Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for Coalbed Methane Development Projects South of Gillette, Wyoming

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[WY-985-0777-66]

Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for Coalbed

Methane Development Projects South of Gillette, Wyoming

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement

for Coalbed Methane Development Projects South of Gillette, Wyoming, in

Campbell County.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) under the National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) must analyze the impacts of actions we

permit on Federal lands and minerals. As part of this analysis, the

cumulative affects of the proposed action and other activities

occurring in the area must be considered. Three Environmental

Assessments (EA) (Pistol Point, Marquiss, and Lighthouse) and one

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) (Gillette South) to address

proposed coalbed methane (CBM) development have been completed for the

area south of Gillette. When we completed the EIS in October of 1997,

the apparent success of the coalbed methane play was drawing additional

operators into the basin.

Feedback we received from industry indicated we could see an

additional 2,600 to 3,000 CBM wells south of Gillette by the year 2007

if development success continues as it has been. With this information,

BLM decided another EIS would be necessary to address this additional

interest.

DATES: Comments to be considered in the draft EIS should be submitted

by March 2, 1998. The draft EIS should be available for public review

by October of 1998.

ADDRESSES: Questions or concerns should be addressed to Richard Zander

in the BLM Buffalo Resource Area Office, 1425 Fort Street, Buffalo, WY

82834.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Zander, phone 307-684-1100.

[[Page 4468]]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: When we began preparation of the Gillette

South CBM EIS in June of 1996, we had developed a proposed action to

analyze a total of 640 CBM wells. This proposed action was based on the

best available information we had from industry at that time. It took

into account potential development based on depth to coal and what

industry knew at that time about the potential to produce methane from

the coal. The proposed action also included the prior Marquiss and

Lighthouse CBM projects to address developmental changes which had

occurred since these two projects had been analyzed by EAs. When we

completed the EIS in October of 1997, the apparent success of the

coalbed methane play was drawing additional operators into the basin.

The following are some of the major issues raised during the

preparation of the Gillette South CBM EIS. These issues are provided to

help you understand what has occurred in past environmental documents

and perhaps stimulate addition thoughts, questions, and issues.

People were concerned with the loss of hydraulic head

related to groundwater associated with the coal seam. Concerns related

to lowering of water levels and increased pumping costs because water

would have to be pumped from greater depths.

Concerns were voiced on how the differentiation would be

made between coal mine-caused and coalbed methane-caused impacts to the

lowering of the water in the coal seam. How would the responsible

entity be identified?

Questions were posed on what effects the coalbed methane

development would have on air quality. Of concern were possible

hazardous emissions and pollutants released as a result of compressor

emissions.

Disposing water on the surface raised concerns about water

quality due to possible increased erosion and possible weed

infestations because of water flow fluctuations.

Questions were raised about the use of produced water for

dust control, stock watering, and the creation of wetlands. What were

the ramifications of using this water in this manner?

Concern was voiced that the mines had been venting methane

for years and now we had companies working to recover the methane and

pay royalty on production. Were we going to make the mines pay back

royalty and future royalty for the methane they vent?

There were concerns that we had not done further

groundwater modeling to predict possible drawdowns and impacts.

Concern was voiced about the use of the 1988 CHIA

(Cumulative Potential Hydrologic Impacts of Surface Coal Mining in the

Eastern Powder River Structural Basin, Northeastern Wyoming) and how

this affected cumulative impacts.

Concerns were voiced that previous documents had

underestimated the magnitude of impacts when in actuality we had

underestimated rate of impact occurrence.

Concerns were raised that we had not addressed impacts to

threatened and endangered species, raptors, and fisheries.

Concern was expressed about the effects of surface

disposal of water and operating a ranch with ongoing methane

development operations.

BLM held a meeting with companies on November 19, 1997, to discuss

the implications of the recently signed Record of Decision for the

Gillette South EIS. This meeting covered the mitigation steps that

would be required of those operators developing Federal minerals.

Specifically covered were monitoring requirements, use of the Water

Well Agreement, and the formation of a groundwater monitoring group

similar to the coal industry's Gillette Area Groundwater Monitoring

Organization (GAGMO) Group. Another topic of discussion was the

question of where the CBM operators thought development was headed. No

specifics were voiced at this meeting, but the general consensus was

that development over and above that analyzed in the Gillette South EIS

was a certainty. BLM asked the operators to provide us feedback on

their development plans so we could plan for future environmental

analysis needs.

Feedback we received from industry indicated we could see an

additional 2,600 to 3,000 CBM wells south of Gillette by the year 2007

if development success continues as it has been. With this information,

BLM decided another EIS would be necessary to address this additional

interest.

A public scoping meeting will be held on February 5, 1998, at 7

p.m., at the Holiday Inn in Gillette, Wyoming, to discuss this

increased industry interest and solicit comments, questions, issues, or

concerns you may have. We will use the feedback in the preparation of

the EIS.

Dated: January 22, 1998.

Alan R. Pierson,

State Director.

[FR Doc. 98-2156 Filed 1-28-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-22-P