# Oil and Gas Leasing; Lewis and Clark National Forest, MT > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A94-4134 ## Record - **Collection:** Federal Register - **Document type:** Uncategorized Document - **Published:** February 24, 1994 ## Text DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management Oil and Gas Leasing; Lewis and Clark National Forest, MT AGENCIES: Forest Service, USDA, and Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to disclose the impacts of proposed oil and gas leasing on the Lewis and Clark National Forest. The Forest Service and the BLM will be joint lead agencies for this EIS (40 CFR 1501.5). The EIS will be designed to satisfy the requirements of the Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform Act of 1987 and implementing regulations (36 CFR 228.102). DATES: Initial comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received in writing no later than March 31, 1994. ADDRESSES: Send written comments to John D. Gorman, Forest Supervisor, Lewis and Clark National Forest, P.O. Box 869, Great Falls, MT 59403. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robin Strathy, Environmental Analysis Team Leader, Lewis and Clark National Forest, as above, or phone: (406) 791-7726. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Forest Service proposes to make certain lands within the Lewis and Clark National Forest administratively available for oil and gas leasing, subject to constraints specified in the 1986 Lewis and Clark National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. The Forest Service also proposes to authorize the BLM to offer those lands for lease, subject to specified stipulations. Both the administratively-available decision, and the leasing decision for specific lands are being made. The BLM will decide whether to offer the specific lands for lease subject to the Forest Service ensuring that correct stipulations will be attached to leases issued by BLM. In cases where the surface resources are not managed by the federal government but the minerals are federally owned (split estate), the BLM will also decide whether or not to offer these mineral rights for lease and what stipulations to apply. Except where stipulations prohibit all surface use, operations and development may be allowed on the leased lands. Such activity is subject to the operator obtaining an approved Surface Use Plan of Operations from the Forest Service in accordance with 36 CFR, subpart E, 228.106 and 228.107. The EIS will examine the effects of the proposal to implement the oil and gas leasing direction in the 1986 Lewis and Clark Forest Plan and additional alternatives. The primary purpose of this analysis is to determine which lands should be available for leasing, what stipulations should be applied to any leases, and which specific lands should be offered for lease at this time. Lands affected are within the boundaries of the Lewis and Clark National Forest. These lands encompass several mountain ranges south and east of Great Falls, Montana (including the Little Belt, Highwood, Castle, north Crazy, Big and Little Snowy Mountains), as well as the eastern Front Range of the Rocky Mountains west of Choteau, Montana. By regulation, several classes of National Forest System lands are considered legally unavailable for leasing at this time, and will be considered unavailable for lease under all alternatives in the analysis. On the Lewis and Clark Forest, these lands include existing wilderness, specifically the Bob Marshall-Scapegoat Wilderness complex. Also unavailable are those lands recommended for wilderness in the Lewis and Clark Forest Plan, which includes about 51,800 acres on the Rocky Mountain Division adjacent to the Bob Marshall and Scapegoat Wildernesses. These lands are described in the Lewis and Clark Forest Plan as the Renshaw, South Fork and West Fork of the Teton, and Silver King-Falls Creek areas. In addition, lands proposed for wilderness study under the Montana Wilderness Study Act (Pub. L. 95-150) are not available for oil and gas leasing. This includes 92,000 acres in the Middle Fork of the Judith River Wilderness Study Area in the Little Belt Mountains, and 98,000 acres in the Big Snowy Mountain Wilderness Study Area. This analysis is required by the Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform Act of 1987 and implementing regulations promulgated in 1990 (36 CFR 228.102). Potential issues that have been identified to date are the effects of oil and gas activities on: 1. Threatened and endangered species. 2. Sensitive fish, wildlife, and plant species. 3. Big game wildlife species. 4. Water quality. 5. Soil resources. 6. Inventoried roadless areas. 7. Indian rights and religious practices. 8. Dispersed and developed recreation opportunities. 9. Heritage resources. 10. Social and economic impacts to local and area communities. 11. Consistency with Forest Plan goals and objectives. 12. Lands considered in wilderness legislation. 13. Scenic byways. 14. Municipal watersheds. 15. Experimental Forest. 16. Noxious weeks. The Lewis and Clark Forest Plan provides direction for the use of stipulations to be attached to leases in order to comply with Forest Plan goals and objectives. As outlined in the Forest Plan, no-surface occupancy (NSO) is recommended for lands where oil and gas development could conflict with riparian values, wetlands and floodplains, as well as on slopes greater than 60%. The Forest Plan calls for no-surface occupancy to protect existing uses such as powerlines, irrigation canals, and cemeteries, and developed recreation sites, as well as the area above Gibson Dam on the Sun River. Areas identified in the Forest Plan as Research Natural Areas also require the NSO stipulation. The Ford Creek Plateau area on the Rocky Mountain Division would be available only for no-surface occupancy leasing for the first decade of the Forest Plan. The Plan also identifies areas for which timing restrictions on activity would be stipulated to protect resource values such as threatened and endangered species habitat, sensitive species habitat, big game seasonal ranges, and raptor nest sites. NSO is recommended in areas where more than one key wildlife habitat is present and the combined seasons of use leaves no opportunity for oil and gas occupancy. In addition, the Lewis and Clark Forest Plan identifies resource concerns requiring special operating constraints, such as landtypes