cultural  resource site  inventory:   The
     Red  Dog project.   Report  to  the Bureau  of Land Management.   Edwin
     Hall and  Associates, Technical  Memorandum #3.

	.   1983a.   Preliminary supplement:   A cultural resource site recon-
     naissance performance in conjunction with  development of Red Dog mine,
     northwestern Alaska.   Report  to  Cominco Alaska, Inc.  Edwin Hall and
     Associates, Technical Memorandum #5.

            1983b.  Pers.  Comm. Edwin S. Hall and Associates.
Hawley,  J.  R.  1972.  Use, characteristics  and toxicity of mine-mill  reagents
     in  Ontario.  Ontario Ministry of the Environment.

Hopkins,  D.  M.   1977.   Coastal  processes and  coastal erosional  hazards  to
     the  Cape  Krusenstern  archeological   site.   U.   S.  Geological  Survey
     Open-File Report 77-32.   17 pp.

Houghton,  J.   1983.   Pers.  Comm.  Fisheries  Biologist,   Dames  & Moore,
     Seattle, WA.

Jansons,  U. and R.  G.  Bottge.  1977.  Economic mining feasibility studies  of
     selected  mineral deposit  types in the western  Brooks  Range,  Alaska.
     U.S. Bureau of Mines  Open-File  Report 128-77.
                                  XI - 4

-------
John  Muir Institute,  1983.   The  regional  socioeconomics  of  Norton  Sound
     (draft),  prepared for  Minerals Management Service, Alaska OCS Office.

Johnson,  A.  W.,  L.  A.  Viereck,  R.  E. Johnson,  and H.  Melchior.   1966.
     Vegetation  and flora.   \r±:   N. J.  Wilimovsky  and J.  N. Wolfe (eds.).
     Environment  of  the  Cape  Thompson  region,  Alaska.   U.S.   Atomic
     Energy Commission,  Oak Ridge, TN, Pub. PNE-481.

Johnson,  C.   1983.   Pers.  Comm.  Marine Mammal  Biologist,  National  Marine
     Fisheries Service, Anchorage, AK.

Kevin  Waring  Associates.   1983.   Socioeconomic  forecasts  for  the  NANA
     Region.   Unpub.  data.

LGL Ecological Research  Associates,  Inc.  1980.   Baseline  aquatic investiga-
     tions  of  fish  and heavy metal concentrations  in  the  Kivalina and Wulik
     Rivers,  1978-1979.   Prepared  for  GCO Minerals Co.

Louis Berger  &  Associates.  1981.  Western and  Arctic Alaska transportation
     study.  Prepared for State  of Alaska, Department of Transportation and
     Public Facilities.

Marquette, W.  M.  and H.  W. Braham.   1982.  Grey whale distribution and
     catch by  Alaska Eskimos:   A   replacement  for the  bowhead  whale?
     Arctic 35(3).

Mauneluk Association.  1974.  The NANA region;  its resource and  develop-
     ment  potential.   Prepared for  U.S.  Economic Development Authority and
     the U.S. Bureau  of  Indian Affairs,  Juneau,  AK.

            1979.   Subsistence.    A summary of available  information  about
     the NANA Region.

McVey, R. W.  1983.  Pers. Comm.  Director,  Alaska  Region,  National Marine
     Fisheries Service, Juneau, AK.

Moore,  G. W.  1966.  Arctic beach sedimentation,   pp.  587-608.   ]_n_:   N.  J.
     Wilimovsky and J. N.  Wolfe (eds.).  Environment of the Cape Thompson
     region,  Alaska.  U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Oak  Ridge,  TN, Pub.
     PNE-481.

Muller, S. W.  1947.   Permafrost  or  permanently frozen ground  and related
     engineering  problems.   Military  Intelligence  Division,  Chief  Engineer,
     U.S.  Army  office,   Special   Report, Strategic  Engineering  Study  62.
     231 pp.

Murray,  D.  F.    1980.    Threatened  and  endangered  plants  of  Alaska.
     U.S.D.A. and U.S.D.I.   Coop.    Forest  Service and  Bureau of Land
     Management  Report,  Contr. No. 53-0109-9-00014.   59  pp.

Noah,  H.  1983.   Pers.  Comm.  Environmental  Coordinator, Cominco Alaska,
     Inc., Anchorage, AK.
                                  XI - 5

-------
Olson, J. E.  1982.  The effects of air pollution  and acid rain (Report 8) on
     fish, wildlife  and their  habitats  -  Arctic  tundra and  alpine meadows.
     FWS/OBS 80/40.8.  U.S.  Department of the  Interior, Washington,  D. C.
     70 pp.

Ott,  A.  1983.   Pers.  Comm.  Regional  Habitat Supervisor,  Alaska Department
     of Fish & Game, Fairbanks, AK.

Rae,  J.  A.   1983.   Pers.  Comm.   Red Dog Project  Manager, Cominco, Ltd.,
     Trail, B.C.,  Canada.

Reeder,  S.  W.,  A.  Demayo and M. C.  Taylor.   1979.  Guidelines for  surface
     water quality.   Vol.  1.   Inorganic  Substances, Cadmium.   Environment
     Canada, Inland Waters Directorate, Ottawa.  19  pp.

Rugh, D. J. and  J. C. Cubbage.  1980.  Migration of  bowhead  whales  past
     Cape Lisburne, Alaska.  Mar. Fish. Rev. 42:46-51.

