Previously issued oil and gas leases in the White River National Forest
Subtitle: final environmental impact statement
By: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Colorado River Valley Field Office
Contributors: Mendonca, Karl; United States. Bureau of Land Management. Colorado River Valley Field Office; United States. Environmental Protection Agency. Region VIII; Colorado. Division of Natural Resources; Colorado. Parks and Wildlife; White River National Forest (Agency : U.S.); Garfield County (Colo.); Pitkin County (Colo.); Rio Blanco County (Colo.); Glenwood Springs (Colo.); Rifle (Colo.); Carbondale (Colo.); New Castle (Colo.); Parachute (Colo.); Silt (Colo.)
Publisher: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Colorado River Valley Field Office
Published: 2016
Place of publication: [Denver, Colorado?]
Language: eng
Subjects: Oil and gas leases; Forest management; Environmental impact statements; Land use; Planning; Public lands; Management; Environmental aspects
Other titles: Final environmental impact statement for previously issued oil and gas leases on the White River National Forest; EIS for previously issued oil and gas leases in the White River National Forest
Description: This Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been prepared to document and disclose the environmental impacts of reaffirming, modifying, or cancelling 65 previously issues federal fluid minerals leases underlying White River National Forest (WRNF) lands. These leases were issued between 1995 and 2012, and are located in Mesa, Garfield, Pitkin, and Rio Blanco counties. The Forest Service decision that made the 65 parcels considered in this EIS available for oil and gas leasing was documented through the 1993 WRNF Oil and Gas Leasing Record of Decision and reaffirmed in the 2002 White River National Forest Plan. In 2007, in a challenge brought against the issuance of three leases, the Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA) held that before including Forest Service parcels in an oil and gas lease sale the BLM must either formally adopt NEPA analysis completed by the Forest Service or conduct a NEPA analysis of its own (see Board of Commissioners of Pitkin County, 173 IBLA 173 [2007]). The 2007 IBLA decision addressed three leases in the WRNF that were later cancelled; however, the 65 existing leases addressed in this EIS share the same NEPA deficiency. With respect to the 65 leases at issue, the IBLA ruled that although the BLM was a cooperating agency on the 1993 WRNF Oil and Gas Leasing EIS, the BLM did not formally adopt the Forest Service NEPA analysis, and therefore did not comply with its NEPA obligations with respect to the issuance of those leases. Following the IBLA's decision, the BLM determined that the WRNF NEPA analysis conducted for the 65 previously issued leases is no longer adequate due to changes in laws, regulations, policies, and conditions since the earlier EIS was finalized in 1993.
Notes: "August 2016."

"BLM/CO/PL-16/013."

"Cooperating agencies : U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 8 ; Colorado Division of Natural Resources ; Colorado Parks and Wildlife ; U.S. Forest Service (White River National Forest) ; Garfield County ; Mesa County ; Pitkin County ; Rio Blanco County ; City of Glenwood Springs ; City of Rifle ; Town of Carbondale ; Town of New Castle ; Town of Parachute ; Town of Silt"--Page 1.

"Greg Larson, Project Manager ; Karl Mendonca, Field Manager"--Page 1

Includes bibliographical references (pages 6-1-6-26, volume 2) and index.
Table of contents: title: Volume I : Cover through chapter 3.0; title: volume II : Chapters 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, glossary, and index; title: volume III : Appendices.