Cottonwood Coal Lease Tract, UTU-68012; Manti-La Sal National Forest, Emery County, Utah

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Cottonwood Coal Lease Tract, UTU-68012; Manti-La Sal National

Forest, Emery County, Utah

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a third-party Environmental Impact

Statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management will direct

preparation of a Third-Party Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to

document the analysis and disclose the environmental and human effects

of proposed actions to offer the Cottonwood Coal Lease Tract for

competitive bidding in accordance with 43 CFR part 3425. As the surface

management agency, the Forest Service will be the lead agency for

preparation of the EIS and the Bureau of Land Management will be a

joint lead agency. The Office of Surface Mining and Bureau of

Reclamation will also participate as cooperating agencies.

The coal lease tract, as delineated by the Tract Delineation Team,

encompasses 9,243.87 acres of Federal coal lands on the Manti-La Sal

National Forest as follows:

T. 17 S., R. 6 E., SLM,

Section 2, SW4;

Section 3, lots 1-12, SE4;

Section 4, lots 1-2, S2NE4, SE4;

Section 9, E2, E2W2;

Section 10, lots 1-8, E2;

Section 11, All;

Section 12, W2W2;

Section 13, W2W2;

Section 14, lots 1-4, E2, NW4;

Section 15, lots 1-12, NE4;

Section 16, NE4NW4;

Section 20, E2E2;

Section 21, All;

Section 22, All;

Section 23; lots 1-12, NE4;

Section 24, W2W2;

Section 25, N2NW4;

Section 26, N2NE4, W2SW4NE4, NW4, N2SW4, W2NW4SE4;

Section 27, N2, N2S2;

Section 28, All;

Section 29, E2;

Section 32, E2;

Section 33; All.

(Additions and/or deletions to the delineated tract may be

considered as alternatives to the proposed action, to be developed and

analyzed based on issues and management needs.)

PacifiCorp applied to the Bureau of Land Management for the lease

to obtain additional coal reserves to increase the production life of

their Cottonwood/Wilberg/Trail Mountain mine complex. The tract lies

west and north of the boundary of the existing approved permit area for

the Trail Mountain Mine. If PacifiCorp obtains the tract, it would be

mined by longwall and room-and-pillar methods through underground

workings in the existing permit area. Existing portal facilities in

Cottonwood/Wilberg/Trail Mountain mine comples would be used. If

another company obtains the tract, it is most likely that new portal

facilities would be required in Cottonwood Canyon, north of the

existing Trail Mountain Mine facility. The underground mining methods

and layout would be similar. The EIS would consider the effects of both

scenarios, the No Action Alternative, and other alternatives to be

developed after completion of project scoping.

AGENCY DECISIONS: In accordance with the Coal Leasing Amendments Act of

1975, which amended the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, the Forest

Supervisor, Manti-La Sal National forest, must decide whether or not to

consent to leasing by the Bureau of Land Management and identify

special coal lease stipulations needed to protect non-mineral

resources.

In accordance with the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, as amended, the

Utah State Director of the Bureau of Land Management must decide

whether or not to offer the tract for competitive leasing and under

what terms, conditions, and stipulations.

DATES: Written comments concerning the scope of the analysis described

in this notice should be received on or before March 23, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Manti-La Sal National Forest, 599

West Price River Drive, Price, Utah 84501.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Questions concerning the proposed action and EIS should be addressed to

Dale Harber or Aaron Howe, Manti-La Sal National Forest, phone (435)

637-2817.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This EIS will tier to the Final EIS and

Record of Decision for the Manti-La Sal National Forest Land and

Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan). The Manti-La Sal Forest Plan

provides the overall guidance (Goals, Objectives, Standards, and

Management Area Direction) to achieve the Desired Future Condition for

the area being analyzed, and contains specific management area

prescriptions for the entire Forest. The proposed lease tract is

available for further consideration for coal leasing. The Forest

Service and Bureau of Land Management have determined that data are

available to meet the Data Adequacy Standards for Federal Coal Leasing,

Uinta-Southwestern Utah Coal Region.

Issues and alternatives to be evaluated in the analysis will be

determined through public scoping. The major issues are expected to

include the socioeconomic benefits of mining; the potential impacts of

underground mining and mining-induced subsidence to surface and ground

water, vegetation, wildlife, cultural/paleontological resources, range

improvements, and other land uses; the potential for impacts on the

Joes Valley Dam; and the potential impacts of any new surface

facilities to the Forest and human environments.

The Forest Service is seeking information and comments from

Federal, State, and local agencies as well as individuals and

organizations who may be interested in, or affected by, the proposed

action. The Forest Service invites written comments and suggestions on

the issues related to the proposal and the area being analyzed.

Information received will be used in preparation of the Draft EIS and

Final

[[Page 8427]]

EIS. For most effective use, comments would be submitted to the Forest

Service within 30 days from the date of publication of this notice in

the Federal Register. Preparation of the EIS will include the following

steps:

1. Define the purpose of and need for action.

2. Identify potential issues.

3. Eliminate issues of minor importance or those that have been

covered by previous and relevant environmental analysis.

4. Select issues to be analyzed in depth.

5. Identify reasonable alternatives to the proposed action.

6. Describe the affected environment.

7. Identify the potential environmental effects of the

alternatives.

Steps 2, 3, and 4 will be completed through the scoping process.

Step 5 will consider a range of alternatives developed from the key

issues and management needs. At a minimum, the ``No Action'' and

``Propose Action'' Alternatives will be analyzed. Other alternatives

could involve modified tract boundaries (additions and/or reductions)

and different sets of special lease stipulations for the protection of

non-mineral resources. Alternatives may also be developed to include

analysis of mining in the existing adjacent lease area and a potential

modification of adjacent existing leases to add up to 160 acres/lease

to prevent bypassing minable reserves.

Step 6 will describe the physical attributes of the area to be

affected by this proposal, with special attention to the environmental

factors that could be adversely affected.

Step 7 will analyze the environmental effects of each alternative.

This analysis will be consistent with management direction outlined in

the Forest plan. The direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of each

alternative will be analyzed and documented. In addition, the site

specific mitigation measures for each alternative will be identified

and the effectiveness of these mitigation measures will be disclosed.

Agency representatives and other interested people are invited to

visit with Forest Service officials at any time during the EIS process.

Two specific time periods are identified for the receipt of formal

comments on the analysis. The two comment periods are, (1) during the

scoping process, the next 30 days following publication of this Notice

in the Federal Register, and (2) during the formal review period of the

Draft EIS.

The Draft EIS is estimated to be filed with the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) and available for public review in September,

1998. At this time the EPA will publish an availability notice of the

Draft EIS in the Federal Register.

The comment period on the Draft EIS will be 45 days from the date

the Environmental Protection Agency's notice of availability appears in

the Federal Register. It is very important that those interested in

this proposed action participate at that time. To be the most helpful,

comments on the Draft EIS should be as specific as possible and may

address the adequacy of the statement or the merits of the alternatives

discussed (See The Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for

implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental

Policy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3).

In addition, Federal court decisions have established that

reviewers of draft environmental impact statements must structure their

participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is

meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewers' position and

contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519,

553 (1978). Environmental objections that could have been raised at the

draft stage may be waived if not raised until after completion of the

final environmental impact statement. City of Angoon v. Hodel, (9th

Circuit, 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp.

1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). The reason for this is to ensure that

substantive comments and objections are made available to the Forest

Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider them and respond to

them in the final document.

To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues

and concerns related to the proposed action, comments on the Draft EIS

should be as specific as possible. Referring to specific pages or

chapters of the Draft EIS is most helpful. 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, 40

CFR 1503.3, in addressing these points.)

The final EIS is expected to be released in December, 1998.

The Forest Supervisor for the Manti-La Sal National Forest and Utah

State Director of the Bureau of Land Management, who are the

responsible officials for the EIS, will then make their respective

decisions regarding this proposal, after considering the comments,

responses, and environmental consequences discussed in the Final

Environmental Impact Statement, and applicable laws, regulations, and

policies. The rationale for the respective agency decisions will be

documented in the Record(s) of Decisions.

Dated: February 11, 1998.

Janette S. Kaiser,

Forest Supervisor, Manti-La Sal National Forest.

[FR Doc. 98-4168 Filed 2-18-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M