Saario,  D.  J.   and B.  Kessel.  1966.   Human  ecological   investigations  at
     Kivalina.   In:  N.  J.  Wilimovsky  and J. N. Wolfe (eds.).   Environment
     of the  Cape Thompson region, Alaska.  U.S. Atomic Energy  Commission,
     Oak Ridge, TN, Pub.  PNE-481.

Selkregg, L. L. 1974.  Alaska regional profiles.  Northwest  region.  Univer-
     sity of Alaska,  Arctic Environmental  Information and Data Center.   265
     pp.

Sellmann, P.V.,  J.  Brown, R. I. Lewellen, H. McKin, and C. Merry.  1975.
     The classification  and  geomorphic implications of  thaw  lakes  on   the
     Arctic  coastal  plain,  Alaska.    Research  Report  344,   Cold   Regions
     Research and  Engineering  Laboratory, Hanover, NH.  21 pp.

Shaver,  M.   1983.   Pers.  Comm.  Superintendent, Cape  Krusenstern National
     Monument,  National Park  Service,  Kotzebue, AK.

Smith,  H.  L.   1982.  Archaeological investigations  in the  DeLong Mountains,
     northwest  Alaska,  1979-1980.  Bureau of Land Management,  Fairbanks,
     AK.

Social  Research  Institute.   1982.  NANA coastal  resource service  area  coastal
     management plan:   The people.

Specht,  W.   L.   1973.   The  effect of  heavy metals upon  the  diversity  and
     abundance  of  benthic  macroinvertebrates.   M.S.   Thesis,   Penn.   St.
      Univ.  58 pp.

Sprague, J.  B., P. F. Elson, and R.  L. Saunders.   1965.   Sublethal copper-
      zinc pollution  in a salmon river  -- a field  and laboratory  study.   Int.
      J.  Air, Water Pollut.  9:531-543.
                                  XI  - 6

-------
Springer, A.  M. and  D. G.  Roseneau.  1977.   A comparative sea-cliff bird
     inventory of the Cape  Thompson vicinity, Alaska.   pp. 206-262.  In:
     Environmental   assessment  of  the Alaska  Continental  Shelf.    Annual
     reports  of  principal investigators  for the year ending March 1977.  Vol.
     5.   Receptors-birds.  Nat.  Oceanic  and Atmos.  Admin., U.S.  Dept. of
     Commerce.

	.  1982.    Population  and  trophies  studies  of  seabirds  in  the
     northern Bering and Chukchi Seas, 1981.  In: Environmental assessment
     of  the  Alaskan continental  shelf.  Annual reports of  principal  investiga-
     tors for the year ending March  1982.   Nat. Oceanic and Atmos. Admin.,
     U.S. Dept. of Commerce.

Tailleur, D.  L.  1970.   Lead-,  zinc-,  and  barite-bearing  samples  from  the
     western  Brooks  Range,  Alaska.   U.S.  Geological  Survey  Open-File
     Report 70-319.

Tsytovich,   N.  A.   1975.   The mechanics  of  frozen  ground.   New  York:
     McGraw Hill Book Co.

U.  S.  Department of  Commerce,   Bureau  of  Economic  Analysis.   1982.
     Personal  income and employment by major source, 1967 to 1981.

U. S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency.  1983.  Responsiveness summary for
     scoping meetings, February 14  through April  1,  1983 on Red Dog Mining
     Project EIS.

Viereck, L. A., C.  T.  Dyrness, and A.  R. Batten.   1981.   Revision of pre-
     liminary  classification   system   for vegetation  of Alaska.    U.S.D.A.,
     Forest  Service General Technical Report PNW-106.  64 pp.

WGM, Inc.   1978.  Mineral  studies  of  the  western  Brooks Range.   Vol.  I  &
     II.  U.S.  Bureau of Mines,  Contract No. J0155089.

Winslow, P. C.   1968.   Notes on biology of Wulik River char (unpublished).
     Alaska  Department  of  Fish  &   Game,   Division  of Sport Fish, Juneau,
     AK.

Wood ward-Clyde Consultants.  1983.   Coastal sedimentations:  Cape Thomp-
     son to  Cape Krusenstern.

Wunnicke,  E.  C.   1983.  Department of  Natural  Resources,  Office  of  the
     Commissioner  letter  to  W.  H.  Tonking,  GCO Minerals  and  H.  M.
     Giegerich,  Cominco  Alaska, March  9, 1983.
                                 XI  - 7

-------
 Chapter XII
Glossary

-------
         XII.   GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS, ACRONYMS AND

              ABBREVIATIONS AND MEASUREMENT  EQUIVALENTS
DEFINITION  OF TERMS

Technical Term
                         Definition
alluvium

anadromous

aufeis


borrow site


chelation


diachronic

epibenthic

epifauna


euryhaline

halophytic

hydric

hydrophyte

igneous

infauna

lighter
Material deposited by moving water.

Fish which go up rivers from the sea to spawn.

Icings  formed  from   pressurized  flows  of  streams  or
groundwater.

Site from  which  road construction materials (gravel)  would
be extracted.

Reaction which  causes central  atom (usually a metal ion)
to attach  to neighboring atoms  to form a ring structure.

Through time.

Existing on the  surface of bottom material.

Community of organisms which  live on or just beneath the
surface of bottom material.

