Laserfiche WebLink
not be permitted under Deep Creek or within a buffer zone on either side of [he creek. The <br />buffer zone is defined by projecting a 25-degree angle of draw (from vertical) from the surface <br />expression of the creek to the top of the coal seam to be mined." <br />I did not select Alternative C because the site-specific and condition-specific effects analysis in <br />Section 3.3 of the EIS, coupled with the local experience gained°from monitoring subsidence <br />effects on a portion of Deep Creek that had been subsided previously (EIS, page 3-22), gave <br />sufFicient scientific basis to accurately anticipate that the potential effects would be minor, and <br />could be mitigated. Therefore, I elected to consent to BLM leasing the tract, without a specific <br />stipulation prohibiting or limiting mining under Deep Creek <br />D. Public Involvement <br />As described in the background, the need for this action arose in September 2003. A proposal to <br />consent to leasing National Forest System lands in the Dry Fork LBA tract for development and <br />production of federal coal reserves, consistent with applicable laws and regulations, including <br />terms and conditions for protecting non-coal resources was listed in the Notice of Intent that <br />appear in the Federal Register on June 16, 2004. The proposal was provided to the public and <br />other agencies for comment during scoping from June 16, 2004 through July 29, 2004. In <br />addition, as part of the public involvement process, the GMUG listed the project on the Schedule <br />of Proposed Actions beginning in Fall 2003. A scoping letter was sent to 37 known interested <br />parties on June 16, 2004. A news release inviting scoping comments appeared in the Delta <br />County Independent -North Fork Times on June 23, 2004. A legal notice for the project <br />appeared in the Grand Junction Sentinel on June 16, 2004. Comments were accepted through <br />July 29, 2004. Seven written comments letters were received during scoping. Copies of the <br />scoping documents and the public input are in the project file. <br />The proposed lease was also discussed with the North Fork Coal Working Group, a <br />collaboration-based community interest group dealing with coal issues in the azea at their <br />scheduled meetings in October 2003, April June, July, August and October 2004, and January, <br />April and July 2005. <br />Using the comments from the public and other agencies, the interdisciplinazy team identified <br />several issues regarding the effects of the proposed action (see EIS, Section 2.3). Main issues of <br />concern included potential impacts of underground mining-induced subsidence on surface and <br />ground water resources (including perennial streams); wildlife (including threatened, <br />endangered, sensitive and management indicator species); topographic surface, land stability, <br />soils and geologic hazazds; vegetation (including impacts to riparian vegetation and associated <br />habitat); cultural resources; existing land uses, including recreation, roadless character, existing <br />roads/facilities, visual resources and livestock management, and cumulative impacts (see EIS <br />pages 2-1 to 2-4). Other primary issues were related to the effects of post-leasing surface <br />activities on water resources, vegetation, wildlife (including threatened, endangered, sensitive <br />and management indicator species), land use, recreation, roadless character, visual resources and <br />socioeconomics. To address these concerns, the Forest Service created the alternatives <br />described above. <br />The Draft EIS was released for the 45-day public review and comment period on April 1, 2005. <br />A Notice of Availability appeared in the Federal Register on April 1, 2005. EPA published a <br />