CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION 

1.1 BACKGROUND.................................................................................................................... 1-3

1.2 PURPOSE AND NEED ........................................................................................................ 1-3

1.3 PROPOSED ACTION........................................................................................................... 1-4

1.4 AUTHORITY......................................................................................................................... 1-4

1.5 NORTHEAST NATIONAL PETROLEUM RESERVE – ALASKA PLANNING AREA 

BOUNDARY.......................................................................................................................... 1-5

1.6 REQUIREMENTS FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS ................................................................ 1-6

1.7 CONSISTENCY WITH FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL LAWS AND 

REGULATIONS....................................................................................................................1-6

1.8 FEDERAL, STATE, AND NORTH SLOPE BOROUGH PERMITS AND APPROVALS 

NEEDED TO UNDERTAKE ON-THE-GROUND ACTIVITIES ....................................... 1-9

1.9 INTERRELATIONSHIPS AND COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES AND 

GOVERNMENT-SPONSORED GROUPS......................................................................... 1-10

1.10 CONSULTATION.............................................................................................................. 1-11

1.11 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND KEY ISSUES................................................................ 1-12

1.12 PREVIEW OF THE REMAINDER OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL IAP/EIS ..................... 1-13
Northeast NPR-A Supplemental IAP/EIS 

Chapter I: Introduction 1-2 
Northeast NPR-A Supplemental IAP/EIS 

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION 

1.1 BACKGROUND 

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is undertaking the Northeast National Petroleum 

Reserve-Alaska (NPR-A or Petroleum Reserve) Supplemental Integrated Activity 

Plan/Environmental Impact Statement (IAP/EIS) to supplement its Northeast NPR-A Final 

Amended IAP/EIS, which was issued in January 2005. This Supplement is necessary because

on September 25, 2006 the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska in National Audubon 

Society v. Kempthorne (case number 1:05-cv-00008-JKS), found inadequate an important aspect 

of the Amended IAP/EIS’s cumulative impact analysis and as a result vacated the associated 

Record of Decision (ROD), dated January 11, 2006. The purpose and need and proposed action 

in the Supplement have not changed from that in the Amended IAP/EIS, and the issues are

essentially the same in both documents. The range of alternatives in this Supplement, too, is 

almost entirely unchanged from those presented in the Amended IAP/EIS. 

1.2 PURPOSE AND NEED 

BLM’s purpose and need has not changed from the Amended IAP/EIS; that is, to address the 

Nation’s need for production of more oil and gas through additional leasing in the Northeast 

NPR-A (Maps 1-1 and 1-2). Congress authorized an oil and gas-leasing program in the NPR-A 

in the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies’ Fiscal Year (FY) 1981 Appropriations 

Act (Public Law [PL] 96-514, December 12, 1980). Additionally, in 2001, the President created 

the National Energy Policy Development Group (NEPDG), consisting of the Vice-President and

other key cabinet members. The primary task of the group was to “develop a national energy

policy designed to help the private sector, and, as necessary and appropriate, state and local 

governments, and promote dependable, affordable, and environmentally sound production and

distribution of energy for the future” (NEPDG 2001). In May 2001, the NEPDG released the 

National Energy Policy report, a comprehensive list of findings and key recommendations that 

form the basis of the President’s National Energy Policy. Specifically, the policy directs the 

Secretary of the Interior to “consider additional environmentally responsible oil and gas 

development, based on sound science and the best available technology, through further lease 

sales in the National Petroleum Reserve – Alaska,” and states that “such consideration should 

include areas not currently leased within the northeast corner of the National Petroleum 

Reserve – Alaska.” The Amended IAP/EIS and this Supplement thereto are part of the process

by which the Secretary will carry out that policy direction. 

1-3 Chapter I: Introduction 
Northeast NPR-A Supplemental IAP/EIS 

1.3 PROPOSED ACTION 

BLM’s proposed action has not changed from the Amended IAP/EIS. The Petroleum Reserve

consists of 23 million acres located on the North Slope of Alaska (Maps 1-1 and 1-2). The 

Northeast NPR-A Planning Area consists of approximately 4.6 million acres located in the 

northeastern portion of the Petroleum Reserve. BLM is amending its 1998 Northeast NPR-A 

IAP/EIS to consider making portions of the BLM-administered lands (public lands) in the 

Northeast NPR-A Planning Area available for oil and gas leasing that, pursuant to the terms of 

the 1998 IAP/EIS ROD, are currently unavailable for leasing. In addition, BLM proposes to

develop performance-based lease stipulations and Required Operating Procedures (ROPs) in the

Planning Area similar to those stipulations and ROPs included in the Northwest NPR-A 

IAP/EIS ROD (Northwest IAP/EIS ROD; USDOI BLM and MMS 2004). The stipulations would 

apply to oil and gas activities, but the ROPs would apply to both oil and gas activities and nonoil and gas activities. 

