Land Use Planning and National Environmental Policy Act Compliance within Greater Sage-Grouse Approved Resource Management Plans and Plan Amendments Decision Area

IM 2016-105
Instruction Memorandum

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240-0036
http://www.blm.gov

June 3, 2016

 

In Reply Refer To:

1610 (210) P

 

EMS TRANSMISSION 06/07/2016

Instruction Memorandum No. 2016-105

Expires: 09/30/2019

To:                   SD’s (CA, CO, ID, MT, NV, OR, UT, WY)

From:               Assistant Director, Resources and Planning

Subject:          Land Use Planning and National Environmental Policy Act Compliance within Greater Sage-Grouse Approved Resource Management Plans and Plan Amendments Decision Area

Program Areas:   All Resource Programs, National Environmental Policy Act and Land Use Planning

Purpose: This Instruction Memorandum (IM) sets forth guidance on how the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) will support Greater Sage-Grouse (GRSG) conservation and achieve consistency with the June 2014 (Lander) and September 2015 Greater Sage-Grouse (GRSG) Approved Resource Management Plans and Plan Amendments (GRSG RMPs and Amendments) when conducting land use planning and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analyses in support of implementation-level activities.

Policy/Action: BLM State Offices must ensure that ongoing planning efforts support the desired outcomes established by the GRSG conservation strategy.  Additionally, implementation-level activities must conform to the goals, objectives, allocations, and management actions established by the GRSG RMPs and Amendments.

Supporting the GRSG Conservation Strategy

In order to uphold the BLM commitment made in partnership with other Federal and state government agencies  to support GRSG habitat conservation, future land use planning efforts, should take into consideration the most up-to-date GRSG conservation commitments and scientific information to support those commitments.  Changes to the RMP goals and objectives within decision areas of the GRSG Plans and Amendments should uphold the overall conservation strategy and provide commensurate, or when specified or needed, increased protection of GRSG and its habitat.

Resource Management Planning Efforts Already in Progress

BLM State Offices must evaluate all RMP revision and amendment efforts that are already underway within the decision area for the GRSG RMPs and Amendments.  Ongoing RMP revisions and amendments may need modifications in order to ensure that the 2014/2015 GRSG plan decisions are included in the No Action Alternative in NEPA analyses, since the decision included in the GRSG RMPs and Amendments now represent current management.  A proposed plan decision that deviates from the No Action Alternative must disclose in its NEPA analysis whether it would provide commensurate or increased protection of GRSG and its habitat.

In accordance with NEPA, ongoing planning efforts within the 2014/2015 GRSG RMP revision and amendment decision areas for which the BLM has issued a draft plan/EIS prior to the issuance of the GRSG RODs [September 21, 2015, and June 2014] may require supplemental NEPA analysis unless the GRSG planning outcomes were included in the development and analysis of the range of alternatives.  BLM State Offices should coordinate with the Office of the Solicitor in evaluating whether a supplemental NEPA analysis is warranted. 

Implementation Decisions & Using Categorical Exclusions within the Greater Sage-Grouse Decision Area
By regulation and policy (43 CFR § 1610.5–3(a), H-1601), all implementation-level activities for which the BLM has decision-making authority within the GRSG RMPs and Amendments decision areas must conform to the goals, objectives, allocations, and management actions contained in the GRSG RMPs and Amendments and RODs  [See also, BLM Land Use Planning Handbook, H1601-1.]  When conducting implementation-level NEPA analysis within GRSG RMPs and Amendments decision areas, the use of a Categorical Exclusion (CX) may be appropriate.  A proposed action located within GRSG habitat alone is not an extraordinary circumstance that would require preparation of an Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement.  Categorically-excluded actions must conform to GRSG RMPs and Amendments and RODs and any other applicable RMP decisions.

When considering the application of a CX within GRSG RMPs and Amendments decision areas, an Extraordinary Circumstances review is required (43 CFR 46.215).  An Extraordinary Circumstances Worksheet (available in ePlanning) must accompany documentation of use of a CX in GRSG habitat.  The Extraordinary Circumstances worksheet must fully explain the rationale used for determining the absence of extraordinary circumstances.

Timeframe: This Instruction Memorandum (IM) is effective immediately.

Budget Impact: This policy may impact some RMP and implementation-level project budgets. Additional cost may be incurred in order to incorporate and analyze the GRSG RMPs and Amendments outcomes into ongoing planning efforts and for purposes of land use plan conformance requirements for implementation-level projects within GRSG planning areas.

Background: The National Greater Sage-Grouse Planning Strategy was initiated in 2011 in response to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s March 2010 “warranted, but precluded” Endangered Species Act  listing petition decision.  The BLM, in coordination with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, developed a targeted, multi-tiered, coordinated, collaborative landscape-level management strategy, based on the best available science, which offers the highest level of protection for GRSG in the most important habitat areas.  The GRSG RMPs and Amendments were issued on September 21, 2015 and June 2014.  The targeted protections afforded in these plans not only protect the GRSG and its habitat, but also over 350 wildlife species associated with the sagebrush-steppe ecosystem, which is widely recognized as one of the most imperiled of its kind in North America.

The GRSG RMPs and Amendments include management direction that avoids and minimizes additional disturbance in GRSG habitat management areas as well as targets restoration and improvements to the most important areas of habitat.

The efforts of the BLM, in coordination with the Forest Service on National Forest System lands within the remaining range of the species, constitutes a coordinated strategy for conserving the GRSG and the sagebrush-steppe ecosystem on the majority of Federal lands on which the species depends.  These decisions complement those implemented by Federal agencies through the Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy and the Sage Grouse Initiative as well as those implemented by state and local governments, private land owners, and other partners.

Manual/Handbook Sections Affected:  None.

Coordination: The Division of Decision Support, Planning & NEPA (WO-210) coordinated preparation of this IM with the Division of Forest, Rangeland, Riparian and Plan Conservation (WO-220),  the Division of Fish and Wildlife Conservation (WO-230),  the Directorates of Resources and Planning (WO-200) and Energy, Minerals and Realty Management (WO-300),  and the Department of the Interior (DOI) Office of the Solicitor.

Contact: Please direct any questions concerning this IM to Leah Baker, Division Chief, Decision Support, Planning and NEPA (WO-210), at 202-912-7282.

 

 

Signed by:                                                                   Authenticated by:

Kristin Bail                                                                  Robert M. Williams

Acting, Assistant Director                                          Division of IT Policy and Planning,WO-870

Resources and Planning

 

 

1 Attachment

    1 – Extraordinary Circumstances Worksheet (2 pp)