Notice2024-31413
BLM Director's Response to the Montana Governor's Appeal of the BLM Montana/Dakotas State Director's Governor's Consistency Review Determination for the Miles City Field Office Proposed Resource Management Plan Amendment and Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
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
December 31, 2024
Issuing agencies
Interior DepartmentLand Management Bureau
Abstract
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is publishing this notice of the reasons for the BLM Director's determination to reject the Governor of Montana's recommendations regarding the Miles City Field Office Proposed Resource Management Plan Amendment (RMPA) and Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (Final SEIS).
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 250 (Tuesday, December 31, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 250 (Tuesday, December 31, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 107156-107157]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-31413]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[PO# 4820000251]
BLM Director's Response to the Montana Governor's Appeal of the
BLM Montana/Dakotas State Director's Governor's Consistency Review
Determination for the Miles City Field Office Proposed Resource
Management Plan Amendment and Final Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement
AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of response.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is publishing this notice
of the reasons for the BLM Director's determination to reject the
Governor of Montana's recommendations regarding the Miles City Field
Office Proposed Resource Management Plan Amendment (RMPA) and Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (Final SEIS).
ADDRESSES: A copy of the Record of Decision and Approved RMPA for the
Miles City Field Office RMPA/Final SEIS is available on the BLM website
at: <a href="https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/2021155/570">https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/2021155/570</a>.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Heather Bernier, Division Chief for
Decision Support, Planning, and National Environmental Policy Act;
telephone 303-239-3635; address P.O. Box 151029, Lakewood, CO 80215;
email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#48202a2d3a26212d3a082a2425662f273e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="38505a5d4a56515d4a785a5455165f574e">[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. Bernier. 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: On May 17, 2024, the BLM released the
Proposed RMPA/Final SEIS for the Miles City Field Office planning
effort (89 FR 43432). In accordance with the
[[Page 107157]]
regulations at 43 CFR 1610.3-2(e), the BLM submitted the Proposed RMPA/
Final SEIS for the Miles City Field Office planning effort to the
Governor of Montana for a 60-day Governor's Consistency Review in order
for the Governor to review the Proposed RMPA and identify any
inconsistencies with State plans, policies, or programs. On July 16,
2024, the Governor of Montana submitted a response for the Miles City
Field Office RMPA/Final SEIS to the BLM Montana/Dakotas State Director.
The State Director reviewed the Governor's response and the alleged
consistency issues and did not accept the Governor's recommendations.
The BLM sent a written response to the Governor on August 12, 2024.
On September 18, 2024, the Governor of Montana appealed the State
Director's decision to the BLM Director. In reviewing these appeals,
the regulations at 43 CFR 1610.3-2(e) state that ``[t]he Director shall
accept the (consistency) recommendations of the Governor(s) if he/she
determines they provide for a reasonable balance between the state's
interest and the national interest.'' On November 6, 2024, the BLM
Director issued a response to the Governor detailing the reasons that
the recommendations did not meet this standard. Pursuant to 43 CFR
1610.3-2(e), the basis for the BLM's determination on the Governor's
appeal is presented below. The appeal response is being published
verbatim.
``I am in receipt of your letter dated September 18, 2024, which
contains the State of Montana's appeal to the Bureau of Land Management
(BLM) Montana/Dakotas State Director's response to the Governor's
consistency review of the Miles City Field Office Proposed Resource
Management Plan Amendment (RMPA) and Final Supplemental Environmental
Impact Statement (SEIS). The Governor's consistency review is an
important part of the BLM land use planning process, and we appreciate
the significant time and attention that you and your staff have
committed to this effort.
The applicable regulations at 43 CFR 1610.3-2(e) provide you with
the opportunity to appeal the State Director's decision to not accept
the recommendations you made in your consistency review letter. These
regulations also guide my review of the appeal, in which I must
consider whether you have raised inconsistencies with State or local
plans, policies, and or programs. If inconsistencies are raised, I
consider whether your recommendations address the inconsistencies and
provide for a reasonable balance between the national interest and the
State of Montana's interest.
I have completed my review of your appeal and determined that the
recommendation you have provided does not meet this standard for the
reasons detailed in the following paragraphs.
In your appeal, you allege the three consistency issues below:
<bullet> ``Alternative D is inconsistent with Montana's
Constitutional Mandate to utilize State Trust Lands to fund schools and
other public institutions.''
<bullet> ``Alternative D is inconsistent with Montana's `All-Of-
The-Above' Energy Strategy, and the SEIS fails to consider critical
local energy plan.''
<bullet> ``Alternative D conflicts with Montana's Coal Revenue
Trust Fund Policy.''
It is your recommendation that `the BLM withdraw the Miles City
Field Office RMPA/SEIS and work collaboratively with the State to form
alternatives that honor State plans, policies, and programs.'
Upon review, I find that your recommendation does not present a
reasonable balance between the national and the State's interest. The
Proposed RMPA/Final SEIS is a land use level review specific to the
Miles City Field Office and is in response to the Federal district
court's order in Western Organization of Resource Councils, et al. v.
Bureau of Land Management, Civil Action No. CV-00076-GF-BMM (D. Mont.
2022). The BLM developed a range of alternatives to meet the purpose
and need of the Proposed RMPA/Final SEIS and the court's order, such as
to complete new coal screens in accordance with 43 CFR 3420.1-4;
provide additional land use planning level analysis that considers no-
leasing and limited coal leasing alternatives; and disclose the public
health impacts, both climate and non-climate, of burning fossil fuels
(coal, oil, and gas) from the planning area.
While there are State and Federal policies that may encourage coal
mining and facilitate the orderly development of coal resources, they
do not mandate that coal mining would be authorized wherever coal
reserves may be present. The Proposed RMPA/Final SEIS also only applies
to federally administered coal in the Miles City Field Office planning
area and does not make decisions on State lands or privately owned coal
resources. Similarly, the BLM's regulatory process does not apply to
State lands and does not preclude the State from making management
decisions for State trust lands, nor preclude the State's authority to
manage[ ], permit, and bill other uses of State lands accordingly to
meet the State's fiduciary responsibility.
Additionally, under Alternative D, the State's mineral estate was
determined to not have development potential or not expected to be
leased or mined within the life of the plan. This is due to: (1) no new
mines projected, (2) the Rosebud Mine having sufficient coal reserves
from existing leases, and (3) the Spring Creek Mine projecting needs
from pending Federal leases and subsequent 1,300 acres of Federal coal
leases. The BLM also carefully considered current and future coal
demand with national and international trends as they relate to coal
development in the Miles City planning area. The BLM recognizes a
potential future decrease, but that is expected as the national coal
market is in decline and trending to continue that decline throughout
the life of the plan.
Finally, the BLM has prepared the Miles City Proposed RMPA/Final
SEIS in accordance with all applicable Federal laws, regulations, and
policies. The BLM did carefully review and consider applicable State,
local, and other Federal agency plans, policies, and programs in the
development of the Miles City Proposed RMPA/Final SEIS. The BLM is
consistent, to the extent practicable, with these plans as per the
provisions of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act and the
planning regulations at 43 CFR 1610-3-2.''
(Authority: 43 CFR 1610.3-2(e))
Nada Wolff Culver,
Principal Deputy Director.
[FR Doc. 2024-31413 Filed 12-30-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4331-20-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 December 31, 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.