With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". simply not be available until after BLM issues leases and the lessees determine where, when and how they propose to conduct their field activities. (Fed. Defs.’ Mem. in Opp’n to Pis.’ Mot. for Partial Summ. J. on Counts II-IY and VII-VIII of the First Am. Compl. & in Supp. of Defs.’ Mot. for Summ. J. (“Defs.’ Opp’n & Mem. in Supp.”) at 20.) Where an agency administering oil and gas leasing on federal lands “chooses not to retain the authority to preclude all surface disturbing activities, then an EIS assessing the full environmental consequences of leasing must be prepared at the point of commitment — when the leases are issued.” Sierra Club v. Peterson, 717 F.2d 1409, 1415 (D.C.Cir.1983); see also Wyoming Outdoor Council v. United States Forest Service, 165 F.3d 43, 49 (D.C.Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>); Bob Marshall Alliance v. Hodel, 852 F.2d

A: holding under pre1994 law that statute of limitations does not allow party to avoid obligation to comply with previous order
B: holding that the fact that the sale may not be fully consummated does not prevent a determination that the appeal is moot because section 363m does not require the purchaser to take irreversible steps consummating the sale before the absence of a stay will render an appeal moot
C: holding that point of irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources and concomitant obligation to fully comply with nepa do not mature until leases are issued
D: holding nonparty department of mental health had standing to appeal commitment order regarding person found not guilty by reason of insanity because department had direct interest that was affected by commitment order and because employees of the department conceivably could be held in contempt of court for failing to comply with the order
C.