My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Case No. 3:07-cv-08164-DGC Grand Canyon Trust v. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation December 7 2007
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
5001-6000
>
Case No. 3:07-cv-08164-DGC Grand Canyon Trust v. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation December 7 2007
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/5/2013 2:57:56 PM
Creation date
7/27/2012 3:35:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Case No. 3:07-cv-08164-DGC Grand Canyon Trust v. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation December 7 2007
State
CO
Date
12/7/2007
Title
Case No. 3:07-cv-08164-DGC Grand Canyon Trust v. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation December 7 2007
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Court Documents
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
149
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
1 <br />1] <br />fl <br />1 <br />Il <br />1 adverse modification or, alternatively, offering a reasonable and prudent alternative that <br />2 avoids jeopardy and adverse modification. Id. § 1536(b)(4)(A). <br />3 II. NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT <br />4 Congress enacted NEPA to "promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage <br />5 to the environment." 42 U.S.C.§ 4321. Thus, NEPA requires federal agencies to analyze <br />6 the environmental impacts of a particular action. In addition, agencies must notify the <br />7 public of its actions and allow for public comment on their environmental impacts. <br />8 Agencies must comply with NEPA prior to initiating an action so that the environmental <br />9 impacts can be considered and disclosed to the public during the decision - making process. <br />10 40 C.F.R. §§ 1501.2, 1502.5. <br />11 The cornerstone of NEPA is the environmental impact statement ( "EIS ") that must <br />12 be prepared for all "major federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human <br />13 environment." 42 U.S.C.§ 4332(C). Federal agencies may first prepare an environmental <br />14 assessment ( "EA ") to determine whether a project's environmental impacts are significant. <br />15 Id. § 1508.9. If the EA concludes that a project "may" have a significant impact on the <br />16 environment, then an EIS must be prepared. If not, the federal agency must provide a <br />17 detailed statement of reasons why the project's impacts are insignificant and issue a finding <br />18 of no significant impacts ( "FONSI "). Id. 1508.13. <br />19 In either an EIS or EA, federal agencies must broadly evaluate and disclose the <br />20 environmental impacts of their actions. Federal agencies must not only review the direct <br />21 impacts of their actions, but also analyze indirect and cumulative impacts. Indirect effects <br />22 are those "caused by the action and are later in time or farther removed in distance but are <br />23 still reasonably foreseeable." 40 C.F.R. § 1508.8(b). Cumulative impacts include impacts <br />24 of "other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency <br />25 (Federal or non - Federal) or person undertakes such other actions." 40 C.F.R. § 1508.7. <br />26 NEPA regulations also provide that significant impacts are likely present when wetlands, <br />27 National Parks, or endangered and threatened species or their critical habitat will be <br />28 impacted or when the project violates law or is controversial. 40 C.F.R. § 1508.27(b). <br />Memorandum in Support of Ms.' 4 <br />Motion for Summary Judgment <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.