Cumulative Environmental Impact Study Work Plan, Joint effort between the Colorado Department of Health and the US Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII, To Assess The Cumulative Environmental Impacts Of Energy Development In Northwestern Colorado, Work Plan


CUMULATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL
A Joint Effort between the Colorado Department of Health
and the (LS. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII,
to assess the Cumulative Environmental Impacts of Energy
Development in Northwestern Colorado.
jJ\
f{V
I*
October 1981

-------
CUMULATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY
WORK PLAN
A Joint Effort Between the Colorado Department of Health
and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII,
to Assess the Cumulative Environmental Impacts of Energy
Development in Northwestern Colorado
Colorado Department of Health
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region VIII
October 1981

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Introduc tion	2
Background	2
Objective	3
Study Area	3
Management/Organization	3
Resources	3
Key Activities	1
Schedule	7
Outputs	1
Appendix - Draft Outline - Cumulative Environmental
Impact Report	H
Map/Figure/Tables
Map 1	Study Area	4
Figure 1 Project Organization	5
Table 1 CDH/EPA Working Group	6
Table 2 Schedule	8
Table 3 Detailed Schedule	9
-1-

-------
INTRODUCTION
This proposed Cumulative Environmental Impact Study is a joint effort
between the Colorado Department of Health and the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), Region VIII in cooperation with other state, federal and local
agencies and industry.
The Study will be an iterative process. During the first year the
following tasks are to be completed: (1) gather and assess existing
environmental data; (2) identify additional data needs; (3) inventory and
assess completed or ongoing studies; (4) analysis of data, studies and models;
(5) develop methodology for assessing cumulative environmental impacts; (6)
prepare a first-cut assessment of the cumulative impacts; and (7) define the
elements of a continuing program.
Subsequent years, depending on funding and resources, will consist of
gathering needed data, improve assessment techniques, including models and the
publishing of cumulative environmental impact reports.
BACKGROUND
Overview
Colorado is experiencing accelerated, large-scale development of energy
resources and facilities, especially in the northwestern corner of the State.
Coal, oil, gas, oil shale, and uranium resources are abundant, and either are
already being actively developed or are on the threshold of development.
This large-scale energy development in Colorado necessitates a joint
effort of the Colorado Department of Health and the EPA-Region VIII to develop
the capabilities to identify and assess the cumulative environmental effects
of many individual energy projects and facilities. While the environmental
effects of any single activity by itself can be assessed with relatively good
accuracy, limited means are available at this time to assess the cumulative
environmental effects of a number of major projects which are relatively
adjacent to each other. This is a serious deficiency, since a large portion
of both current and proposed energy projects in Colorado are located within
relatively limited areas, resulting in significant environmental interactions
and aggregate effects.
A dramatic example of this characteristic of proximity is the
concentration of virtually all of Colorado's oil shale deposits in only two
adjacent counties, which overlap with the three adjacent counties comprising
Colorado's principal coal resources area. Within this same six-county area
(Garfield, Moffat, Rio Blanco, Mesa, Routt and Delta Counties) are a major oil
and gas field, and four major coal-fired power stations. This area falls
entirely into the Colorado River drainage, and the Yampa and White Rivers
sub-basins, a fact with significant air quality and water quality
implications. Also within this area are located three sensitive environmental
areas: Dinosaur National Monument, the Flat Tops and Mt. Zirkel Wilderness
areas. Similar, though less dramatic, energy concentrations exist elsewhere
in Colorado.
-2-

-------
Environmental Impacts of Oil Shale Development:
The environmental impact associated with commercial oil shale operations
will depend upon: (1) the type of retorting operation; (2) the type of mining
systems and associated resources recovery rate; (3) the magnitude of the
operation; (4) the processing system employed to recover the shale oil; and
(5) the type of disposal system used for the retorted shale and other wastes.
The operation can be expected to: (1) produce air and water pollutants; (2)
cause some degree of surface subsidence/disruption; (3) increase noise levels;
(4) impact local vegetation and animal life; and (5) impact upon local
population and supporting commercial activity. Thus, the development of
mitigation strategies for socio-economic, land, air, and water impacts are
required. The socio-economic impacts and mitigation strategies are not part
of this study but are part of another State study being done by the Colorado
Department of Local Affairs and the Department of Natural Resources.
OBJECTIVE
The overall objective of this study is to assess the cumulative
environmental impacts of oil shale production and other energy developments in
Northwestern Colorado, based on two or more production scenarios and the
associated population growth.
STUDY AREA
The study area is shown on Map 1 and will include energy projects in
Delta, Garfield, Mesa, Moffat, Rio Blanco and Routt Counties in Colorado and
those projects in Utah that may impact Colorado environmentally.
In assessing the environmental impacts, the Study will consider areas
• outside the six-county region in order to assess, for example, air impacts on
Class I areas, as well as water quality impacts on the lower Colorado River.
PROJECT MANAGEMENT/ORGANIZATION
Management
The project will be managed by Paul Ferraro, Colorado Department of
Health. EPA's coordinator for the project is John Philbrook. The majority of
the effort will be performed by the Department of Health and EPA, Region
VIII.
Organization
The project organization is shown in Figure 1. Members of the Colorado
Department of Health/EPA Working Group are presented in Table 1.
RESOURCES
The Colorado Department of Health plans to devote more than 2.5 FTEs to this
Study and EPA 1.5 FTEs.
-3-

