HYDRO26266 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

j-21-1999 7:02PM ~IHON EFFERT P.1; A Hers tit Lau' FROI~IHON Mr. Chuck Williams Page 5 June 21, 1999 ASSOCIATES 303 436 939 D. American Soda's Monitoring Plan Does Not Remedy the BLM and EPA's NEPA Noncomoliance. The BLM acknowledged in the DEIS that baseline monitoring data presented in the DEIS were insufficient and American Soda would be required to submit a more retailed baseline and operations monitoring plan. See DEIS at 4-17. American Soda since has submitted the monitoring plan (attached to the EPA Draft UIC permit).to the BLM, EPA, and other authorising agencies; however, American Soda has not submitted actual baselinr; data, Rather, BLM indicated in the DEIS that such baseline data would be collected after the project was already approved and underway. See DEIS at 4-17. While a detailed monitoring plan is certainly a step in the right direction, it does not either the BLM's or EPA's noncompliance with NEPA. The plan calls for monitoring to determine baseline data; the data will not be available until a year after all public comment periods have closed; the data will not be available until after the agency has already taken the proposed action that it is required to evaluate using the baseline data; and the data will not be available until after the applicant has commenced the project affecting the environment. This methodology is in square contradiction to the requirements and purposes of NE1.~A. As the Supreme Court of the United States has held: NEPA promotes its sweeping commitment to "prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere" by focusing Government and public attention on the environmental effects of proposed agency action. By so f~>cttsing agency attention, NEPA ensures that the agency will not act ~~rt incomplete information, only ra regret its decision after it is too late to correct. Marsh v. Oregon Natural Resources Council, 490 U.S. 360, 371 (19b9) (etnphasi~• added; citation omitted). P. 6 It goes without saying that the data to be collected under the monitoring plan will not be available in time to conduct a baseline analysis for an E1S that has already been completed. Putting the cart before the horse in this way precludes any meaningful pre-decision environmental analysis of the project as required by NEPA. See 40 C.F.R. § 1502.2 ("Environmental impact statements shall serve as the meatts of assessing the environmental impact of proposed agency actions, rather than justifying decisions already made."); id. § 1502.5 ("The statement shall be prepared early enough so that it can serve practically as an important