Laserfiche WebLink
<br />CHAPTER 3. SCOPE OF NEPA ANALYSIS <br /> <br />Comments received at the public scoping meetings and in the letters will be used to verify what <br />level of NEPA analysis is necessary (environmental assessment or EIS), to assist in formulating <br />alternatives,and to help determine the affected environment, environmental consequences, <br />mitigation measures, and studies to be performed in the contract analysis and decision-making <br />processes. <br /> <br />r <br />, <br /> <br />The initial scoping effort. identified many controversial issues and concerns to be addressed, <br />making it apparent that an EIS would probably need to be prepared. The following preliminary <br />outline for a draft NEPA document was developed to assist in ensuring that the issues and <br />concerns raised in this scopingeffort are addressed as different sections of the NEPA document <br />are prepared. The number in parentheses following each section identifies the item under which <br />the comments are discussed in the next chapter. <br /> <br />Gunnison River Contract <br />Preliminary Outline for a NEPA Document <br /> <br />I. INTRODUCTION <br /> <br />A. Background <br />1. Historic and Current Operation of the Aspinall Unit (Item 1) <br />2. Aspinall Unit Purposes (Item 2) <br />3. Black Canyon and Curecanti Purposes and Resources (Item 3) <br />4. Gunnison Gorge Resources (Item 4) <br />5. Colorado's Interests (Item 5) <br />6. Endangered Fish (Item 6) <br /> <br />B. Purpose and Need <br /> <br />n. ALTERNATIVES <br /> <br />A. Formulation of Alternatives <br />1. Compatibility with Federal and State Laws (Item 7) <br />2. Accountability: Meet and Balance Goals (Item 8) <br />3. Release Priorities, Quantities, and Patterns (Item 9) <br />4. Colorado's Compact Entitlement (Item 10) <br /> <br />B. . Alternatives Considered (Item 11) <br /> <br />C. Comparative Analysis (Item 12) <br /> <br />9 <br />