Laserfiche WebLink
Approval described in the EA were modified in response to public comment. I considered public comment while <br />making this decision. <br />I recognize that some commenters do not support coal production in this area. The decisions to lease coal in the <br />project area were made in 1967 (C-1362) and 1995 (COC-56447). <br />I recognize that some commenters believe that an Environmental Impact Statement should have been written <br />because of impacts to the West Elk IRA, impacts on global climate change, the need for waivers to lease <br />stipulations, cumulative impacts on the West Elk wilderness, the age of the GMUG Forest Plan, potential impacts to <br />public safety, the existence of unknown risks, and other reasons. I cazefully considered the written comments <br />expressing these concerns. I concluded that the environmental analysis performed and the environmental <br />assessment written adequately studied the potential consequences of the proposed actions and the alternatives. I <br />concluded that no significant impacts will occur as the result of my decision. I concluded that preparation of an EIS <br />is not warranted for this decision. <br />IV. SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED <br />Five alternatives were considered in the EA, (Section 2.3.1 through 2.3.5). The selected action is a combination of <br />these alternatives. Table 1 displays components and• impacts of the selected action and the five alternatives. A <br />summary of alternatives considered in the EA follows this table. <br />Final Version 5/31/02 pdgC 11 <br />