WSP05183 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

which would be involved in the pro- posed action should it be implemented. 42 U.S.C. section 4332(2) 22. Construction of the Narrows based on an inadequate FES without compliance with NEPA will deprive plaintiffs of life, liberty and property without due process of law as guaranteed by Fifth Amendment of the U. S. Constitution. 23. Defendants in responding to comments made by various agencies and these plaintiffs dismissed the comments without a full or adequate disclosure of the environmental considerations raised by governmental agencies and these plaintiffs. As an example, Region VIII of the United States Environmental Protection Agency reviewed DES and stated that, lithe conclusions drawn in DES concerning future water quality of the South Platte River and eutrophication of the reservoir cannot be made on the basis of the data presented in the impact statement (DES)" and' further the Regional Administrator of Region VIII stated that, "from the information provided in the draft EIS, EPA has not found it possible to determine the environmental impacts that would result from construction of the Narrows Unit. For this reason, we are giving the Narrows Unit EIS a category 3 (inadequate) rating." Chapter 11, pages 68 and 69, of FES. The response in FES was inadequate' but EPA's official comments on FES are not available at this time and upon information and belief it is alleged that said comments will not be filed with the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) in time for review prior to the thirty-day moratorium on project activity imposed by CEQ quidelines. Another example of defendants' failure to provide an ade- quate DES and to respond to the comments of a governmental agency to DES are the comments made by Division of Water Resources of the State of Colorado dated February 17, 1976 -9-