GENERAL47522

• Permit No: C1980007
• IBM Index Class Name: General Documents
• Doc Date: 3/16/2006
• Doc Name: Final EIS & Record of Decision for the Dry Fork Lease
• From: US Forest Service
• To: DMG
• Permit Index Doc Type: Other Permits
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

CHAPTER 2
ISSUES AND ALTERNATIVES
2.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter summarizes public and agency
involvement, identifies and describes the resulting
project issues and alternatives, provides a
comparison of alternatives relative to project issues,
identifies and describes actions that are considered
in the impact analyses in Chapter 3, and identifies
the Forest Service's preferred alternative.
2.2 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Comments on the project proposal were solicited
from the public and agencies. A Notice of Intent
(NOI) to prepare an EIS appeared in the Federal
Register on June 16, 2004 describing the Proposed
Action and asking for comments (pg. 33619 Vol.
69, No. ]15). The project has been listed on the
GMUG Schedule of Proposed Actions since fall
2003. A scoping letter was also sent to 37 known
interested panics on June 16, 2004. A news release
inviting scoping comments appeared in the Delta
County Independent -North Fork Times on June
23, 2004. A legal notice for the project appeared in
the Grand Junction Sentinel on June 16, 2004.
Comments were accepted through July 29, 2004.
The proposed lease was also discussed with the
North Fork Coal Working Group, acollaboration-
based community interest group dealing with coal
issues in the North Fork Valley, at their scheduled
meetings in October 2003; April, June, July, August
and October 2004; and January and July 2005.
Seven written comments letters were received
during scoping. scoping input was reviewed,
analyzed, and summarized to represent the issues
and concerns of the respondents. Based on the
issues raised, alternatives to the Proposed Action
were developed to address both the project issues
and the purpose and need for the project. The
following sections identify and describe project
issues and alternatives and how they were used to
develop the EIS.
The Drafr EIS was released for the 45-day public
review and comment period on April 1, 2005. A
Notice of Availability appeared in the Federal
Register on April 1, 2005. EPA published a
corrected version of the notice on April 8, 2005.
The availability of the EIS was also published in the
Delta County Independent-North Fork Times on
March 30, 2005. A legal notice appeared in the
Grand Junction Daily Sentinel on April 3, 2005 that
announced the availability of the Draft EIS for
review and comment, and included the date of the
Notice of Availability appearance in the Federal
Register. The comment period ended on May l6,
2005. Public comments were also taken during the
BLM's Public Hearing on Apri127, 2005.
Comments were received from five parties on the
Draft EIS. Copies of the comment letters, and
comments received during the BLM's Public
Hearing, along with agency responses are included
in Chapter 8.
2.3 ISSUES IDENTIFIED AND
FORMULATION OF
ALTERNATIVES
2.3.1 Issues
Issues were determined through review of
comments received during the public scoping
efforts, and Forest Service specialists' knowledge
of issues related to mineral leasing activities. Many
of the public's comments were centered on surface
disturbance related to post-leasing activities such as
MDW drilling, associated road construction, and
other surface uses.
The issues identified were assigned to the following
categories. The issues and concerns in each
category are discussed below. More detailed
information on the comments can be found in the
Dry Fork scoping Summary located in the project
file.
1.3.1.1 Issue ar Concern Used To Develop
Alternatives
Some comments received expressed general
opposition to coal mining. These comments are
Dry Fork Lease-By-Application FEIS 2-1