1.4 AUTHORITY 

BLM undertook the Amended IAP/EIS and this Supplement thereto in accordance with the 

Department of the Interior and Related Agencies’ Fiscal Year (FY) 1981 Appropriations Act, the 

National Energy Policy, and the BLM’s responsibilities to manage these lands under authority 

and direction of two laws passed in 1976; the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act (NPRPA) and 

the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA). The Northeast NPR-A IAP/EIS addresses the

BLM’s responsibilities under the NPRPA and FLPMA through a National Environmental Policy 

Act (NEPA)-required process. 

The authority for the management options in the IAP/EIS comes from several statutes, 

primarily the FLPMA and the NPRPA. Under FLPMA, the Secretary has broad authority to

regulate the use, occupancy, and development of the public lands and to take whatever action is 

required to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of the public lands (43 United States 

Code [USC] § 1732). 

Under the NPRPA, the Secretary has the authority to conduct oil and gas leasing and 

development in the National Petroleum Reserve – Alaska (42 USC § 6506a). The Department of 

the Interior and Related Agencies’ Fiscal Year (FY) 1981 Appropriations Act specifically directs 

the Secretary to undertake “an expeditious program of competitive leasing of oil and gas” in the 

Petroleum Reserve. The NPRPA also provides that the Secretary “shall assume all 

responsibilities” for “any activities related to the protection of environmental, fish and wildlife, 

and historical or scenic values” (42 USC § 6503(b)). In addition, the NPRPA authorizes the 

Secretary to “promulgate such rules and regulations as he deems necessary and appropriate for

the protection of such values within the reserve.” The NPRPA’s implementing regulations are

found at Title 43, Part 2360, of the Code of Federal Regulations [CFR]. 

The NPRPA, as amended, contains special provisions that apply to any exploration or 

development activities within areas “designated by the Secretary of the Interior containing any 

significant subsistence, recreational, fish and wildlife, or historical or scenic value” (42 USC § 

Chapter I: Introduction 1-4 
Northeast NPR-A Supplemental IAP/EIS 

6504(a)). Based on this authority, the Secretary in 1977 designated two Special Areas within 

the planning area (Map 1-3), in which all activities were to “be conducted in a manner which 

will assure the maximum protection of such surface values to the extent consistent with the 

requirements of this Act for the exploration of the reserve.” (42 Federal Register 28,723; June 2, 

1977). The Teshekpuk Lake Special Area, the great majority of which is within the planning 

area, was created to protect migratory waterfowl and shorebirds. The Colville River Special 

Area, about a third of which is in the planning area, was created to protect the Arctic peregrine

falcon, which at that time was an endangered species. The alternatives presented in each of the 

plans BLM has developed for the northeastern part of the Petroleum Reserve recognize the

importance of the resources of the Special Areas and present different means of providing 

“maximum protection” consistent with “exploration of the reserve.” 

The Department of the Interior and Related Agencies’ Fiscal Year (FY) 1981 Appropriations Act 

exempted the Petroleum Reserve from Section 202 of FLPMA (43 USC § 1712), which requires 

the preparation of land use plans (called Resource Management Plans, or RMPs, in regulations 

adopted by the BLM). Because of this exemption, neither the Amended IAP/EIS nor this 

Supplement thereto have been developed as a RMP (as most BLM planning efforts are called). 

Section 202 of FLPMA and its implementing regulations governing the preparation of RMPs (43 

CFR Part 1600) do not apply to this plan. 