-------
Oil Shale Projects
Rio Slanco Oil Shale Inc iFecerai Lease Tract C-ai
Catnearai Bluffs Shaie Oil Co i Feaerai Lease Tract C-c)
White Fiver Shaie P'oiect (ceaerai Lease Tracts UaUb)
4	Coionv Devetooment Coeration
5	Union
5	Chevron
7	Moorl
9	Superior
9	Parano
10	Cities Service
11	Naval 0
-------
FIGURE 1
PROJECT ORGANIZATION OF CUMULATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT STUDY
Elements of A Continuing
Program
-5-
-------
TABLE 1
CDH/EPA WORKING GROUP
PAUL FERRARO, PROJECT MANAGER, CDH
CDH MEMBERS
Paul Nazaryk
George Lauderdale
Maureen Dudley
Greg Starkebaum
Bob Graves
Dave Gourdin
Office of Health Protection
Air Pollution Control
Water Quality Control
Solid Waste Control
Air Pollution Control
Noise Control
320-8333
320-8333
320-8333
320-8333
320-8333
320-8333
EPA MEMBERS
John Philbrook
Mike Hammer
Ken Lloyd
Rick Claggett .
Doug Linkhart
Eliot Cooper
Don Shosky
Diane Groh
Wes Wilson
Dean Gil lam
EPA, Coordinator, Energy Office 837-5914
Energy Office	837-5914
Analytical Center	837-2351
Water Quality	837-2721
Air Quality	837-3471
Air Quality	837-6131
Solid Waste	837-6258
Noise Control	837-4136
Environmental Evaluation	837-4831
Toxics	837-3926
-6-
-------
KEY ACTIVITIES
Tasks to be undertaken in this study are:
1.	Use (where feasible) the energy workforce/population/productions scenarios
developed by the State Cumulative Impact Task Force, chaired by the
Executive Director, Department of Natural Resources.
2.	Gather and assess environmental information and data.
3.	Inventory and assess past and ongoing studies that will provide valuable
input. These include such studies as: DOE's Risk Analysis Study, SAI Air
Quality Study, Four Corners Air Quality Study, etc.
4.	Inventory and assess existing models and identify needed changes.
5.	Develop necessary analytical tools to prepare a first cut assessment of
the cumulative environmental impacts for air, water, solid waste,
hazardous waste and noise.
6.	Prepare and distribute a report showing the tentative cumulative
environmental impacts. See Draft Report Outline, Attachment I.
7.	Develop a mechanism for public involvement throughout the Study.
8.	Develop a work plan that will identify the mechanism for gathering or
developing needed information, data and analytical tools; and a budget and
resources for continuing a cumulative environmental impact assessment
program in subsequent years as information and analytical tools become
more accurate.
SCHEDULE
The project schedule is shown on Table 2. The project period is from October
1, 1981 to September 30, 1982. Table 3 outlines a more detailed schedule.
OUTPUTS
1.	Cumulative Environmental Impact Report
2.	Appendices
a)	Inventory of Significant Studies
b)	Identification of Data/Research Needs
-7-
-------
TABLE 2
SCHEDULE
TASKS	QUARTERS
1.	Production Scenarios
2.	Data Inventory & Assessment
3.	Study Inventory & Assessment
4.	Model Inventory & Assessment
5.	Cumulative Impact Assessment
6.	Prepare Draft Report
7.	Prepare Final Report
8.	Public Involvement
9.	Develop Work Plan for Future Assessments
DELIVERABLES & MILESTONES
12 3 4
1.	Draft Inventory Reports
2.	Draft Cumulative Report
3.	Final Cumulative Report
4.	Work Plan
5.	Progress Reports
6.	Progress Briefings
-8-
-------
TABLE 3
Cumulative Environmental Impact Study
Detailed Schedule
Tasks
Final Work Plan
Dis tribut ion
Task
Leader
Paul
Ferraro
Task
Member(s)
Mike Hammer
Due
Date
10/30/81
Comments
Distribute to D.D.'s,
EPA, Industry, Locals
others
Areas of
Consideration
Production Scenarios
Employment
Projections
Paul
Ferraro
Paul
Ferraro
Population Pro-	Paul
jections & Allocations	Ferraro
Land Impacts	Paul
- Sensitive	Nazaryk
Environmental Areas
Mike Hammer
Mike Hammer
Mike Hammer
Judy Glazner
Wes Wilson
Mike Hammer
11/30/81	Data from Industry,
ROMGA, Cumulative Impact
Task Force, others
11/30/81	Data from Industry and
Cumulative Impact Task
Force, Locals
12/15/81	Cumulative Impact Task
Force
1/30/82	Data from DNR, BLM,
