The BLM Big Horn Basin Buffalo RMPEIS Projects by dav22810


									The BLM Big Horn Basin &
Buffalo RMP/EIS Projects
         Understanding the Planning
          Process and Participating
              More Effectively
Petroleum Association of Wyoming – Public Lands Committee
                   Cheyenne, Wyoming
                       2 March 2010

 InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC                 1

The views and opinions expressed in this
 presentation are solely those of the author,
 and do not necessarily represent the views
 and opinions of InterTech Environmental &
 Engineering, LLC staff and/or clients.

  InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC   2
      Understanding the BLM RMP
    Planning Process & Participating
            More Effectively
   Nuts and Bolts of the RMP/EIS Planning
   Wyoming RMP Initiative
   RMPs and Domestic Energy Demand
   Planning Issues Identified for the Bighorn Basin
    and Buffalo RMPs
   Effective Participation in the Planning Process
   Questions/Comments

InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC         3
                   Nuts and Bolts of the
                  RMP Planning Process
   July 2009: 74% of RMPs Completed
    •   85 new or revised completed in past 5 years
    •   36 major land use plans in progress
    •   41 land use plans may need revision
   March 2-6, 2009: BLM National Land Use
    Planning Conference, Portland, OR
    •   Theme: “Keeping Pace with Change”
          o   Sustainable Resource Planning & Decision-Making
          o   Collaborating with Cooperators and Forming

    InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC              4
               Nuts and Bolts of the
              RMP Planning Process
  BLM Land Use Planning Guided by:
 FLPMA of 1976, As Amended (Publ. Law 94-
  579), U.S.C. §§1701 - 1782
 Public Lands Planning, 43 C.F.R. §§ 1601 et
  seq. and §§ 1610 et seq.
 Land Use Planning Manual and Handbook
  (BLM Manual Section1601 and H-1601-1)
 NEPA and BLM NEPA Handbook (H-1790-1)
 Planning for Fluid Mineral Resources
  Handbook (H-1624-1)

InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC      5
               Nuts and Bolts of the
              RMP Planning Process



InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC   6
                          Wyoming RMP Initiative
                             2002 - present
 RMP/EIS                    Buffalo        Lander         Pinedale     Rawlins    Kemmerer      Casper

  Surface       3.2M         0.8M            2.5M           0.9M         3.5M       1.4M         1.4M

Min. Estate     4.2M         4.8M            2.7M           1.1M         4.5M       1.6M         4.7M

    NOI                    Nov. 2008     Feb. 2007        Feb. 2002   Feb. 2002   June 2003    June 2003
Letters1        3,367         710                                       26,745       54           44
 Comments       1,060         196                          55,769       10,496      1015         200+
  Form Ltr.     3,302         605                           Unk.        22,950        ?            ?

    CAs           21          24              31                          XX         13           12

 NOA/Draft    4Q 2010      4Q 2010          20092         Feb. 2007   Dec. 2004   July 2007    July 2006
 Final/ROD     3Q 2011     4Q 2011           2010         Nov. 2008   Dec. 2008   Aug. 20082   Dec. 2007
 Approx. $$     3.7M           -                  -           -            -          -            -
                                       1Initial   scoping period; 2Scheduled

       InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC                                                       7
                   Nuts and Bolts of the
                  RMP Planning Process
    Issues Identified as Causing Schedule Delay
   Multiple review cycles
   Other non-RMP commitments of RMP Project Mgr.
   Inadequate studies (e.g., air, wilderness) and/or GIS
   Issues with quality of analysis or alternatives (third-party
   Changes in BLM policy and/or guidance.
                                                     Source: EMPS Inc. 2009

    InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC                           8
                    RMPs and
              Domestic Energy Demand
   Economic Growth (and Recovery) will drive
    Energy Demand, domestically and globally.
   BLM RMPs have historically and will continue to
    affect socioeconomic growth, locally and
   Balancing values and needs for multiple-use
    land and resource management is complicated.
   More opportunities now than ever before to
    participate effectively in an RMP planning

    InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC    9
Non-fossil energy use grows rapidly, but fossil
 fuels still provide 78 percent of total energy
                   use in 2035
     Quadrillion Cubic Feet

                                                           Liquid Bio-Fuels
                                                                Liquid Fuels

                              20                              Natural Gas

                                                     Source: EIA, Annual Energy Outlook 2010

 InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC                                               10
                         Shale gas and Alaska production offset
                         declines in supply to meet consumption
                             growth and lower import needs

                       20                                                       Shale Gas
Trillion Cubic Feet



                         5                                                     Offshore
                                                                      Associated w/ Oil
                                                                           Net Imports