Capable of withstanding wide variations in salinity.

Adapted to grow in  salty or alkaline soil.

Characterized by an abundance of moisture.

Plant growing only in  water or  very wet earth.

Formed by volcanic  action  or intense heat.

Community of organisms which  live within  bottom  material.

Open  barge  used  for transporting goods between  ships
and  shore  in shallow water.
                                  XII  -  1

-------
Technical  Term
(Continued)

lightering
mafic


mesic

moraine



natal  stream

oligochaeta


orographic

polynya

project area
                         Definition
rolligon


scree


sealift


seismic


solifluction


tailings


tailings pond

thaw bulb
Using  open  barges  in  loading  and  unloading  of  larger
ships where shallow waters prevent normal docking.

Pertaining  to  igneous rocks  rich  in  magnesium  and iron,
and  relatively low in silica.

Moist,  or requiring  moderate  amounts of moisture.

Mass of rocks, gravel, sand, clay, etc., carried and  then
deposited  by  a  glacier along  its sides,  at its terminus, or
underneath the  ice.

Stream in which a fish is born.

Class  of  segmented worms;  found  chiefly  in  moist  soils
and  fresh water.

Pertaining to  mountains.

Semi-permanent  open lead  in  sea ice.

Refers  to  the  entire  area encompassed  by  proposed
project components.   Generally  bounded by the Singoalik
Lagoon port   site,  the GCO  transportation  corridor,  Red
Dog  Valley, the Mulgrave  Hills,  VABM  28  and  an undeter-
mined  distance out to sea.

Cushion-wheeled  vehicle  used for  crossing tundra  with
minimal damage.

A  heap of rock waste at  the base of a cliff or  a sheet of
coarse, loose  debris lying on a mountain slope.

Large  seasonal  movement  of  cargo  by  ships from  distant
points to the  project area.

Related to,  or caused by,  earthquakes  or man-made earth
tremors.

The   process  of   slow  downslope   movement   of  water-
saturated earth.

The  waste products of the  milling   process that are  dis-
posed  of in the tailings  pond.

The  area  created  by a dam to hold the  mill tailings.

Unfrozen  zone  in permafrost area,  usually  around  lake,
stream, or man-made structure.
                                  XII - 2

-------
Technical  Term
(Continued)
thermocline
Title XI
                        Definition
trophic
ungulate
xeric
xerophytic
Layer of water  between warmer surface  zone and colder,
deeper  waters  in  which  temperature  decreases rapidly
with depth.
The part of the Alaska National Interest Lands  Conserva-
tion Act  (ANILCA)  that  provides a  mechanism  for  the
Secretary of the Interior to grant access through certain
reserved   lands   in   Alaska   (e.g.,   Cape   Krusenstern
National Monument).
Related  to  nutrition.
A hoofed mammal.
Related  to, or having  dry or  desert-like  conditions.
Adapted  to growing under very dry or desert-like (xeric)
conditions.
AGENCY ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Federal Agencies
ACHP      Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
BLM       Bureau of Land  Management
Corps      Army Corps of Engineers
DA        Department of the Army
DO I        Department of Interior
EPA       Environmental Protection Agency
FWS       Fish and Wildlife Service
MSHA      Mining Safety and Health Administration
NMFS      National Marine  Fisheries Service
NOAA      National Oceanographic  and Atmospheric Administration
NPS       National Park Service
NWS       National Weather Service
USGS      United States Geological Survey
                                  XII  -  3

-------
State of Alaska Agencies
ADF&G     Alaska  Department of Fish and  Game
AEIDC     University of Alaska, Arctic  Environmental Information & Data Center
DEC       Department of Environmental  Conservation
DGGS      Division of Geological and Geophysical  Survey
DNR       Department of Natural Resources
SHPO      State Historic Preservation Office

Other
ANCSA     Alaska  Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971
ANILCA    Alaska  National  Interest Lands  Conservation  Act of 1980
BACT      Best Available Control Technology
HDS       High Density Sludge
IRA       Indian  Reorganization Act
NAAQS     National Ambient Air Quality  Standards
NANA      NANA Regional  Corporation
           (originally:  Northwest Alaska  Native Association)
NEPA      National Environmental Policy Act
NPDES     National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NSB       North Slope Borough
NSPS      New Source Performance  Standards
ORV       Off-road  Vehicles
PSD       Prevention of Significant Deterioration
SPCC      Spill Prevention,  Control and Countermeasure Plan
VLCC      Very Large  Crude Carrier
VQO       Visual Quality Objective
                                  XII  -  4

-------
METRIC/ENGLISH MEASUREMENT, ABBREVIATIONS AND  EQUIVALENTS
 Metric  Unit (Abbrev.)

centimeter (cm)

meter (m)

kilometer (km)

hectare  (ha)

square kilometer (km2)

liter (£)

cubic meter  (m3)

cubic meter  (m3)

cubic dekameter (dam3)

cubic meter
  per second (m3/s)

kilogram (kg)

megagram (Mg)

meter per second (m/s)

meter per second (m/s)

miligram  per liter (mg/2)

degrees Celsius  (°C)

barrels  (bbls)
      Equivalent
2.54 cm      = 1 in

0.3048 m     = 1 ft

1.6093 km    = 1 mi

0.4047 ha    = 1 ac

2.590 km2    = 1 mi2

3.7854 H     = 1 gal

0.0283 m3    = 1 ft3

0.7646 m3    = 1 yd3

1.2335 dam3  = 1 ac-ft


0.0283 m3/s  = 1 ft3/s

0.4536 kg    = 1 Ib

0.9072 Mg    = 1 ton

0.5144 m/s   = 1 knots

0.3048 m/s   = 1 ft/s

1.0 mg/£     = 1 ppm

(1.8x°C)+ 32= °F
English Unit (Abbrev.)

