SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

RHR submitted a PoO to the Forest Service Cibola National Forest and National Grasslands on November 7, 2025, proposing to develop the Roca Honda Mine Project. Development and operations associated with the project would occur on lands administered by the Forest Service and the BLM, as well as on state and private lands. A draft EIS was published in 2013; however, due to the submission of a new proposal and updates to applicable regulations, the project is being reinitiated as a new project under the USDA NEPA regulations at 7 CFR 1b.

Purpose and Need for Action

The Forest Service purpose for the action is to respond to RHR's PoO for surface use of NFS lands in connection with underground uranium mining development and operations authorized by the United States mining laws (30 U.S.C. 21-54).

The Forest Service need for action is established by the agency's responsibility under the Organic Administration Act of 1897 (16 U.S.C. 478, 482, and 551) and the locatable minerals regulations at 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 228, Subpart A. In accordance with the 36 CFR 228.5, the Forest Service must analyze and provide timely response to the submission of a PoO. Furthermore, the Forest Service must assess whether the proposed operations will be conducted as, where feasible, to minimize adverse environmental impacts on National Forest surface resource in accordance with 36 CFR 228.8.

RHR must apply to the EPA for a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit to discharge pollutants into waters of the United States under section 402 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Therefore, EPA will be required to process the permit application pursuant to its regulations under 40 CFR 122.21.

The BLM must decide whether to issue a right-of-way (ROW) grant to RHR after interdisciplinary specialists analyze RHR's proposed actions on BLM land.

Proposed Action

Project Location and Access

The Project is located approximately three miles northwest of the community of San Mateo, NM and approximately 22 road miles northwest of the community of Grants, NM, within McKinley County. The Project encompasses Sections 9, 10, 11, 15, 16, and 17 in Township 13 North, Range 8 West. Sections 9, 10, and 11 occur on NFS lands; Section 16 is State trust land; and Sections 15 and 17 are privately owned. The Project also includes areas in Section 6 of Township 12 North, Range 9 West, and Section 24 of Township 12 North, Range 10 West, which occur on BLM-administered lands.

Access to the northeastern portion of the project area would occur via an existing non-system road (a road that is not part of the National Forest Transportation System) in Section 11. Access to the southwestern portion would occur along an existing haul route extending from Section 17 through Section 20 to its intersection with NM-605. A rehabilitated existing road in Section 15 would be used as a utility corridor for pipelines and utilities.

Proposed Activities

Under the Proposed Action, the Forest Service would approve the PoO to mine for uranium under a combination of federal minerals, state-trust minerals lease, and privately held minerals with terms and conditions for the protection of surface resources and any necessary modifications to comply with applicable laws and regulations. The PoO describes infrastructure on NFS lands to support an underground uranium mine on NFS, state, and private lands. The ROW application describes the pipeline that will be constructed through public lands.

Proposed activities on NFS lands include approximately 87 acres of disturbance for dewatering wells, vent shafts, dewatering influent pipelines, development drilling, utility corridors, access roads, and associated road improvements. Proposed activities on State and private lands include a haul road, two production shafts, a water treatment plant, ore bays, waste rock stockpiles, water retention ponds, diversion channel, and a discharge effluent water pipeline resulting in approximately 279 acres of additional disturbance off NFS lands. The pipeline would be constructed within the New Mexico Highway 605 right-of-way and treated water would be discharged into the Rio San Jose in the Village of Milan. The project would not include leach pads, heaps, pits, tailings disposal facilities, or mills. Ore-bearing materials would be hauled off-site by truck to the White Mesa Mill in Blanding, Utah for processing.

Under the Proposed Action, the EPA must consider whether to issue an ( printed page 58058) NPDES discharge permit on the treated wastewater which will be discharged into a non-perennial segment of Rio San Jose, in the town of Milan, New Mexico. The BLM would issue a ROW to RHR to operate and to maintain the water pipeline on public land. The ROW would include statute-derived stipulations and conditions that RHR must adhere to while their installations are on public land. These conditions would include language related to the pipeline's decommission.

Plan of Operations

The PoO incorporates concurrent reclamation along with final closure, monitoring, and mitigation activities throughout the life of the mine. Mining would be conducted as a conventional underground operation using either a step room-and-pillar or drift-and-fill mining method, depending on specific ore zone characteristics. The estimated lifespan of the Project is approximately 21 years, of which 11 years would be mineral production and the remaining years would consist of construction, reclamation, and closure monitoring activities. Reclamation would begin on portions of Sections 17 and 16 after the end of production. Some Section 17 surface facilities, particularly the water treatment plant, would remain operational throughout the life of the mine. Reclamation of the entire mine, including placement of development rock remaining on the surface back underground, would be completed approximately six years after mining has been completed.

Alternatives

No Action Alternative

Under the No Action alternative, the proposed mine activities would not occur on NFS lands. An EPA NPDES permit would not be required. The BLM would not approve a right-of-way grant. Other alternatives to be considered in the EIS are expected to be variations of mine and facility configuration based on resource issues identified through the public comment process. The federal agencies welcome comments on potential alternatives.

