Grand Mesa-Uncompahgre-Gunnison National Forests; Dry Fork Federal Coal Lease-by-Application (COC-67232)
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: June 16, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 115)]
[Notices]
[Page 33619-33620]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr16jn04-33]
========================================================================
Notices
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings,
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents
appearing in this section.
========================================================================
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Grand Mesa-Uncompahgre-Gunnison National Forests; Dry Fork
Federal Coal Lease-by-Application (COC-67232)
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Forest Service (FS) will prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) to disclose the environmental and human effects of
underground coal mining within the Dry Fork Lease-by-Application area,
and to identify terms and conditions needed to protect non-mineral
resources consistent with the Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and Gunnison
(GMUG) National Forests Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest
Plan). ArkLand Company of St. Louis, MO submitted a competitive coal
lease-by-application (LBA) to the BLM--Colorado State office for about
1,517 acres of federal coal reserves. Named the Dry Fork LBA tract (Dry
Fork tract), the application is for lands generally located in Sections
35 and 36, T 13 S, R 90 W; and Sections 1, 2, 11 and 12, T 14 S, R 90W,
6th PM, in Gunnison County, about 4 miles southeast of Somerset,
Colorado. The land surface is National Forest System lands administered
by the GMUG, and the mineral estate is administered by the BLM.
The FS and cooperating agencies will conduct the environmental
analysis considering the most likely mining scenarios and reasonably
foreseeable alternatives. Under the requirements of the Mineral Leasing
Act, as amended by the Federal Coal Leasing Amendments Act, the FS will
identify terms and conditions for the protection of non-mineral
resources. This would allow identification of the measures required for
minimizing effects to non-mineral resources consistent with the Forest
Plan, and provide a basis for a reasonable estimate of the tract's
recoverable coal reserves. The proposed action is to consider the lands
in the tract for leasing by competitive bid and subsequent mining by
underground methods; identify terms and conditions necessary for the
protection of non-mineral resources; and to concur to any subsequent
mining and reclamation plan(s).
The EIS process for this project will include preparation of a
reasonably foreseeable mining scenario for the Dry Fork tract that will
be used as the basis for determining effects. The most likely access to
the coal reserves would be through the existing West Elk Mine. Mining
would be entirely underground, using predominantly longwall methods.
Surface disturbance during the life of the lease will likely include
several exploration drill holes and methane drainage wells, with
associated road construction. The disturbed areas would be reclaimed
when no longer needed. Land subsidence similar to that experienced over
other areas mined with underground methods in the adjacent and
surrounding areas is expected.
The Forest Service is seeking information and comments from
Federal, State, and local agencies as well as individuals and
organizations who may be interested in, or affected by, the proposed
action. The agency invites written comments and suggestions on the
issues related to the proposed action and the area being analyzed.
Information received will be used to prepare the Draft and Final EIS
and to make the agency decision.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received
within 30 days from the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register. The draft environmental impact statement is expected
January 2005 and the final environmental impact statement is expected
June 2005.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Forest Supervisor, Grand Mesa,
Uncompahgre and Gunnison National Forests, 2250 Highway 50, Delta, CO
81416, ATTN: Liane Mattson, Leaseable Minerals Program Leader. Fax may
be sent to (970) 874-6698. Telephone (970) 874-6697.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions concerning the proposed
action and EIS should be addressed to Liane Mattson, Grand Mesa,
Uncompahgre and Gunnison National Forests, phone (970) 874-6697, or
lmattson@fs.fed.us.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose and Need for Action
The purpose and need for the action is to lease additional Federal
coal reserves in the Dry Fork LBA tract for economic development and
production of the coal, consistent with applicable laws and regulations.
Proposed Action
The proposed action is to consent to leasing National Forest System
lands in the Dry Fork LBA tract for development and production of
federal coal reserves, consistent with applicable laws and regulations,
including terms and conditions for protecting non-coal resources.
Lead and Cooperating Agencies
The USDA, Forest Service will be the lead agency. The USDI, Bureau
of Land Management and the USDI-Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement will participate as cooperating agencies.
Responsible Official
The Responsible Forest Service Official is the Grand Mesa,
Uncompahgre and Gunnison National Forest Supervisor (now vacant), 2250
Highway 50, Delta, CO 81416.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
The decision to be made is whether or not to consent to the BLM
offering for lease of federal coal reserves in the Dry Fork LBA tract,
and to prescribe conditions for the protection of non-coal resources.
Scoping Process
Scoping will include mailing letters to known interested parties on
the GMUG mailing list, publishing a legal notice in the Grand Junction
Sentinel, and presenting the proposal to local coal activity interest
groups.
Preliminary Issues
Issues and alternatives to be evaluated in the analysis will be
determined through scoping. The primary issues are expected to include:
The socioeconomic
[[Page 33620]]
benefits of mining, effects of transporting the coal, and the potential
impacts of underground mining and mining-induced subsidence on surface
and ground water resources (including perennial streams); wildlife
(including threatened, endangered, sensitive and management indicator
species); topographic surface, land stability, soils and geologic
hazards; vegetation (including impacts to riparian vegetation and
associated habitat); cultural resources; existing land uses, including
recreation, roadless character, existing roads/facilities, visual
resources and livestock management, and cumulative impacts. Direct,
indirect and cumulative impacts (when considered together with past,
present and reasonable foreseeable cumulative actions in the area)
effects, will be disclosed.
Comment Requested
This notice of intent initiates the scoping proces which guides the
development of the environmental impact statement. Agency
representatives and other interested people are invited to visit with
Forest Service at any time during the EIS process. Two specific time
periods are identified for the receipt of comments on the proposal. The
two comment periods are, (1) during the scoping process, the next 30
days following publication of this Notice in the Federal Register, and
(2) during the formal review period of the Draft EIS.
Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent
Environmental Review: A draft environmental impact statement will be
prepared for comment. The comment period on the draft environmental
impact statement will be 45-days from the date the Environmental
Protection Agency publishes the notice of availability in the Federal
Register.
The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important
to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of
draft environmental impact statements must structure their
participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is
meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and
contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519,
553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the
draft environmental impact statement stage but that are not raised
until after completion of the final environmental impact statement may
be waived or dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d
1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490
F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of these court rulings,
it is very important that those interested in this proposed action
participate by the close of the Draft EIS comment period so that
substantive comments and objections are made available to the Forest
Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider them and respond to
them in the final environmental impact statement.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft
environmental impact statement should be as specific as possible. It is
also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the
draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft
environmental impact statement or the merits of the alternatives
formulated and discussed in the statement. Reviewers may wish to refer
to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing
the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act at
40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.
Comments received, including the names and addresses of those who
comment, will be considered part of the public record on this proposal
and will be available for public inspection.
Also, comment during this 45-day comment period is required to
establish eligibility to appeal the final decision under 36 CFR part 215.
Dated: June 3, 2004.
Larry M. Hill,
Acting Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 04-13503 Filed 6-15-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P
![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif)