Endangered Species Consultation: Pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, formal consultation has taken place between MMS, the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and the National Marine and Fisheries Service (NMFS). This process was initiated by the letters which appear in Appendix E. FWS has provided the current biological opinion which appears in Appendix E. The NMFS has not yet provided MMS with an updated biological opinion which specifically considers proposed Sale No. 111. The NMFS biological opinion, which is due by November 1984, will be included in the FEIS.

Stipulation Development: Stipulations are usually developed on a sale-specific basis for conditions or resources which are identified during the environmental assessment process and which are believed to warrant special regulation. Recommendations for stipulations normally are considered first by the Atlantic OCS Office, in consultation with the MMS District Supervisors and the regional offices of the Fish and Wildlife Service. This is in accordance with the Department of the Interior inter-bureau coordination procedures for OCS leasing activities. Prior to inclusion of the stipulations in the Secretarial Issue Document (SID) and the proposed Notice of Sale, inter-bureau consultation is also undertaken at the headquarters level. The States have an opportunity to help develop and review stipulations during the scoping process, through the Regional Technical Working Group (RTWG), and by commenting on the proposed stipulations included in the DEIS and the proposed Notice of Sale. The final decisions on inclusion of stipulations and the specific requirements of stipulations are made by the Secretary prior to the final Notice of Sale and appear in that document. Stipulations under consideration appear in Section II.B.1.d. The environmental analyses in this document consider the mitigating effect of the proposed stipulations separately from the proposed action in Sections II.B.1.d. and IV.E.

Secretarial Issue Document (SID): Concurrent with the publication of the Final EIS, the Atlantic OCS Region will prepare a SID which outlines environmental and physical factors and other issues, including potential economic and social impacts of the proposal. The SID is used by the Secretary in making the decision on whether to hold the sale and which blocks and stipulations to include in the sale.

Notice of Sale: If the Secretary's preliminary decision is to proceed with proposed Sale No. 111, a proposed Notice of Sale will be issued in June 1985, indicating the blocks proposed for leasing, the stipulations to be made a part of the leases, bidding systems proposed to be used, and any information to lessees deemed necessary for potential bidders. Governors of affected States will be notified directly and are allowed up to 60 days to comment on the proposed lease sale. The Secretary is required to consider the Governor's comments regarding the size, timing, and location of the proposed lease sale. The Secretary shall accept those recommendations that he determines provide for a reasonable balance between the national interest and the well-being of the citizens of the affected State. Further, the Secretary shall communicate to such Governor, in writing, the reasons for his determination to accept or reject such Governor's recommendations, or to implement any alternative means identified in consultation with the Governor to provide for a reasonable balance between the national interest and the well-being of the citizens of the affected State. At least 30 days

prior to the scheduled sale, a final Notice of Sale is published in the Federal Register. Under certain conditions, the Secretary may offer larger leasing units than 5,760 acres, or lease terms longer than 5 years, as established under Section 8(b) of the OCS Lands Act. Larger leasing units may be used if the Secretary finds a larger area is necessary to comprise a reasonable economic production unit, and longer lease terms may be used if the Secretary finds they are necessary to encourage exploration and development because of unusually deep water or other unusually adverse conditions. Considerations such as the deep-water aspect of this sale may warrant the adoption of one or both of these options for some blocks.

Sale: The MMS Atlantic OCS Region will conduct the lease sale, tentatively scheduled for October 1985, determine the highest qualified bidders, and forward its recommendation on the acceptance of bids for approval by the Regional Manager. Once approval has been given, the MMS Atlantic OCS Region will ensure that successful bidders have posted the proper bond and issue the leases.

C. Results of the Scoping Process

Scoping is a means for early identification of what are and what are not the important issues deserving of study in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The Council on Environmental Quality Regulations (40 CFR 1501.7) establish a formal mechanism for agencies, in consultation with affected parties, to identify the significant issues which must be discussed in detail in an EIS and to identify the issues that do not require detailed study. Thus, the scope of the EIS is established before the statement is written. This process is intended to raise the important issues and eliminate those that are not considered significant. The scoping process involves sources of input such as Federal agencies, the affected States, regional and local governments, individual members of the public as well as interest groups, and members of the oil and gas industry. These sources provide input through a variety of means such as formal and informal meetings and written comments. Consultation with other Federal agencies provides information for the description of the environment, analysis of impacts, and the development of the scenario of the EIS (see section V). Written comments and information received in response to the area identification process (Call for Information) and the Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement are analyzed, as well as resource reports requested from other Federal agencies. Issues from prior lease sales in the Planning Area along with the expertise of the MMS staff also contribute to determining the significant issues and alternatives to be considered.

The public scoping meetings for the Mid-Atlantic Sale No. 111 were held in New Brunswick, New Jersey, on April 24, 1984, and in Norfolk, Virginia, on April 26, 1984. Attending in New Brunswick were representatives of the U.S. Coast Guard, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Digicon Geophysical, Inc., and a private citizen. Attending in Norfolk were representatives of Nautilus Press, Inc., the Southeastern Virginia Planning District Commission, and the U.S. Naval Surface Weapons Center in Dahlgren, Virginia.

