Podcast: NPR-A: the plan, the planner, the process

The best laid plans don’t happen by accident, and they require some very skilled planners to lay them out.  We sat down with Stephanie Rice recently to go over the planning effort for the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska Integrated Activity Plan and to get a glimpse into what makes Stephanie tick.

TRANSCRIPT

Jim Hart (Host): Welcome to the BLM Alaska Frontiers podcast, I'm Jim Hart. Development in the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, also known as the NPR-A, can be a complex concept to tackle. Today, we'll visit with Stephanie Rice, the BLM Alaska planner who led the environmental analysis for the petroleum reserve's new integrated activity plan, or IAP.


The NPR-A doesn't use traditional land use plans because it's exempt from certain planning regulations found in the Federal Land Policy Management Act. Originally called the Naval Petroleum Reserve number four, it was set aside as an emergency oil supply for the U.S. Navy by President Harding in 1923. In 1976, The Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act gave the BLM the task of managing the newly renamed National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska. The integrated activity plan provides guidelines for how oil and gas production can proceed in concert with protection of other important resource values. Her work has far reaching potential effects, both economically and ecologically, Stephanie, thanks for joining us. How are you doing? 

Stephanie Rice (Guest): I'm doing great. Thanks, Jim. How are you doing? 

Hart: Great. So, Stephanie, how long have you been a planner? 

Rice: I've been a planner for just over four years now. 

Hart: And what did you do before you came to the BLM? 

Rice: Before I came to BLM, I was an active duty Air Force officer and I did criminal investigations and counterintelligence work for the Air Force. 

Hart: That's a striking contrast, working as a military officer for the Air Force and then going into the BLM as a planner. How was the transition? 

Rice: You know, Jim, honestly, the thing that I find most striking about my new career with BLM is how similar it is and how much my old skill sets transfer to planning. You know, one of the things that I have noticed is that everything runs on relationships. And so, all of the skills that I developed in dealing with people and in negotiating solutions to complex problems that I used in the military are very applicable to my work in the BLM. 

Hart: What are some of your favorite successes? 

Rice: You know, my favorite part of my new job is when I'm dealing with stakeholders and they ask me for something that I can give them through the planning process. That's that's my favorite success story, is when I can negotiate some sort of compromise between people with these very disparate viewpoints. And it's something that everyone can live with, even if they're not completely happy with, it meets their needs. And so that is my favorite part of the job when I can do that.

Hart: And that brings up a really good point. Your work involves one of the most unique areas that the BLM manages. And there are some people who believe that there shouldn't be any development in the NPA. But that's not really an option, is it?

Rice: That's correct. According to the Naval Petroleum Reserves Protection Act, which is the law that governs the management of the NPR-A, the BLM is required to have a leasing and development program in the spring. And so we can't consider an alternative where we do not have a program like that. 

Hart: And that doesn't mean that it's wide open. You can drill wherever you want, whenever you want. Right, there are controls in place? 

[Stephanie Rice (Guest)]: Yeah, that is absolutely correct. That same law, the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act, also requires that the BLM provide maximum protection to important surface resources. And these surface resources can be things from subsistence species that are important to local communities, cultural heritage sites, important rivers. And so these, you know, the BLM is required to provide extra protection for these resources in the area. 

[Jim Hart (Host)]: So what's your greatest motivation or concern when you're generating an environmental impact statement?

Rice: One of the things that I work towards most heavily when I am managing an EIS is stakeholder outreach. There are a lot of people, particularly when it comes to the NPR-A, that have very strong opinions about how it should be managed and they often have very good input to the planning process. And so one of the things that motivates me the most is conducting stakeholder outreach in a timely and efficient manner and actually incorporating the suggestions that we get if we can. 

Hart: So I've noticed when a draft EIS is presented, there's a range of alternatives to the proposal. What's the purpose of having that range of alternatives? 

Rice: So the range of alternatives can serve different purposes depending on the type of planning effort that we're doing. So, when we're talking about the overarching plan for the NPR-A, the range of alternatives often serves as kind of like a set of bookends where you've got a very pro conservation alternative on one end, and then you have a very pro-development alternative on the other end. 

So, the range of alternatives is sort of like the spectrum where the final decision can be anywhere in that spectrum. 

Hart: People sometimes take a look at the no-action alternative and the alternative that's really, really pro production, and they say, "Well, those have no chance of ever being approved. They're just throw away alternatives." Is that really the case? 

Rice: No, that's not correct, particularly when you're talking about a land-use-plan-level planning effort. And so, in this case with the integrated activity plan, we do have these two alternatives there that are at the extreme ends of conservation and development. And they're not throwaway alternatives. They just sort of constrain the analysis to a spectrum that is that we can legally select from. And the final alternative often does not look like one of the, or exactly like one of the alternatives that was analyzed in the EIS. There are always changes that are made between draft and final to the preferred alternative based on public comments. 

Hart: And that's an important part, too, isn't it, that public comments actually do have a major role to play in BLM planning efforts? 

Rice: Yeah, that's absolutely true. And particularly when we're talking about public comments that we receive between the draft and the final EIS. The BLM is required to respond in writing to all comments that we receive by mail that are submitted online and that are spoken at public meetings. And so in the final EIS, there is actually an appendix where every comment that we receive during the public comment period is listed there in that appendix with the BLM written response. 

Hart: So how many alternatives are you required to consider? 

Rice: So Jim, NEPA only requires consideration of two alternatives, and that is the proposed action and the no-action alternative. However, we're also required to consider a broad range of alternatives, so we often consider more than two. The ideal number of alternatives is somewhere between three and five. So, we want to make sure that we are considering a broad range of alternatives and looking at all of our options. But we don't want to have so many alternatives in there that the analysis becomes unwieldy. So, we often try and design the alternatives to be kind of generic, where the final preferred alternative will include elements of the range. 

Hart: So when you're working on an EIS, what does the typical day for Stephanie Rice look like?

Rice: Well, there's a lot of office time and there's a lot of time spent going through emails. But the majority of my time is taken up with talking to people. So, I'm either talking to stakeholders and getting their input on talking to management about different options to go forward, or I'm talking to our contractor about the schedule and about what deliverable I can expect next. I'm organizing our interdisciplinary team to be ready for reviews, or to answer questions for the primary authors I'm doing. I'm working with our contractor to do public outreach. If we're getting ready to go out into the public to do meetings, for example, during the scoping process of the year or during the draft comment period.

So most of my day is taken up with talking to people. 

Hart: So all in all, it sounds like you have a pretty full plate. How do you like it so far? 

Rice: You know, I do really like this job, Jim. I feel very strongly about public land management. And this is a position where I actually get to have a seat in the table at the table where these decisions are made. 

Hart: So, what's the one thing you want people to know about planning in the BLM? 

Rice: So, the one thing that I would like the public to understand is that planning is about compromise. There are a range of competing interests the BLM has to has to balance when making its decision. And so, our our goal is always to to get to a point where we have negotiated a reasonable compromise between all of these competing interests. And so, at the end of the day, no one got everything that they wanted, but everyone got something. 

Hart: That's a great point, Stephanie. Well, thanks a lot for your time. I appreciate you coming on BLM Alaska Frontiers podcast. And thanks for coming to work for the BLM.

Rice: Thanks, Jim. It's great to be here. 

Hart: That concludes this Frontier's podcast. Make sure you check out the BLM Alaska Facebook page and stay up to date on everything from environmental work to permitting conveyances and more. The Frontiers podcast and a production of the BLM Alaska Office of Communications.