                                                                       Source: EIA, Annual Energy Outlook 2010

                      InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC                                                 11
     Planning Issues Identified for the
     Bighorn Basin and Buffalo RMPs
           Bighorn Basin                                         Buffalo
   27 Major Issue Areas (BLM)                       27 Major Issue Areas (BLM)
   15 Major Issue Areas (Public                     12 Major Issue Areas (Public
    Scoping)                                          Scoping)
   Climate Change, Watershed &                      Air/Climate, Water, Wetlands,
    Air Management, Energy &                          Energy & Minerals, Biological,
    Minerals, Fire/Fuels, Invasive                    Cultural, Lands & Realty,
    Spp., Biological, Wild Horses,                    Grazing, Invasive Spp.,
    Visual, Cultural/Paleo, Lands &                   Recreation, Travel, Special
    Realty, Grazing, Recreation,                      Designations, Socioeconomics
    Travel, Special Designations,

     InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC                                    12
       Effective Participation in the
          RMP Planning Process
     Keys to the Participatory Process


     Establishing Status
            •   For potential protest (43 C.F.R. §§

InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC            13
     Effective Participation in the
        RMP Planning Process

InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC   14
  Effective Participation in the
     RMP Planning Process
             Appendix A – BLM HB H-1601 -
                Collaborative Planning
   Be inclusive and explicitly acknowledge the interests
    of distant groups, individuals, industry, corporations,
    and other agencies. An effective collaborative
    process for public land planning assures that local,
    regional, and national interests are integrated. Distant
    interests are sought out and encouraged. Effective
    outreach is the best way to get beyond the barriers to
    successful participation. Ensure multiple options for

InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC                 15
      Effective Participation in the
         RMP Planning Process
                 Appendix A – BLM HB H-1601 -
                 Collaborative Planning (cont.)

   Clearly cite the authority of collaborative groups, including that of the
    BLM, and ensure accountability. Participants must understand the
    roles of all parties in the planning effort. If the planning effort
    includes other participants with jurisdictional responsibilities or
    decision-making authority, the responsibilities of each must be
    clearly identified. Decisions made by each jurisdiction must be within
    their own authorities. The BLM retains decision-making authority for
    all decisions on BLM lands. The BLM does not need to be the lead
    agency for agency personnel to participate in collaborative efforts.

    InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC                             16
    Effective Participation in the
       RMP Planning Process
             Appendix A – BLM HB H-1601 -
             Collaborative Planning (cont.)
   Use collaboration to enhance and complement standard public
    involvement requirements. Individuals or groups that were
    unable or chose not to participate in a collaborative process are
    still entitled to full input through legally required public review
    and comment processes.
   Recognize that collaborative processes may not be effective
    everywhere. The BLM manager retains the authority to manage
    the planning process and may choose to move forward with
    traditional planning processes if collaborative efforts are
    ineffective or become unacceptably lengthy.

InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC                                17
      Effective Participation in the
         RMP Planning Process
How a Collaborative Working Group Can
       Help the Planning Process
   Provides new ideas to BLM.
   Communicates issues more clearly to BLM staff
    and other group members.
   Serves as a review of the Action Alternatives.
   Keeps alternatives development on track.
   Fine tunes alternatives and improves credibility.

    InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC          18
           Effective Participation in the
              RMP Planning Process
                     Summary and Conclusions
   Participation should occur during Alternative Development
    Phase of the planning process; that is, through working
    groups made up of individuals with technical skills.
   Participation in collaborative a working group can be critical to
    improving Action Alternatives.
   Industry participation may be better served by engaging with
    the BLM using one voice.
   Comments on Draft RMP/EIS must be focused and specific to
    particular goals, objectives, allocated uses, and management
   Be prepared to provide viable alternatives.

    InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC                      19
•   EMPS Inc., Boulder, Colorado
•   Jim Branch, Exxon Mobil, Piceance Basin
•   Rob Garland, P.G., CEO/President,

    InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC   20
•   Larvie, Veronica, “Nuts and Bolts of Federal Land-Use Planning in
    Infrastructure Siting: Access, Permitting, and Development of
    Energy Projects, “Energy Development: Access, Siting, Permitting,
    and Delivery on Public Lands, Paper No. 7A, Page 2-1 (Rocky Mt.
    Min. L. Fdn. 2009).

    InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC                          21
            Contact Information

                            David P. Kane
InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC
               3821 Beech St.
            Laramie, WY 82070
           Mobile: 307.660.9466

InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC   22
     Questions & Comments

InterTech Environmental & Engineering, LLC   23

To top