inch (in)

foot (ft)

mile (mi)

acre (ac)

square mile (mi2)

gallon  (gal)

cubic feet  (ft3)

cubic yard (yd3)

acre-foot (ac-ft)

cubic feet
  per second (ft3/s)

pound  (Ib)

short ton  (2,000 Ib)

knot (knot)

feet per second  (ft/s)

part per million  (ppm)

degrees Fahrenheit (°F)

barrels (bbls)
                                 XII - 5

-------
Chapter XIII
   Index

-------
                              XIII.  INDEX
Active layer:  IV-8
ADF&G:  (see Alaska Department of Fish & Game)
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP):  1-9,  V-25,  V-71, V-81,
     V-93,  VI-8
Air quality:  IV-49, V-17, V-66, V-81,  V-83, V-92, VI-8
Aircraft flights:  V-69
Airstrip:   11-13,  V-85
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC):   I-9,  V-82,  VI-9
Alaska Department of Fish & Game  (ADF&G):   I-9,  V-42,  V-46,  V-80, V-90,
     VI-9
Alaska Department of Natural Resources (DNR):  I-4,  I-9, V-75,  VI-9
Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA):   1-1,  III-36,
     111-41, IV-1, V-93, V-97
Alaska Native Claims  Settlement Act (ANCSA):   I-2, IV-1
Alluvial deposits:   IV-5,  IV-7
Alternatives 1, 2 and 3:  11 (-39, III-44,  V-36
Ambler District:  V-88
Anadromous fish:   (see  Fish)
Appendix 1,  Reclamation Plan:  V-83
Appendix 2,  Spill Prevention,  Control and  Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan:
     V-5, V-13,  V-46,  V-47,  V-51, V-54, V-64,  V-80,  V-92
Appendix 3,  Endangered Species Biological Assessment:   IV-12, IV-17,  IV-43,
     VI-8
Appendix 4,  NPDES Draft Permit:  VI-1
Appendix 5,  Department of  Army Public Notice and Section 404(b)(1)
     Evaluation:  VI-7
Appendix 6,  ANILCA Title XI  Right-of-Way Application:  VI-7
Appendix 7,  Protection of Cultural Resources:   VI-8, VI-10
Archeological resources:  VI-8, VI-10
Archeological sites:   IV-53, V-25,  V-90
Arctic char:   (see  Fish)
Arctic Circle:  I-2
Asikpak  Lagoon:   IV-12, V-51
Asikpak  River:   11-13,  III-6, IV-12,  IV-19, V-39, V-45,  V-48,  V-51
Asikpak  route:   III-6,  111-16,  III-35,  III-37
Atigun Pass:  V-38,  V-66
Ballasted tanker:  (see Transfer facility)
Baqhalik Creek:  IV-33
Barite:   11-1, II-8,  IV-8
Barium sulfate:   II-8, V-63
Bear  Creek Mining  Company:   V-88
Beaufort Sea:  IV-42, V-60
                                 XIII - 1

-------
Belukha whale:  (see Marine mammals)
Benthic invertebrates:  IV-30, V-13, V-49
Bering Sea:  IV-42
Bering Strait:  IV-43
Best Available Control Technology (BACT):   V-17,  V-19
Big Diomede  Island:   IV-43
Bioaccumulation:   IV-37, V-2, V-14
BLM:   (see U.S.  Bureau of Land Management)
Boating:   IV-71,  V-74
Bons Creek:   II-6, III-3,  111-16, IV-25, V-16
Bons Creek water supply reservoir:  11-13,  V-13,  V-17, V-85
Borrow sites:  11-16, II-33, V-37, V-39,  V-46,  V-50, V-67, V-68, V-86
Bowhead  whale:   (see Marine  mammals;  c.f.  Appendix 3)
Bridge:  (see Road transportation system)
Brooks Range:   I-2,  IV-8,  IV-15, V-88
Brown  bear:   (see Terrestrial wildlife)
Buddy Creek:  III-3,  IV-25
Cadmium:   IV-23, IV-25,  IV-29,  IV-36,  V-5
Campsite:   III-3,  V-27
Cape Krusenstern:  IV-46, IV-53, V-53,  V-57,  V-61, V-64, V-94
Cape Krusenstern Archeological  District:   III-47,  IV-53
Cape Krusenstern National Monument:   1-1,  I-4, I-8, 11-19, III-7, III-47,
     III-48,  IV-2, IV-50, IV-53,  IV-72,  V-23, V-71, V-74, V-88,  V-90,
     V-97, VI-7
Cape Lisburne:   I-2
Cape Seppings:   V-74
Cape Thompson:   IV-15, IV-42, IV-48
Caribou:   (see Terrestrial wildlife)
Char overwintering habitat:   (see Fish)
Chemical spills:   V-2, V-5, V-38, V-45, V-47,  V-54, V-61 (c.f. Appendix 2)
Chromium:   IV-25, IV-29
Chukchi Sea:  I-2,  11-13,  IV-42, IV-46
Coal:   III-3, V-89
Coastal geologic processes:  I-7, III-45,  IV-46, V-57,  V-94
Coastal Zone Management:   VI-10
Cominco Alaska,  Inc.:  I-2,  I-6
Community facilities:   IV-69,  V-34
Component:  11-1, III-16,  111-39, V-1
Concentrate  spills:  V-2, V-38, V-54, V-61  (c.f. Appendix 2)
Concentrate  storage building:  11-19, II-35, V-39,  V-68
Concentrates (lead,  zinc,  barite):   11-1, II-8,  V-63
Copper:   IV-29,  IV-37
Copper sulfate:   11-10, V-62
Corps:  (see U.  S.  Department of  Army Corps of Engineers)
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ):  1-1
Cultural  resources:   I-7,  III-47, IV-51, V-25,  V-71, V-81, V-83,  V-93,
     VI-8, VI-10
De Long Mountains:   I-2,  IV-4,  IV-15,  V-75
Deadlock  Mountain:   I-2,  IV-4
DEC:  (see Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation)
Department of the Army (DA):   IV-10,  VI-1, VI-7
Development schedule:   11-33
Diachronic model:  IV-53
                                 XIII - 2

