Notice2024-13452
Notice of Availability of the Proposed Resource Management Plan and Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Colorado River Valley Field Office and Grand Junction Field Office Resource Management Plans, Colorado
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
June 21, 2024
Issuing agencies
Interior DepartmentLand Management Bureau
Abstract
In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, as amended (FLPMA), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has prepared a proposed Resource Management Plan (RMP) and final supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Colorado River Valley Field Office (CRVFO) and Grand Junction Field Office (GJFO) Resource Management Plans and by this notice is announcing the start of a 30-day protest period of the proposed RMP.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 120 (Friday, June 21, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 120 (Friday, June 21, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52082-52083]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-13452]
[[Page 52082]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[BLM_CO_FRN_MO4500178689]
Notice of Availability of the Proposed Resource Management Plan
and Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Colorado
River Valley Field Office and Grand Junction Field Office Resource
Management Plans, Colorado
AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, as amended, and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of
1976, as amended (FLPMA), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has
prepared a proposed Resource Management Plan (RMP) and final
supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Colorado
River Valley Field Office (CRVFO) and Grand Junction Field Office
(GJFO) Resource Management Plans and by this notice is announcing the
start of a 30-day protest period of the proposed RMP.
DATES: This notice announces the beginning of a 30-day protest period
to the BLM on the proposed RMP. Protests must be postmarked or
electronically submitted on the BLM's ePlanning site within 30 days of
the date that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) publishes its
Notice of Availability (NOA) of the proposed RMP and final supplemental
EIS in the Federal Register. The EPA usually publishes its NOAs on
Fridays.
ADDRESSES: The proposed RMP and final supplemental EIS is available on
the BLM ePlanning project website at <a href="https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/2016085/510">https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/2016085/510</a>. Documents pertinent to this proposal
may be examined online at <a href="https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/2016085/510">https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/2016085/510</a> and at the Colorado River Valley and Grand Junction
Field Offices.
Instructions for filing a protest with the BLM for the proposed RMP
and final supplemental EIS for the CRVFO and GJFO RMPs can be found at:
<a href="https://www.blm.gov/programs/planning-and-nepa/public-participation/filing-a-plan-protest">https://www.blm.gov/programs/planning-and-nepa/public-participation/filing-a-plan-protest</a> and at 43 CFR 1610.5-2.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Heather Sauls, Project Manager;
telephone: 970-878-3855; address: BLM Upper Colorado River District,
2518 H Road, Grand Junction, CO 81506; email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d6a3b5a4b2fba5b3bfa596b4babbf8b1b9a0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a8ddcbdacc85dbcdc1dbe8cac4c586cfc7de">[email protected]</span></a>.
Individuals in the United States who are deaf, deafblind, hard of
hearing, or have a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or
TeleBraille) to access telecommunications relay services for contacting
Ms. Sauls. Individuals outside the United States should use the relay
services offered within their country to make international calls to
the point-of-contact in the United States.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The planning area is located in Garfield,
Mesa, Eagle, Pitkin, Routt, Rio Blanco, and Montrose Counties,
Colorado, and encompasses approximately 1.56 million acres of public
land and 1.92 million acres of Federal mineral estate. CRVFO and GJFO
management is identified in their respective 2015 RMPs. Apart from
fluid mineral leasing decisions, all existing management as described
in the CRVFO and GJFO approved RMPs remains in effect.
Purpose and Need for the Planning Effort
The purpose of this supplemental EIS is to broaden the range of
alternatives in the 2015 CRVFO and GJFO approved RMPs with respect to
the lands that are allocated as open or closed for oil and gas leasing.
The purpose is also to provide additional air quality analysis for the
fluid mineral management alternatives considered in the 2014 CRVFO
final EIS, the 2015 GJFO final EIS, and in this supplemental EIS.