1.5 NORTHEAST NATIONAL PETROLEUM RESERVE – 

ALASKA PLANNING AREA BOUNDARY 

The planning area for this Supplement is the same as for the Amended IAP/EIS. It does not 

address surface or sub-surface estates if owned by Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act 

(ANCSA) regional or village corporations, primarily located near the community of Nuiqsut; the 

surface lands within certified Native Allotments owned by private individuals; or the airstrip at 

Umiat, owned by the State of Alaska. However, the cumulative impacts of reasonably 

foreseeable activities on these adjacent non-federal lands are considered in the cumulative 

impact section of this Supplement (section 4.7, Cumulative Impacts). For a more extensive 

discussion of land status, see section 3.4.5.1, Land Ownership and Uses, for a map showing

the boundary, see Map 1-2. 

A few considerations regarding the boundary of the planning area are worth mentioning. The 

eastern boundary of the planning area is the eastern boundary of the Petroleum Reserve along

the western bank of the Colville River. That boundary is defined in Executive Order (EO) 3797­

A as the “highest highwater mark . . . on the [western] bank,” which the U.S. District Court for 

the District of Alaska construed to be “on and along the bank at the highest level attained by 

the waters of the river when they reach and wash the bank without overflowing it” (Alaska v. 

U.S.; case no. A78-069 Civ. December 7, 1984). Thus, neither the Colville River nor its banks 

immediately adjacent to the river are in the planning area. Most of the western boundary of the

planning area is along the eastern bank of the Ikpikpuk River, so that river is also outside the 

planning area. Finally, the U.S. Supreme Court (in U.S. v Alaska; No. 84, Orig. decided on June

19, 1997) determined that the NPR-A included tidally influenced waters and that those waters 

and the submerged lands underlying them did not transfer to the State of Alaska at statehood. 

1-5 Chapter I: Introduction 
Northeast NPR-A Supplemental IAP/EIS 

1.6 REQUIREMENTS FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS 

If there is a lease sale based upon this Supplement and associated ROD, the first sale under the

ROD could occur in 2008, with subsequent lease sales approximately every 2 to 3 years 

thereafter. For analysis purposes, this Supplement assumes that all lands that the ROD 

determines should be available for leasing would be offered in the first sale. Readers should

bear in mind, however, that the first sale, as well as any subsequent sale, might offer only a 

portion of the lands identified in the ROD as available, making possible a phased approach to 

leasing and development. The area offered would be within the area identified in the ROD of 

this Supplement as available for leasing, or within areas identified in a new ROD, if after 

proper NEPA analysis, new areas are made available. The timing of the second and subsequent 

sales, if any, would depend in part on the response to the first sale and the results of the 

exploration that follows. 

BLM anticipates that this Supplemental IAP/EIS will fulfill the NEPA requirements for the 

first lease sale and for any potential renegotiations of the stipulations of previously leased tracts 

(Map 1-4) in the planning area. Prior to conducting each additional sale, the agency would

conduct a determination of the existing NEPA adequacy. If BLM finds its existing analysis to 

be adequate, the NEPA analysis for any second or subsequent sale may require only an 

administrative Determination of NEPA Adequacy or an EA to support the ROD. 

Future actions requiring BLM approval, including a proposed exploratory drilling plan or 

proposed construction of infrastructure for development of a petroleum discovery, would require

further NEPA analysis based on specific and detailed information about where and what kind of 

activity is proposed. 

1.7 CONSISTENCY WITH FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL 

LAWS AND REGULATIONS 

BLM and any leaseholder or applicant for a BLM permit or other authorization must comply 

with numerous federal laws that govern activities on public lands. The Clean Air Act (CAA), as 

revised in 1990, governs air pollutant emissions, and requires the U.S. Environmental Agency 

(EPA) and states to carry out programs to assure attainment of the National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS). The Clean Water Act (CWA) regulates discharges into waters of 

the United States, including wetlands. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 

regulates the treatment, storage and disposal of solid and hazardous wastes, while the 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) regulates 

how to clean up releases of hazardous substances and the notification of agencies in case of a 

release. 

Several laws pertain to the protection of plants and animals and their habitats. The 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) provides for conserving endangered and threatened species of 

plants and animals. The ESA also requires that federal agencies consult with the U.S. Fish and 

Chapter I: Introduction 1-6 
Northeast NPR-A Supplemental IAP/EIS 

Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

Fisheries Service to ensure that any actions that they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely

to jeopardize the continued survival of a listed species or result in the adverse modification or 

destruction of its critical habitat. The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Management and 

Conservation Act requires consultation with the NOAA Fisheries Service on Essential Fish 

Habitat. 

The Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act of 1980 encourages federal agencies to conserve and 

promote the conservation of non-game fish and wildlife species and their habitats. The 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act makes it unlawful to directly, or indirectly, harm migratory birds. 

The Sikes Act authorizes the USDOI to plan, develop, maintain, and coordinate programs with 

state agencies for the conservation and rehabilitation of wildlife, fish, and game on public lands. 

The Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 was re-authorized with the passage of the Coastal 

Zone Management Act (CZMA) Re-Authorization Amendments of 1990. The act requires states 

to develop coastal zone management plans and requires states to develop and implement 

Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Programs. The act also requires the NOAA and USEPA to 

develop guidance and implementation documents for nonpoint pollution of coastal waters. 

The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (WSRA) of 1968 requires that in all land and water use 

planning for development, consideration “shall be given by all federal agencies involved to 

potential wild, scenic, and recreational river areas...” (16 USC § 1276(d)). The Act was created 

to help preserve rivers from being dammed, channelized, and over-developed and requires that 

BLM address wild and scenic river values in its planning efforts. The act establishes a National 

Wild and Scenic Rivers System and prescribes the methods and standards through which 

additional rivers may be identified and added to the system. 

The Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 prohibits the construction of any bridge, dam, dike, or 

causeway over or in navigable waterways of the U.S. without U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

(USACE) approval. Under Section 10 of the Act, the building of any wharves, piers, jetties, or 

other structures is prohibited without USACE approval, and excavation or fill within navigable 

waters requires the approval of the Chief of Engineers, USACE. 

Laws and acts that pertain to the protection of historic and cultural resources and the rights of 

Alaska Native groups include the Historic Sites Act of 1935, which provides for the preservation 

of historic American sites, buildings, objects, and antiquities of national significance. The 

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) requires Federal agencies to take into 

account the potential effects of their actions on properties that are listed or are eligible for

listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), and to consult with State Historic 

Preservation Officers (SHPOs) and local governments regarding the effects of federal actions on 

historic properties. The Archeological Resources Protection Act prohibits the excavation, 

removal, damage, or other alteration or defacement of archaeological resources on federal or

Indian lands without a permit. 

The American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 requires federal land managers to include 

consultation with traditional Native American or Alaska Native religious leaders in their 

management plans. The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 

1-7 Chapter I: Introduction 
Northeast NPR-A Supplemental IAP/EIS 

recognizes the property rights of Alaska Natives in certain cultural items, including Alaska 

Native human remains and sacred objects. Section 810 of the ANILCA addresses issues related 

to the effects of proposed activities on subsistence. An ANILCA Section 810 notice and public 

hearing process is required if a proposed action may have significant impacts on subsistence 

resources or uses. An evaluation and proposed finding of effects on subsistence resources from

actions that could be undertaken under this Supplement, provided in Appendix A, was based on 

information contained in this Supplement, and from public comments. 

The FLPMA of 1976 directs BLM to “take any action necessary to prevent unnecessary or undue 

degradation of public lands” and to develop resource management plans consistent with those of 

state and local governments to the extent that BLM programs also comply with federal laws 

and regulations. The NPRPA of 1976 delegates authority to the BLM for surface management of 

the National Petroleum Reserve – Alaska and protection of surface values from environmental 

degradation, and encourages the preparation of rules and regulations necessary to carry out its 

surface management and protection duties. 

This IAP/EIS follows the guidelines in several Executive orders, including, but not limited to: 

• Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, which was issued in order to avoid, to 

the extent possible, the long and short-term impacts associated with the occupancy and

modification of floodplains and to avoid direct or indirect support of floodplain 

development wherever there is a practicable alternative. 

• Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands, which directs federal agencies to 

“minimize the destruction, loss, or degradation of wetlands, and enhance and preserve

the natural and beneficial values of wetlands” when carrying out actions on federal 

lands. 

• Executive Order 12898, Environmental Justice, requires that federal agencies address 

the disproportionate effects of their actions on minority populations and on low-income

populations. 

• Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, 

directs federal agencies to ensure meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the 

development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.” 

The State and the NSB require permits for certain activities within the planning area. These 

are discussed in section 1.8. The NSB believes that it has concurrent jurisdiction within the 

NPR-A derived from the jurisdiction transferred to the state under the Alaska Statehood Act 

and the Borough's status as a home rule municipality. It is BLM’s policy to consider the NSB’s 

Land Management Regulations to the extent practical in any decision within NPR-A. Although

BLM acknowledges the NSB’s local land use plan, it is BLM’s position that the Borough’s plans 

cannot prohibit activities on Federal lands. All activities on Federal lands must be authorized 

by BLM. 

Chapter I: Introduction 1-8 
Northeast NPR-A Supplemental IAP/EIS 

1.8 FEDERAL, STATE, AND NORTH SLOPE BOROUGH 

PERMITS AND APPROVALS NEEDED TO UNDERTAKE ONTHE-GROUND ACTIVITIES 

The following discussion focuses on some of the permits that would be required by various 

agencies during any oil and gas exploration or development activities in the planning area. A 

more inclusive list is provided in Appendix B. 

The USACE administers two permits relevant to proposed oil and gas activities in the planning 

area. The first permit is issued pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, which addresses 

the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S., including wetlands. In addition, 

the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) must certify that the 404 

permit meets state water quality standards. To meet Section 404 requirements, any future 

NEPA document would describe the project’s components, identify the type and amount of 

wetlands and other waters affected by each alternative, describe anticipated impacts, and 

discuss mitigation measures that could minimize impacts to these resources. 

Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 is the source for the second USACEadministered permit. To address the requirements of this section, as they pertain to 

construction of structures or work in or affecting navigable waters of the U.S., any future NEPA 

document must describe the navigable waters of the U.S within the project area and how 

structures in, on, or over these waters would affect them during construction and operation. The

NEPA document would describe the alternatives and compare possible impacts to coastal 

integrity and navigation for each alternative. It would also discuss mitigating measures to

minimize these impacts. In addition, Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act requires that an 

applicant desiring to build a bridge across a navigable stream obtain a permit from the U.S. 

Coast Guard. The Coast Guard is responsible to assure that such a bridge does not obstruct or 

alter a navigable stream. 

The USEPA and authorized states issue National Pollution Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) permits required by the Clean Water Act. To provide information for these permits,

any future NEPA document would describe existing water quality and the quantity of water 

requirements for the proposed project, expected pollutants and their concentrations, and the 

quality and locations of wastewater treatment facilities and discharges. The USEPA 

administers, and the ADEC issues, other Clean Water Act mandated permits for Waste Water

Authorization, Oil Discharge Prevention and Contingency Plans, Storm Water Discharge, and 

Underground Injection Authorizations. 

Under their State Implementation Plan, the ADEC issues Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) and other air quality permits. Any future NEPA document would provide 

an analysis of meteorological factors and air quality baseline conditions, and would predict 

impacts to air quality during construction and operation to provide information necessary to 

evaluate the issuance of these permits. 

1-9 Chapter I: Introduction 
Northeast NPR-A Supplemental IAP/EIS 

The ADEC is responsible for issuing several permits and plan approvals for oil and gas 

exploration and development activities, including the storage and transport of oil and cleanup of

oil spills. The Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission is responsible for issuing drilling 

permits and for production, injection, and disposal plan approvals for exploration and 

development activities in the State of Alaska. 

Finally, the NSB, as a Home Rule Borough, issues development permits and other 

authorizations for oil and gas activities under the terms of its ordinances and, with an approved

local district plan within the Alaska Coastal Management Program, participates in the process

through which the state issues a Coastal Zone Consistency Determination. 

1.9 INTERRELATIONSHIPS AND COORDINATION WITH 

OTHER AGENCIES AND GOVERNMENT-SPONSORED 

GROUPS 

BLM coordinates with state and local agencies to satisfy the requirements of several acts, 

including the Sikes Act, FLPMA, and Section 106 of the NHPA. BLM coordinates closely with 

state resource management agencies on issues involving the management of public lands and 

protection of fish and wildlife populations, including federal and state-listed threatened and 

endangered species. BLM coordinates at the national and local level with several resource 

advisory groups, including the BLM Resource Advisory Council. 

To ensure local participation in the decision-making process as it relates to subsistence in the 

NPR-A, BLM established a local Subsistence Advisory Panel (SAP). The individual tribal 

governments of Anaktuvuk Pass, Atqasuk, Barrow, Nuiqsut, Point Lay, and Wainwright; as 

well as the Inupiat Community of the Arctic Slope (ICAS), a regional tribal entity; and the 

North Slope Borough (NSB) are all represented on the panel. The SAP’s purview encompasses 

all of the NPR-A, including the planning area. The responsibilities of this panel are and will 

continue to be to: 

• Provide recommendations to BLM concerning planning, research, monitoring, and 

assessment activities needed to facilitate responsible development and to protect 

subsistence resources and uses in the NPR-A; 

• Identify potential conflicts between subsistence use and other resource uses; 

• Inform local communities about agency actions affecting subsistence resources and uses 

in the planning area; 

• Inform agencies of panel activities; 

• Work with the NSB to maintain a repository of subsistence information concerning the 

planning area for local communities and agencies; and 

• Help BLM ensure continuity and consistency in the collection and use of subsistence 

information by the advisory panel and other groups. 

The panel is responsible for reviewing resource-related development plans within the planning 

area and issuing recommendations to BLM regarding whether the plans adequately consider 

Chapter I: Introduction 1-10 
Northeast NPR-A Supplemental IAP/EIS 

subsistence. BLM will work with the panel and any permittees to resolve conflicts between 

subsistence use and resource development. BLM will work closely with the panel to develop a 

plan to monitor the effects of development on subsistence resources and users. Should

monitoring identify the existence of impacts on subsistence uses, the panel would make 

recommendations to BLM regarding: 1) additional mitigating measures, 2) potential relocation 

of operations or redesign of facilities, and 3) more effective mechanisms for enforcement of 

subsistence stipulations. 

1.10 CONSULTATION 

BLM consulted with Alaska Native groups both during the Amendment and the Supplement

processes to identify the cultural values, religious beliefs, traditional practices, and legal rights 

of Alaska Native groups that could be affected by BLM actions. Consultation activities during 

the Amended IAP/EIS process included sending out letters to Alaska Native groups that could

be directly affected by the proposed activities, holding numerous meetings with Native groups, 

and requesting information on how the proposed activities could impact Alaska Native 

interests, including the use of wildlife for subsistence, religious, and ceremonial purposes. In 

December 2006, BLM sent letters to the Inupiat Community of the Arctic Slope and five village 

tribes initiating government-to-government consultation and requesting input particularly on 

measures that could reduce impacts to resources and uses that could be impacted by oil and gas 

activities. The tribes were invited to provide input not only during the initial commenting 

period, but throughout the planning process. Consultation activities with Alaska Native groups 

are ongoing. Further information is provided in Chapter 5 (Consultation and Coordination). 

BLM consulted with the Alaska SHPO during the Amended IAP/EIS process as part of Section 

106 consultation under the NHPA to determine how proposed industrial activities could impact 

cultural resources listed on or eligible for inclusion in the NRHP. With a letter of February 1, 

2007, BLM initiated consultation with the SHPO for the Supplemental IAP/EIS. Formal 

consultations with SHPO also may be required during implementation of individual projects. 

Consultations with SHPO are ongoing and will be completed by the time of the signing of the 

ROD. 

BLM consulted with the USFWS and NOAA Fisheries Service as required under Section 7 of 

the ESA during the Amended IAP/EIS process and prepared a Biological Assessment (BA). As

part of the Supplemental IAP/EIS, BLM reinitiated consultation with both agencies with letters

of March 20, 2007. The letters included a description of the Supplement’s contemplated actions, 

notified the agencies that BLM intends to prepare a new BA, and identified the threatened, 

endangered, and proposed species that the BA would address. BLM will prepare a BA and the 

ROD will not be signed until consultation is concluded. 

BLM is consulting with the State of Alaska to ensure that the mandates of the CZMA are met. 

The required compliance documentation will be included in the Supplemental IAP/EIS ROD. 

1-11 Chapter I: Introduction 
Northeast NPR-A Supplemental IAP/EIS 

1.11 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND KEY ISSUES 

As part of its NEPA process, BLM has considered a wide range of issues related to actions that 

it may authorize in the planning area, including those that might result from potential oil and 

gas-related impacts to the environment. BLM used the scoping process to decide which issues

were most relevant to the alternatives under consideration and to help focus the analysis. BLM 

initially defined the issues in the planning area through the Amended IAP/EIS’s scoping process 

initiated in June, 2003. Scoping meetings were held in October and November of that year in 

Anaktuvuk Pass, Anchorage, Atqasuk, Barrow, Fairbanks, and Nuiqsut. In undertaking a 

Supplemental IAP/EIS, BLM is not required to conduct formal scoping (40 CFR 1502.9(c)(4)). 

Nevertheless, in issuing a Notice of Intent to prepare the Supplement, BLM invited the public 

to comment on issues of interest, particularly recommended mitigation measures. 

The issues addressed in this Supplement are the same as those identified for the Amended

IAP/EIS and include: impacts to water resources; waterfowl, shorebirds, and their habitats; 

caribou, polar bear, and grizzly bear; wilderness values and NPR-A Special Areas; cultural 

resources; subsistence; and society, public health, and economics; as well as the negative and 

positive impacts associated with oil and gas exploration and development (including 

transportation and other oil- and gas-related infrastructure) and questions revolving around 

existing and proposed new stipulations and Required Operating Procedures (ROPs). 

The NSB, our cooperating agency in this Supplement, and NSB residents in previous public 

testimony related to oil and gas development have highlighted public health as an area in need 

of systematic attention, especially given residents’ reliance on the subsistence resources of the 

planning area, and as a result BLM, with the assistance of the NSB, has added new information

regarding the state of, and the potential impacts to, public health. Analysis of these impacts is 

also consistent with Section 302 of FLPMA, which outlines BLM’s responsibility to protect 

public health and safety, and Executive Order 12898, which directs agencies to address 

Environmental Justice and requires them to identify and address the potential effects, 

including health impacts, of their programs, policies, and activities on minorities and lowincome populations and communities. In addition to providing more information on the 

potential impacts to public health, this Supplement, in compliance with NEPA, presents 

potential new mitigation measures to address potential adverse impacts to public health. These 

measures are in addition to the protective measures incorporated in the alternatives themselves 

as lease stipulations and ROPs. This information is presented in separate description and 

analysis sections in Chapters 3 and 4 rather than being presented within the context of other

topics, such as subsistence or sociocultural systems, as has been done previously. 

Chapter I: Introduction 1-12 
Northeast NPR-A Supplemental IAP/EIS 

1.12 PREVIEW OF THE REMAINDER OF THE 

SUPPLEMENTAL IAP/EIS 

As with the Amended IAP/EIS, the format of this IAP/EIS follows guidance provided by CEQ 

and BLM NEPA Handbook H-1790-1 (USDOI BLM 1988). Figure 1-1 shows the types of 

information found in the IAP/EIS, and where it is located. 

1-13 Chapter I: Introduction 
Northeast NPR-A Supplemental IAP/EIS 

Figure 1-1. How This Supplemental IAP/EIS is Organized 

VOLUME 1 

Chapter 1−Introduction: Summarizes the purpose of and need for this Supplemental 

IAP/EIS, and decisions to be made 

Chapter 2−Alternatives: Describes and compares proposed management alternatives 

Chapter 3−Affected Environment: Presents existing natural and socioeconomic 

resources at the Northeast NPR-A 

VOLUME 2 

Chapter 4−Environmental Consequences (sections 4.1−4.6): Evaluates impacts of the 

alternatives on resources in the Northeast NPR-A and the cumulative and other effects 

relevant to making a decision among the alternatives 

VOLUME 3 

Chapter 4−Environmental Consequences (continued: sections 4.7−4.12). 

Chapter 5−Consultation and Coordination: Describes public and government 

(including tribal) consultation undertaken for this plan, development of alternatives, and 

lists preparers of the Supplemental IAP/EIS 

Appendices 

A ANILCA Section 810 Analysis of Subsistence Impacts 

B Federal, State, and Local Permits and/or Approvals Needed for Oil and Gas 

 Exploration, Development, and Production Activities 

C Essential Fish Habitat Assessment 

D Alternative A Stipulations 

E Alternatives B and C Stipulations and Required Operating Procedures 

F Alternative D Stipulations and Required Operating Procedures 

G Examples of Public Health Mitigation Strategies 

H Scientific, Common, and Iñupiaq Names of Species Listed in Supplemental IAP/EIS 

I Historic Sites 

J BLM Sensitive Species List for Alaska 

K Information, Models, and Assumptions Used to Analyze the Effects of Oil Spills 

Bibliography, Glossary, and List of Acronyms 

VOLUME 4: Maps 

Chapter I: Introduction 1-14