-------
Diesel fuel:   11-13, III-3
Discharge standards:   11-12, V-7,  V-9
Diversion  ditch:  II-4,  V-4,  V-5, V-80, V-82
Division of Geological  and Geophysical Survey  (DGGS):   V-89
DNR:  (see Alaska Department of Natural  Resources)
DO I:  (see U.S.  Department of the Interior)
Domestic wastewater:   11-19, V-8,  V-80
Dredging:   II-30, V-52, V-53, V-59
Dudd Creek:  II-13,  111-3,  IV-25,  IV-37
Dust:  V-2, V-17,  V-19,  V-38, V-66, V-81, V-91
Economy:   1-7, III-48,  IV-65
Emissions:   V-17, V-21, V-66
Employment:   IV-66,  V-26
Endangered species:  IV-11, I V-17,  IV-43, VI-8 (c.f.  Appendix 3)
EPA:  (see  U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency)
EPA  Significant Emission Rates:  V-17, V-21
Erosion:   V-14,  V-38, V-46, V-59
Eschscholtz Bay:   IV-42
Evaingiknuk Creek:   III-7
Evaporation:   IV-48,  V-7
Fish:  I-7,  11-13, 11-16, III-44, V-14,  V-50, V-72,  V-82, V-100
     Anadromous  fish:  IV-32, IV-40, V-46, V-52,  V-55,  V-101
     Arctic char:   IV-36, IV-40, IV-54, IV-59, IV-72, V-14, V-25,  V-73,  V-101
     Arctic grayling:   IV-32,  IV-36, IV-40,  IV-72,  V-14, V-50
     Char overwintering habitat:   11-13,  IV-32, V-51
     Char rearing habitat:  V-50,  V-51
     Char spawning habitat:   II-32,  IV-32, V-50, V-51
     Chum salmon:  IV-33,  IV-40,  IV-54,  IV-59,  IV-72
     Coho salmon:  IV-33
     King salmon:  IV-33
     Migration:   IV-37, V-50,  V-51,  V-54
     Pink salmon:  IV-33,  IV-40
     Salmon:  IV-36,  V-14,  V-51
     Sockeye salmon:   IV-33
     Tissue:   IV-37,  V-15
Fishing:   IV-71,  V-16,  V-26,  V-36, V-52, V-74,  V-81,  V-90, V-100
Fivefingered Creek:  IV-33
Floodplains:  IV-7
Fuel:  11-19, II-32, V-61
Fuel  spills:  V-2, V-5,  V-38, V-45,  V-47, V-54,  V-61 (c.f.  Appendix 2)
FWS:  (see  U.S.  Fish and Wildlife  Service)
Garbage collection:  V-4, V-80
GCO Minerals  Company:   I-2,  III-3,  V-88
GCO route:   III-3,  111-16, III-35,  III-37
Glacial moraine:   IV-4
Golden eagle:   (see Terrestrial  wildlife)
Gray whale:  (see Marine Mammals;  c.f. Appendix 3)
Grayling Creek:  11-16,  IV-33,  V-47
Groundwater:   IV-17,  IV-29,  V-4,  V-45,  V-80, V-82
High Density Sludge  (HDS)  process:  11-12, V-9
Hotham  Inlet:   III-8,  III-37
Hovercraft:   III-7
Hunting:  IV-71, V-26, V-36,  V-74,  V-81, V-90,  V-100


                                 XIII  -  3

-------
Hydrology:  IV-19, V-5, V-46,  V-80,  V-82,  VI-9
Hydropower:   III-3
Ice:   IV-47, V-60
Ice-wedge polygons:  I V-5
Icings:   IV-7,  IV-19, V-47, V-48,  V-82
Ikalukrok Creek:  11-13, IV-19, IV-25, IV-29, V-47, V-82
Imikruk Creek:  IV-12
Imikruk Lagoon:   IV-12
Income:  IV-66, V-27, V-30
Inupiat Eskimos:   IV-55, IV-62
Ipiavik  Lagoon:  IV-12,  IV-20,  IV-42, V-50,  V-59
Iron:   IV-23,  IV-29
Kavrorak  Lagoon:   IV-42,  V-51
Kivalina:  I-2, 11-13, IM-6, IV-2,  IV-19, IV-54, V-25, V-98
Kivalina Lagoon:   IV-12
Kivalina River:  11-13, III-6,  IV-7, IV-12, IV-19,  IV-23, IV-32, V-39,  V-48,
     V-73, V-101
Kobuk National Monument:   V-88
Kotlik  Lagoon:   IV-37
Kotzebue:  I-2, 11-1, IV-2, IV-54,  IV-62, IV-70, V-33, V-81, V-99
Kotzebue Sound:   III-8,  III-37,  IV-42
Kruz  route:  III-7, 111-16,  III-35,  III-38, V-99
Lagoon  breaching:  II-30,  II-32, II-33, V-39,  V-43,  V-52,  V-59
Land  exchange:  I-4
Land  status:   IV-2
Lead:   11-1, II-8,  IV-8,  IV-23,  IV-25, IV-29, V-5
Lead sulfide:   11-13
Lighter barges:  11-30, 11-32
Lik prospect:   I-4, III-3,  III-48, V-76
Lime:  11-11
Manganese:  IV-29
Mapsorak  Lagoon:   IV-37
Marine biology:  I-7, III-46, IV-37, V-52
Marine birds:   IV-42, V-55, V-57
Marine fish:   IV-40,  V-53,  V-55
Marine invertebrates:  IV-38, V-52
Marine mammals:   IV-42, V-25,  V-55,  V-57,  V-70, V-72, V-100, V-103
     Bearded  seal:  IV-42,  IV-54,  V-73
     Belukha whale:  IV-42, IV-54, V-70, V-73
     Bowhead  whale:   IV-42,  V-56, V-70, V-73, VI-8 (c.f. Appendix 3)
     Gray whale:   IV-43, V-56, V-70, VI-8  (c.f. Appendix 3)
     Harbor porpoise:  IV-42
     Polar  bear:   IV-43
     Ringed seal:   IV-42,  IV-54, V-55
     Spotted  seal:  IV-42,   IV-54
     Walrus:   IV-43,  V-73
     Whale migration:  IV-43, V-56, V-81
Marine water quality:  IV-46, V-59, V-65, V-82
Mauneluk  (Maniilaq) Association:  V-72
Mercury:   IV-25,  IV-29
Meteorology:   IV-47
Methylisobutyl  carbinol:  11-11
Mill:   11-1, II-4, II-6, 111-1,  V-85
                                 XIII  -  4

-------
Mine:  11-1,  II-2, 111-1, V-22,  V-25,  V-83
Mining Safety and Health Administration  (MSHA):   11-12
Mitigation:  V-78
Monitoring:   V-81, VI-1
Moose:  (see Terrestrial wildlife)
Morgan  Coal  Company:   V-89
Mulgrave  Hills:   11-13,  IV-59, V-72, V-102
Muskoxen:  (see Terrestrial wildlife)
NANA region:   IV-62,  IV-65,  IV-70, V-99,  VI-10
NANA Regional  Corporation:   I-2, 11-1,  111-41,  IV-2, V-26, V-75,  V-78,
     V-83
NANA/Cominco agreement:   I-6, V-27, V-31,  V-35, V-41, V-72,  V-102
Natal streams:   IV-32
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS):   V-17, V-21, V-66
National Climatic Center:  IV-48
National Environmental  Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA):   1-1
National Marine  Fisheries Service (NMFS):   I-9,  IV-43,  VI-8
National Petroleum Reserve:   III-36
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)  Permit:   1-1, 1-8,
     11-19, V-8, V-82
National Register of Historic  Places:   III-47,  IV-53,  V-25,  V-71
Natural  gas:   III-3, V-87
New Heart Creek:  V-50,  V-72
Nickel:   IV-29
NMFS:  (see National Marine Fisheries  Service)
No  Action Alternative:   111-41, V-1, V-77
Noatak:   I-2, III-7, III-37,  IV-2,  IV-54,  IV-62,  V-25, V-98
Noatak corridor:  III-7, III-37
Noatak National  Preserve:   III-36, I V-71, V-88
Noatak River:   11-16,  III-7,  III-37, IV-7, IV-19,  IV-32,  IV-71, V-37
North Fork  Red Dog  Creek:   III-3, IV-22,  I V-25,  V-14
North Slope  Haul  Road:  V-38, V-66
North Slope  Borough:  1-10, IV-2,  IV-70,  V-35, V-86
Northern  corridor:  11-13,  III-3, III-37, IV-53, V-85
NPS:  (see  U.S. National  Park Service)
Ocean currents:   IV-44
Off-road vehicles  (ORVs):   V-90
Ogotoruk  Beach:  IV-46
Ogotoruk  Creek:  IV-20
Ogotoruk  Valley:  IV-48
Oil:   V-87
Omikviorok River:   11-16,  III-7,  IV-12,  IV-20, V-37, V-49, V-50,  V-101
Omikviorok route:  III-7,  111-16, III-38
Option:    11-1,  111-1
Options screening criteria:  III-9
Options screening process:   III-8, 111-16,  III-39
Ore:  I-2, 11-1
Ore  body:  II-4,  IV-29, IV-36,  V-5
Orographic shading:   IV-48
Ott Water Engineers, Inc.:   I-4
Overburden:  II-4,  V-84
Peregrine falcon:  (see Terrestrial wildlife; c.f.  Appendix 3)
Permafrost:   N-16,  IV-5,  IV-8,  IV-17,  V-46
                                  XIII - 5