The need for this supplemental EIS is to comply with the settlement
agreements in litigation of the CRVFO RMP (Wilderness Workshop v. BLM,
16-cv-01822) and subsequent oil and gas leasing in both field offices
(Wilderness Workshop v. BLM, 18-cv-00987). The need is also to revisit
the GJFO RMP as described in the BLM's motion for voluntary remand in
litigation associated with the GJFO RMP (Center for Biological
Diversity v. BLM, 19-cv-02869). The need is also to consider new
information and to consider areas with Tribal significance per the
Tribal Consultations for Oil and Gas Leasing Handbook, Section 1.3.
Alternatives Considered in the Draft Supplemental EIS
The BLM analyzed two additional alternatives (E and F) in detail in
the draft supplemental EIS. The three action alternatives (B through D)
and the no action alternative (A) from the 2014 CRVFO and the 2015 GJFO
final EISs remain within the range of alternatives considered.
Alternative E would close the areas with no-known, low, and medium
potential for fluid minerals to future fluid mineral leasing.
Alternative E would also close areas that would be allocated as closed
to fluid mineral leasing in alternative C of the 2014 CRVFO and 2015
GJFO final EISs. Alternative E would designate the potential areas of
critical environmental concern (ACECs) that were analyzed as closed to
leasing in alternative C of the 2014 CRVFO and 2015 GJFO final EISs.
Alternative F would close the same areas as alternative E to future
fluid mineral leasing, as well as additional areas identified by the
public during scoping. Alternative F would designate one FLPMA Section
202 Wilderness Study Area.
The State Director had identified Alternative E as the preferred
alternative in the draft supplemental EIS.
Public Involvement
The BLM received a total of 373 letter submissions during the
public comment period on the supplemental EIS, including seven letters
which contained non-unique, preformulated language that appeared
elsewhere in letter submissions. There were 366 unique submissions,
from which the BLM derived 407 unique substantive comments.
Most submissions were focused on suggestions for specific
alternatives or alternative elements, statements pertaining to the
reasonably foreseeable development (RFD) scenario, and detailed input
pertaining to various resource topics analyzed in the draft
supplemental EIS, such as air quality and climate, social and economic
conditions, and special designations.
Changes Between the Draft Supplemental EIS and the Final Supplemental
EIS
Based on public comments on the draft supplemental EIS, the BLM has
updated the final supplemental EIS and developed several new
appendices. The BLM has provided responses to substantive comments in
Appendix F. Some comments questioned whether the RFD scenarios remained
valid in light of more recent United States Geological Survey (USGS)
assessments. In Appendix G, the BLM provided a review of the USGS
assessments and a review of recent development trends to explain that
the RFDs remain valid. The final supplemental EIS has also been updated
with additional information for the socioeconomics and environmental
justice impacts analyses. The BLM developed an analysis of the
cumulative effects of the simultaneous ongoing planning efforts the BLM
is conducting in Colorado, which is included in Appendix J.
[[Page 52083]]
Summary of the Proposed RMP
The proposed RMP (Alternative G) in the final supplemental EIS
draws from a combination of components from the various alternatives.
Alternative G would retain the areas closed to fluid mineral leasing in
the 2015 CRVFO and GJFO RMPs (same as alternative B) and would retain
the fluid mineral stipulations. Within the CRVFO, areas closed to oil
and gas leasing in the 2015 RMP include: all Wilderness Study Areas
(WSAs); lands within municipal boundaries; the Upper Colorado River
Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA); Blue Hill, Bull Gulch, Deep
Creek, and Thompson Creek ACECs; Deep Creek, Flat Tops Addition, Pisgah
Mountain, and Thompson Creek lands with wilderness characteristics;
Deep Creek and two Colorado River segments found eligible for inclusion
in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System; and all State wildlife
areas. Within the GJFO, areas closed to oil and gas leasing in the 2015
RMP include: all WSAs; Bangs, Dolores River, and Palisade Rim SRMAs;
Gunnison River Bluffs Extensive Recreation Management Area; Badger
Wash, Dolores River Riparian, Juanita Arch, Rough Canyon, Sinbad
Valley, The Palisade, and Unaweep Seep ACECs; Bangs, Maverick, and
Unaweep lands with wilderness characteristics; Gunnison sage-grouse
critical habitat and greater sage-grouse habitat within one mile of an
active lek; Grand Junction and Palisade municipal watersheds; and
Bureau of Reclamation withdrawal areas.