All issues raised during the scoping process were evaluated by MMS for consideration in the Sale No. 111 Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). The following is a summary of issues and alternatives that were raised and those that are considered in the DEIS and where they are addressed. Following the guidelines in section 1501.7 of the CEQ Regulations we have presented the issues raised in the following categories: (1) Alternatives (including the proposed action), (2) Related actions, (called "connected" and "cumulative" in the regulations) including those actions that are associated with the proposed action or the alternatives), (3) Mitigating measures (including stipulations), and (4) Impacts (including those resources that may be affected by the proposed action or the alternatives). Issues and alternatives that were not considered further after the scoping process are identified also and explained.

(1) Hold the Sale as proposed. Alternative 1, the proposed action, is the offering for sale of 3,566 blocks. Section I.B. describes the area identification process that led to the present configuration of the sale area.

(2) Delay the sale. An alternative to delay the sale
(Alternative 2) is included in the EIS because it is
routinely recommended and included for sales in the
Atlantic OCS Region. For purposes of analysis, a
delay of one year is assumed (section II.B.2.) in
order to incorporate in the EIS the results of ongoing
studies.

(3) Cancel the sale. Alternative 3 is the no action
alternative required by the Council on Environmental
Quality regulations.

(4)

Defer blocks to avoid conflicts with NASA activities.
Alternative 4 consists of deferring 65 blocks
(approximately 2 percent of the sale area). NASA's
Wallops Island Flight Facility at Wallops Island,
Virginia, identified these blocks to be within their
surface-free flight zone. Deferral of these blocks
would eliminate the possibility of an exploratory rig
and/or production platform being damaged by falling
debris from rocket and missile tests conducted by
NASA at Wallops Island.

(5) Defer canyon area blocks to protect biological resources. Alternative 5 would defer 59 whole blocks and 54 partial blocks around canyons. Sixty-three blocks around canyon heads that were deleted from the last mid-Atlantic sale were deleted from this proposal during area identification in March 1984. This alternative is responsive to recommendations from Virginia, New Jersey, Massachusetts,

New York State Department of Environmental Conserva-
tion, Natural Resources Defense Council, National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and the Committee to
Preserve Assateague Island, Inc. The deferral would
provide protection for canyon heads, which are areas
of relatively high biological productivity and species
diversity. Compared to the slope, canyon areas are of
greater importance to tilefish, lobster, and red crab
commercial fishing industries. Blocks were identified
for this alternative using the criteria developed by
NMFS for the Sale No. 82 canyon deferral, and additional
information that has become available since Sale No. 76
concerning biological and physical processes in mid-
Atlantic canyon and intercanyon areas.

b. Alternatives Not Considered in the EIS

(1) The following requested alternatives were resolved in March 1984, during the area identification process by consultation with the interested parties and affected States (see section I.B.).

(a) Deferral of all blocks out to 50 miles from shore
was requested by Virginia, New Jersey, Massachu-
setts, the Natural Resources Defense Council,
Cape May County Planning Board, and Committee to
Preserve Assateague Island, Inc. Maryland
requested deferral of all blocks within 57 miles
of its shoreline. All blocks have been deleted
within 50 miles of shore for all coastal States
except North Carolina, where all blocks within
200-m have been deferred as requested by the state.
For the other affected states a single, nearshore
deferral of 50 miles will be applied, rather than
make an exception for the few additional blocks
requested by Maryland.

(2) Deferral of blocks in the shelf-break zone was proposed by the following for the specified water depths: Natural Resources Defense Council--50 to 300-m isobath, New Jersey--110 to 240-m isobath. The shelfbreak zone encompasses canyonhead areas as well as intercanyon areas. As explained in Section I.C.l.a (4), a canyon area deferral has been developed because of the relatively high biological productivity and species diversity in these areas. That alternative would defer 59 whole blocks and 54 partial blocks in addition to the 63 canyonhead blocks deleted from the proposed sale area during area identification (Section I.B). The remaining blocks in the shelf-break zone are located in intercanyon areas, where biological productivity varies depending on the complexity of the terrain. Species diversity and faunal densities are generally less on the slope than in canyon areas (Section III.B.2). Therefore, an alternative to defer the entire shelf-break zone is not warranted. However, some intercanyon blocks may exhibit the rugged topography and exposed substrate associated with increased biological productivity. To provide adequate protection to biological resources in such cases, a stipulation has been developed for the entire shelf-break zone (Section II.B.1.d).

(3) No leasing beyond the 200-mile U.S. limit until litigation determines its legality was proposed by Massachusetts. This consideration is not part of the EIS process. Prior to Sale No. 111, the Secretary of the Interior will have the opportunity to defer areas from the sale for environmental, legal, or other

reasons.

(4) Deferral of all blocks seaward of the 2,000-m isobath until deepwater technology is improved was recommended