-------
pH:   IV-23,  IV-25,  IV-29,  IV-36,  V-10
Physical  and chemical oceanography:  IV-44, V-57
Physiography:   IV-5
Pingos:  IV-7
Point Hope:  IV-43, IV-46, IV-47,  IV-62, V-53,  V-61
Point Lay:   V-89
Polyacrylamide  flocculant:   11-11
Polynya:   IV-42, V-55, V-56
Population  (human):  IV-62, V-32
Port site:  11-1,  11-19,  II-33,  III-8, 111-16,  III-35, VI-1
Power  generation:   II-6,  11-13, III-3
Power  plant:  11-1
Precipitation:   IV-20,  IV-48,  V-7
Preferred alternative:   III-50, V-95
Prevention  of Significant  Deterioration  (PSD):  V-17,  V-21,  VI-9
Project components:  111-1
Prudhoe  Bay:  V-38, V-66
Public access:  V-75, V-89
Rabbit Creek:   IV-15,  IV-33,  V-42, V-45, V-73
Railroad:   11-13, III-7, III-35
Raptors:   IV-12, V-42
Reagents:   II-8,  V-9,  V-63
Reclamation:  V-15, V-83, V-86, VI-1  (c.f.  Appendix 1)
Recreation:  IV-70, V-36, V-74, V-83,  V-93
Red  Dog Creek:  12, II-2,  IV-19,  IV-22,  IV-29,  V-11, V-14,  V-82
Red  Dog Valley:  I-2,  II-33,  III-3
Regional  use:  I-8,  III-48,  V-75
Revegetation:  V-13, V-19, V-47,  V-66, V-86 (c.f.  Appendix  1)
Right-of-way:  11-19, VI-7,  VI-9
Road transportation system:  11-16,  II-33, III-7, III-35
     Bridge:  11-13, 11-16, V-38,  V-46,  V-76,  V-85
     Construction:   V-41, V-43, V-46,  V-50,  V-67,  V-80
     Culvert:  11-13, 11-16,  V-38, V-46,  V-49,  V-82,  V-85
     Drainage:   V-38,  V-47
     Stream crossing:   III-43, V-46, V-49,  V-51, V-82, V-85
Rolligons:   V-47
Runoff:  IV-20, V-7
Salinity:    IV-46
Salmon:  (see Fish)
Scoping issues:  I-6
Scoping process:   I-4,  111-1,  III-8,  111-41
Scour:  V-60
Sealift:  I-4, 11-19, II-33
Section 10  (River and  Harbors Act of 1899):  1-1, VI-7
Section 404 (Clean  Water  Act of  1972):   I-2, VI-1, VI-7
Section 7 (Endangered  Species Act of 1973):  VI-8
Section 810 (ANILCA):   V-97, VI-7
Sediment loading:   V-15,  V-50
Sediment transport:  IV-46, V-57,  V-82
Sedimentation ponds:  V-13, V-46, V-59, V-62,  V-80,  V-82
Seepage  containment:   II-6,  V-5,  V-13
Seismology:  IV-5
Selective flotation milling  process:   11-8
                                  XIII - 6

-------
Siaktak Hills:  IV-17, V-44
Silicate:   II-8
Silver:   11-1, II-8,  IV-8,  IV-25,  IV-29
Singoalik  Lagoon:   III-6, III-8, III-35,  III-37,  IV-12
Singoalik  River:   III-6,  IV-12,  V-45
Slurry pipeline:   III-7
Snowfall:   IV-48
Social impacts:  I-7, III-48
Socioeconomics:   IV-62,  V-27, V-81, V-83
Sodium cetylsulfonate:   11-11
Sodium cyanide:   11-10,  V-62
Sodium isopropyl xanthate:  11-11
Soils:  IV-8,  IV-17
Sound:   IV-51,  V-23, V-68, V-70,  V-81,  V-93
South Fork Red Dog Creek:  III-3, 111-16,  IV-23,  IV-25,  V-5,  V-14
Southern  corridor:  11-16,  III-3,  III-7,  111-16, III-35,  III-38,  IV-53,  V-85,  V-101
Sphagnum:   IV-8
St. Lawrence Island:  IV-43
State Historic Preservation  Officer (SHPO):  1-10,  V-25, V-71, V-81, VI-10
Storm events:   IV-20, V-8, V-80
Storm surges:   IV-44
Subsistence:  I-7,  III-46,  IV-54,  IV-65, V-25, V-72, V-81,  V-83,  V-91,
     V-93, V-97,  VI-7
Sulfides:   11-1,  II-8, V-63
Sulfuric acid:  11-11, V-62
Tailings:   II-2,  V-8
Tailings pond:  11-1, II-6,  III-3,  111-16, V-6,  V-8, V-80, V-84, VI-1
Tailings pond dam:   II-4,  II-6
Tailings pond overflows:   V-12, V-16
Tailings slurry:   II-6,  II-8
Tasaychek Lagoon:  V-88
Terrestrial wildlife:   I-7,  III-45,  V-3,  V-40, V-79,  V-82,  V-92, V-100
     Brown bear:   IV-17,  V-3, V-42, V-44
     Caribou:  IV-12, IV-54,  IV-72, V-3,  V-25,  V-41,  V-44, V-72, V-101
     Dall  sheep:   IV-15, V-4, V-42
     Golden eagle:  IV-12,  V-3
     Gyrfalcon:   IV-12
     Moose:   IV-15,  IV-54, IV-72, V-4, V-42,  V-45, V-72, V-73,  V-101
     Muskoxen:   IV-15,  V-4,  V-42, V-45
     Peregrine falcon:   IV-12,  IV-17, V-41,  V-44,  VI-8 (c.f. Appendix 3)
     Red  fox:   IV-17, V-3, V-44
     Rough-legged hawk:   IV-12
     Shorebirds:  IV-12
     Small mammals:  V-3, V-40,  V-42,  V-44, V-101
     Song  birds:  V-3,  V-40,  V-42, V-44
     Waterfowl:   IV-12,  IV-54,  IV-59, V-4, V-42, V-45, V-72,  V-101
     Wolverine:   IV-17,  V-3,  V-44
     Wolves:   IV-17, V-3,  V-44
Thaw bulb:  IV-7
Thaw lake:   IV-5
Thermocline:  IV-47
Tides:   IV-44
Title XI (ANILCA):   1-1, I-4, 111-16, III-37,  III-41, V-75, V-91, V-97, VI-7