Alternative G would also close the no-known and low oil and gas
development potential areas to future fluid mineral leasing, except for
the helium potential area in GJFO, which would remain open to leasing.
Medium oil and gas development potential areas would be closed where
they are surrounded by low oil and gas development potential areas
within the CRVFO. Medium oil and gas development potential areas that
are either adjacent to CRVFO high oil and gas development potential
areas or surrounded by GJFO high oil and gas development potential
areas would remain open for oil and gas leasing. The high potential
areas would generally remain open for fluid mineral leasing. Within the
high potential and open medium potential areas, there would be areas
closed to fluid mineral leasing due to specific resource concerns.
Geothermal resources would remain open to leasing, except for those
within areas closed to oil and gas leasing due to specific resource
concerns, and fluid mineral stipulations in the approved RMPs would
apply.
Alternative G would also close five existing designated ACECs to
fluid mineral leasing to protect their relevant and important values,
including the Glenwood Springs Debris Flow Hazard Zones and Grand
Hogback ACECs in CRVFO and Atwell Gulch, Indian Creek, and Pyramid Rock
ACECs in GJFO. Alternative G would expand the existing Grand Hogback
ACEC in CRVFO and Pyramid Rock ACEC in GJFO.
Within the CRVFO, Alternative G would designate the Castle Peak
Addition lands with wilderness characteristics unit as a wilderness
study area and would close to oil and gas leasing the Thompson Divide
Withdrawal Area in CRVFO, consistent with the boundary described in
Public Land Order No. 7939. Within the GJFO, Alternative G would manage
Cone Mountain, Granite Creek, Kings Canyon, Lumsden Canyon, and West
Creek units for protection of their wilderness characteristics.
Increased protections for the Roan and Carr Creeks ACECs and Jerry
Creek, Mesa/Powderhorn, and Collbran municipal water source areas
within the GJFO would be provided through application of No Surface
Occupancy stipulations.
Protest of the Proposed RMP
The BLM planning regulations state that any person who participated
in the preparation of the RMP and has an interest that will or might be
adversely affected by approval of the proposed RMP may protest its
approval to the BLM. Protest on the proposed RMP constitutes the final
opportunity for administrative review of the proposed land use planning
decisions prior to the BLM adopting an approved RMP.
Instructions for filing a protest with the BLM regarding the
proposed RMP may be found online at the website in the ADDRESSES
section above. All protests must be in writing and mailed to the
appropriate address or submitted electronically through the BLM
ePlanning project website listed in the ADDRESSES section. Protests
submitted electronically by any means other than the ePlanning project
website or by fax will be invalid unless a hard copy of the protest is
submitted.
The BLM will render a written decision on each protest. The
decision of the BLM on the protest shall be the final decision of the
Department of the Interior. Responses to valid protest issues will be
compiled and documented in a Protest Resolution Report made available
following the protest resolution online at: <a href="https://www.blm.gov/programs/planning-and-nepa/public-participation/protest-resolution-reports">https://www.blm.gov/programs/planning-and-nepa/public-participation/protest-resolution-reports</a>. Upon resolution of protests, the BLM will issue a Record of
Decision and Approved RMP.
Before including your phone number, email address, or other
personal identifying information in your protest, you should be aware
that your entire protest--including your personal identifying
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can
ask us in your protest to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be
able to do so.
(Authority: 40 CFR 1506.6, 40 CFR 1506.10, 43 CFR 1610.2, 43 CFR
1610.5)
Douglas J. Vilsack,
BLM Colorado State Director.
[FR Doc. 2024-13452 Filed 6-20-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4331-16-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on June 21, 2024.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.