List of Substantive Issues and Expected Impacts

Substantive issues are those that meaningfully inform the consideration of reasonably foreseeable impacts of the proposed action or a decision on the alternative selected for implementation (7 CFR 1b.11(a)(53)). The following preliminary substantive issues are anticipated to be evaluated, including potential effects to geology and soils at the proposed mine site; hydrologic resources including ground and surface water, aquifers, and springs; local air quality, in particular, exposure of the public to radioactive radon gas vented from mine shafts; vegetation, habitats, and wildlife; nearby land use and recreation and scenic resources; cultural and historic resources; Tribal and traditional communities and uses; local and state workforce and economy; and the potential health and safety risks associated with development to miners and the wider community.

Anticipated Permits and Other Authorizations

RHR requires Forest Service approval of the PoO. In addition, RHR would need to obtain approvals and authorizations from other regulatory agencies including: ROW Grant with BLM, CWA Section 404 Permit with United States Army Corps of Engineers; CWA Section 402 NPDES Permit with EPA; National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Permit with EPA; New Mine Permit with New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department—Mining and Minerals Division (MMD); Discharge Permit with New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) Ground Water Quality Bureau; CWA 401 Certifications & Antidegradation Analysis of NPDES and Section 404 Permits with NMED Surface Water Quality Bureau; Air Quality Permit with NMED Air Quality Bureau; Permit to Appropriate Underground Waters with New Mexico Office of the State Engineer; Utility Permit Application with the New Mexico Department of Transportation; Rights-of-way Easement Application with the New Mexico State Land Office.

Comments and the Objection Process

This notice of intent initiates the NEPA timeline, which guides the development of the environmental impact statement. In this process the Agency is requesting comments on potential alternatives and impacts, and identification of any relevant information, studies or analyses of any kind concerning impacts affecting the quality of the human environment.

It is important that interested members of the public provide their comments at such times and in such manner that they are useful to the agency's preparation of the EIS. Therefore, written comments must be provided prior to the close of the comment period and should clearly articulate the commenter's concerns and contentions. Commenting during any designated opportunities to comment provided by the Responsible Official will govern eligibility under 36 CFR 218 to object once the EIS and draft Record of Decision have been published. Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names and addresses of those who comment, will be part of the public record for this proposed action. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and considered; however, they will not be used to establish eligibility for the objection process.

Objections will be accepted only from those who have previously submitted specific written comments regarding the proposed project during any designated opportunity for written public comment in accordance with § 218.5(a). Issues raised in objections must be based on previously submitted timely, specific written comments regarding the proposed project unless based on new information arising after designated opportunities for comment. This project initiated public comment after the publication of the proposed amendment to the regulations at 36 CFR 218 in the Federal Register on February 6, 2026 (91 FR 5387). This project and the associated ROD may be subject to the revised administrative review process if the final 36 CFR 218 rule is published before the project's objection period is initiated. Otherwise, this project will follow the administrative review process established prior to the proposed rule. This project is being reinitiated as a new project under the revised NEPA regulations. Only comments submitted during designated comment periods for this current project will establish eligibility for the objection period.

Cooperating and Participating Agencies

The Forest Service is the lead federal agency for preparing the EIS. The EPA and BLM are cooperating agencies in the preparation of the EIS. Because of their specialized expertise and legal jurisdiction, the New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department MMD and the New Mexico Environment Department are also cooperating agencies.

Responsible Officials

The Responsible Official for the Forest Service is the Forest Supervisor for the Cibola National Forest and National Grasslands. The Forest Supervisor's decision will address any necessary terms and conditions to the PoO to ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations and to identify mitigation measures under Forest Service jurisdiction.

The Responsible Official for EPA NPDES permitting in New Mexico is the ( printed page 58059) Region 6 Administrator. The scope of EPA's permitting authority is for discharges to waters of the United States.

BLM's Responsible Official is the Rio Puerco Field Office's field manager. The manager will issue a decision record of whether or not to issue a ROW to RHR after environmental review takes place. BLM will also confirm that issuance of the ROW conforms with FLPMA and with relevant land-use plans in the field office.

Substantive Provisions of Forest Service 2012 Planning Rule Directly Related to Potential Plan Amendment

The Forest Service expects that the proposed action will require a project-specific plan amendment to except the project from certain desired conditions related to tribal, cultural, and water resources to provide consistency with the Cibola National Forest Land Management Plan. The specific plan components included in the project-specific amendment will be determined based on the final proposal and analysis. The 2012 Planning Rule, as amended, requires identification in the initial notice of the amendment of the substantive provisions that are likely to be directly related to the amendment. Based on the anticipated Forest Plan amendment for the Roca Honda Mine Project and requirements of the Planning Rule, the following substantive requirements of the 36 CFR 219 planning regulations would likely be directly related to a proposed amendment: 36 CFR 219.8(a)(1), (2), and (3), regarding ecological sustainability; 36 CFR 219.8(b)(1), (4), and (5), regarding social and economic sustainability; 36 CFR 219.9(a)(1), regarding ecosystem plan components; and 36 CFR 219.10(a)(1), (7), and(9), regarding integrated resource management for multiple use.

91 FR 58056