My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2009-02-11_PERMIT FILE - X200923100
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
X200923100
>
2009-02-11_PERMIT FILE - X200923100
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:43:36 PM
Creation date
2/12/2009 9:20:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
X200923100
IBM Index Class Name
PERMIT FILE
Doc Date
2/11/2009
Doc Name
BLM Analysis (Email)
From
John Weinman
To
Jason Musick
Email Name
JDM
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
02/11/2009 14:13 9708265002 BLM PAGE 04 <br />Office. <br />4. Do the methodology and analytical approach Used in the existing NEPA doeument(s) <br />continue to be appropriate for the current proposed action? Yes. CO-100-2008-059-EA <br />methodology and analytical approach are appropriate to this proposed action. <br />5. Are the direct and indirect impacts of the current proposed action substantially <br />unchanged from those identified in the existing NEPA document(s)? Does the existing <br />NEPA document analyze site-specific impacts related to the current proposed action? <br />Yes. CU-100-2009-059-EA analyzed the direct, indirect, and site-specific impacts of the area <br />covered under this current proposed action. <br />6. Are the cumulative impacts that would result from implementation of the current <br />proposed action substantially unchanged from those analyzed in the existing NEPA <br />document(s)? Yes. As the 2008 drill hole locations have been reclaimed and these 6 - 2009 drill <br />pads will be reclaimed imatedistely following plugging and abandonment, there will not be any <br />continuing cumulative impacts from this proposed action as analyzed in CO-100-2008-059-&k. <br />7. Are the public involvement and interagency review associated with existing NEPA <br />document(s) adequate for the current proposed action? <br />Yes. Since the proposed action is identical in scope and location as the approved exploration <br />lieease, all public involvement and interagency review associated with the previous authoriml <br />plan using the existing NEPA document, CO-100-2008-059-EA, are adequate for this current <br />proposed action. <br />E. Interdisciplinary Analysis: Identify those team members conducting or participating in the <br />preparation of this worksheet. <br />Ole Olsen <br />Robyn Morris <br />T,oui? M <br />Ole Olsen <br />Hunter Seim <br />Timothy Novi <br />iVlarilyn W??+ <br />019 Olsen <br />Gina Robison <br /> Resource Represented luLdalslDat?: <br />ral Resource Air Quality, ploodplains, 001/30/09 <br />Specialist prime/Unique Farmlands, <br /> Surface Water Qualm <br />Archaeologist Cultural Resources, Native RWM 214/05! <br /> American Concerns <br />Real Specialist Environmental Justice LM 1/27109 <br />Natural Resource Invasive Non-native Species 001/30/09 <br />S eciaiist <br />Rangeland Management <br />Sensitive Plants, T&E Plant <br />J14S 1129/09 <br />Sec. <br />Wildlife Biolo 'st <br />'fBtE Animal T MN i /30109 <br />Petroleum Geologist Ground Water uali <br />Natural Resource Wetlands/Riparian Zones 00 1/30/09 <br />S eeialist <br />Outdoor Recreation <br />WSA, W&S Rivers <br />GMK 2/2/0! <br />S cialist
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.