susceptible to moderate-severe cut-bank failure potential, semi- primitive recreation areas, Experimental Forests, and municipal watersheds. A stipulation controlling surface use would be applied to leases with these resource concerns. Under the Forest Plan, stream segments eligible for ``wild'' status under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 will not be offered for lease. Most of these stream segments are within existing wilderness areas, but on those segments outside of designated wilderness on Forest, lands unavailable for lease include areas within \1/4\ mile either side of segments of the South Fork of the Sun River, the Dearborn River, and North Fork Birch Creek. Public participation will be important to the analysis. Part of the goal of public involvement is to identify additional issues and to refine the preliminary issues identified above. People may visit with Forest Service officials at any time during the analysis and prior to the decision. However, two periods are specifically designated for comments on the analysis: (1) During the scoping process and (2) during the Draft EIS (DEIS) comment period. During the scoping process, the Forest Service is seeking information and comments from Federal, State, and local agencies and other individuals or organizations who may be interested in or affected by the proposed action. A scoping document will be prepared and mailed to parties known to be interested in the proposed action by February 25, 1994. The agency invites written comments and suggestions on this action, particularly in terms of identification of issues and alternative development. In addition, public open houses will be held during the scoping period: on Monday, February 28 from 5 p.m. to 8 p.m. at the Kings Hill Ranger District Office in White Sulphur Springs, MT; on Wednesday, March 2, from 6 p.m. until 9 p.m. at the Great Falls Civic Center in Great Falls, MT; on Monday, March 14, from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. at the Holiday Inn in Missoula, MT; on Tuesday, March 16, from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. at the Little Flower Parish in Browning, MT; and on Wednesday, March 17, from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. at the Choteau Public Library in Choteau, MT. In addition to the proposed action, a range of alternatives will be developed in response to issues identified during scoping. This includes the no-action alternatives required by NEPA in which no leasing would be authorized at this time. The Forest Service will analyze and document the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of all alternatives. Stipulations will be developed to mitigate effects and protect other resources, and the effectiveness of those stipulations will be assessed. The BLM and Forest Service are jointly preparing a Reasonably Foreseeable Development (RFD) scenario to predict the level and type of oil and gas activity anticipated to occur for the 10-15 year period following leasing. The RFD is based on known geologic, economic, and technical information for the local area. This RFD will be used to analyze the effects of the proposed action and alternatives. The Forest Service will continue to involve the public and inform interested and affected parties on how to participate and contribute to the final decision. Another formal opportunity for response will be provided following completion of a Draft EIS. The Draft EIS should be available for review in the fall of 1994. The Final EIS is scheduled for completion in September 1995. The comment period on the Draft EIS will be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the Notice of Availability in the Federal Register. The Forest Supervisor for the Lewis and Clark National Forest has been assigned the task of compiling the EIS. However, the officials responsible for making the decision resulting from the analysis are: David F. Jolly, Northern Region Regional Forester, Federal Building, 200 E. Broadway, P.O Box 7669, Missoula, MT 59807; and State Director, USDI-Bureau of Land Management, Montana State Office, 222 North 32nd Street, P.O. Box 36800, Billings, MT 59107-6800. They will decide on an alternative to be implemented after considering comments and responses, environmental consequences discussed in the Final EIS, and applicable laws, regulations, and policies. The decision and reasons for the decision will be documented in a Record of Decision. The comment period on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement will have 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the Notice of Availability in the Federal Register. The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of draft environmental impact statements must structure their participation in the environmental review of the proposal so it is meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and contentions (Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the draft environmental impact statement stage but are not raised until after completion of the final environmental impact statement may be waived or dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F. 2d 1016, 1022 (9th Cr. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of these court rulings, it is very important those interested in this proposed action participate by the close of the 45-day comment period so substantive comments and objections can be made available to the Forest Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider and respond to them in the Final Environmental Impact Statement. To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues and concerns on the proposed action, comments during the scoping period should be as specific as possible. Initial comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be mailed to John D. Gorman, Forest Supervisor by March 31, 1994. When the Draft EIS is released, it is also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters in the draft document. Comments may also address the adequacy of the Draft EIS or the merits of the alternatives formulated and discussed in the statement. Reviewers may wish to refer to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points. Dated: February 17, 1994. John D. Gorman, Forest Supervisor. [FR Doc. 94-4134 Filed 2-23-94; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-11-M --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A94-4134. Public record. Not legal advice.