                                 XIII  - 7

-------
Title 16 (Alaska Statutes):   V-46, VI-9
Total  suspended solids (TSS):  V-11
Townsite:  III-3, V-27,  V-34
Transfer facility:   II-30, III-8, III-35
     Ballasted tanker:   II-30,  V-53, V-59, V-68,  V-86
     Bulk carrier:   II-30, V-65
     Buried pipeline:  II-33,  V-56, V-61
     Causeway/dock:  11-19,  III-8, III-35, V-53,  V-56,  V-58
     Short causeway/lightering:   II-30, II-32,  III-8, III-35
     Short causeway/offshore island:   11-30, III-8,  III-35
Transportation corridor:  11-1, 11-13,  III-3,  11 (-35
Transportation system:   11-1,  III-7, III-35
Trapping:   V-26,  V-36,  V-74, V-90
Tugak Lagoon port site:  11-1, 11-13,  III-6,  III-8, III-35, IV-12,  IV-54,
     V-55, V-73
Tutak  Creek:   IV-33, IV-37, V-41
U.S.  Department of Army Corps of Engineers (Corps):   1-1, I-8, VI-7
U.S.  Bureau of Land  Management  (BLM):  I-4, IV-1, V-89
U.S.  Department of the Interior (DOI):   1-1
U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency  (EPA):   1-1,  I-8, VI-1
U.S.  Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS):   I-9,  VI-8
U.S.  Forest Service:  IV-50
U.S.  National Park Service (NPS):  1-1,  I-4, I-9, IV-2, V-75, V-99,  VI-7
VABM  17:   III-7,  III-38
VABM  28  port site:   11-1, 11-13,  11-16, III-7,  111-16, III-38, V-72
Vegetation:   IV-8,  V-2,  V-36, V-39, V-79, V-82, V-91
     Herbaceous:   IV-10
     Hydrophytes:   IV-11
     Mat and  cushion  tundra:   IV-9
     Shrubland:   IV-9
     Tussock  tundra:  IV-10,  V-39
Very  Large Crude  Carrier (VLCC):  II-30 (c.f.  Ballasted tanker)
Visual resources:   IV-50, V-21,  V-67,  V-92
Volcano Creek:   III-3
Volcano Mountain:  V-25
Waste  heat:  11-6,  11-8,  11-13
Wastewater treatment  plant:   11-6,  11-12
Water  balance:  V-5
Water  quality:   I-6,  III-43,  IV-22, IV-36, V-5, V-11, V-46,  V-80, V-82,
     V-84, VI-9
Water  recirculation:   11-6, 11-8
Water  supply:   11-12, III-3
Waves:  IV-44
Western and Arctic Alaska Transportation  Study (WAATS):   III-6, V-88
Western route:  III-7, 111-16,  III-38
Wetlands:  IV-10, V-2,  V-38,  V-40, V-79, V-82,  V-91,  VI-7
Wind:   IV-44,  IV-49
Wolves:   (see Terrestrial wildlife)
Worker housing:  11-1,  II-6, 11-12, II-35, 111-1,  III-3,  V-85
Wulik  Peaks:   IV-19
Wulik  River:  11-13,  III-6,  IV-7,   IV-12,  IV-19, IV-23,  V-37, V-39, V-47,
     V-50,  V-73,  V-101
Zinc:  11-1,  II-8, IV-8,  IV-23, IV-29,  IV-36,  V-5,  V-11
Zinc sulfate:   11-10
Zinc sulfide:   11-13
                                  XIII  -  8

-------
                       XIV.   LIST OF APPENDICES
1.    Reclamation Plan




2.    Spill Prevention,  Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan




3.    Endangered Species Biological  Assessment




4.    NPDES Draft  Permit




5.    Department  of  Army  Public  Notice and  Section  404(b)(1)  Evaluation




6.    ANILCA Title XI  Right-of-Way Application




7.    Protection of  Cultural Resources
          All  appendices  are bound together in a separate volume.
                                XIV-1

-------