others
Emission, water dis-
charge, spent shale
data etc.
Carpool, bus trans-
portation infor-
mation
Wildlife, Wilderness,
Nat/State Parks, en-
dangered species areas,
Agricultural, Recrea-
tional, Fed/Pri Lands
Reservoirs, Corridors,
e tc .
-------
6. Air Quality Impacts
George	Doug Linkhart 3/15/82
Lauderdale Eliot Cooper
Ken Lloyd
7. Water Quality Impacts
Maureen	Rick Claggett 3/15/82
Dudley	Water Divi-
sion Staff
8. So lid/Hazardous
Waste Impacts
Greg	Don Shosky	3/15/82
Starkebaum Dean Gillam
9. Noise Impacts
Dave	Diane Groh	3/15/82
Gourdin Paul Nazaryk
10. Draft Cumulative
Report
Paul	John Philbrook 6/15/82
Ferraro	Paul Nazaryk
11. Fina1 Report
12. Public Involvement
Pau 1
Ferraro
Paul
Ferraro
John Philbrook 8/30/82
Paul Nazaryk
Mike Hammer
Paul Nazaryk
10/81-9/82
13. Work Plan for
Future Studies
Paul	Mike Hammer 9/15/82
Ferraro	Paul Nazaryk
-10-
Studies - SAI, Four
Corners, EPA,
Industries, others
Area Oil Shale Office,
Industry, W.Q. Studies
EPA
Industry, DNR, Locals,
EPA
Data from Dept. of
Highways, Wildlife,
FAA and others
PSD, Total Emissions,
Ambient Stds., Visibi-
lity, Acid Rain
Salinity, Groundwater
Surface Stream Impacts
WWTP's
Spent Shale Impacts,
Sanitary Landfills,
Hazardous Waste
Industry Impacts on
Wildlife/Growth Impact
on Population, Case
Studies - Railroads,
Highways, Airports
County, Advisory and
Technical Committees, and
Industry meetings, Briefings
and Workshops
-------
APPENDIX
CUMULATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
DRAFT OUTLINE
-11-
-------
CUMULATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
DRAFT OUTLINE
Executive Summary
A.	Introduction
B.	Goals and Objectives
C.	Study Methodology
D.	Summary of Related Studies
E.	Description of Area
F.	Sensitive Environmental Areas
G.	Overview/Background
1.	Energy Production Levels - Oil Shale, Coal, Oil and Gas, etc.
2.	Location, Type and Size of Facilities
3.	Explanation of Oil Shale Processes
4.	Population Projections/Allocations
5.	Economic Projections - Other Than Energy
6.	Use Two-Three Production Levels for Oil Shale
7.	Assume Development Pattern for each Production Scenario.
H.	Assessment of Cumulative Environmental Impacts
1. Land
a. Direct Energy Development Impacts
1)	Spent Shale - Area/Quality
2)	Disturbed Lands - Wildlife/Agriculture; Facility/Open
Pit;Recreation/Federal Lands/Private Lands
3)	Reservoirs
4)	Corridors - Utility/Pipelines
-12-
-------
b. Indirect Impacts - Population Related
1)	Residential/Commercial/Industrial
2)	Irrigated Lands
3)	Reservoirs
4)	Others
2.	Air Quality
a.	Direct Energy Development Impacts
1)	Emissions - Major Pollutants
2)	Impacts on Class I Areas, Health Standards, Visibility, Acid
Rain, etc.
a)	Overlays Showing Areas Impacted
b)	Quantities Emitted
c)	Comparison With Other Areas (Los Angeles, Denver)
b.	Indirect Impacts - Population Related
1)	Emissions - Transportation/Space Heating
2)	Impact on Standards
3.	Water Quality/Quantity
a. Direct Impacts - Energy Development
1)	Surface Waters - Quantity/Quality/Uses
2)	Groundwater - Water Table Level/Quality
3)	Salinity
4)	Number of Stream Segments Degraded
5)	Uses Impaired/Improved
6)	Non-Point Sources - Increase Loading
7)	Diversions
-13-
-------
b. Indirect Impacts - Population Related
1)	WWTP's - Quantity/Increase Pollutants; Percent Streams
Impacted
2)	Point Sources - Problems/Impacts
3)	Salinity
4)	Diversions
5)	Irrigated Waters/Replaced
6)	Groundwater Impacts - Quality/Water Table Levels
4.	Solid Waste
a.	Spent Shale Piles - Quantity/Area Impacted
b.	Solid Waste - Community
c.	Sanitary Landfills - Existing/Projected
d.	Sludge Disposal
e.	Hazardous Waste Disposal
5.	Noise
a.	Impacted Areas - Near Development Sites
b.	Impacts on Communities Due to -
1)	Highways
2)	Airports
3)	Railroads
4)	Other
I. Appendices
1.	Inventory of Significant Studies
2.	Identification of Data/Research Needs
3.	Data Summaries
b)	Projects/Production Levels
c)	Population Projections/Allocations
-14-
-------