Laserfiche WebLink
Council Fund v. Brong, 492 F.3d 1120, 1133 (9th Cir. 2007) (internal quotation marks and <br />citation omitted) (emphasis in original). This project alone" as well as when combined with just <br />a few other projects of this size, would meaningfully increase the annual greenhouse gas impact <br />of the entire nation. For the Project FEIS to play its critical role of fostering "informed <br />decisionmaking and informed public comment," Utahns for Better Transp. v. U.S. Dep 't of <br />Transp., 305 F.3d 1152, 1166 (10th Cir. 2002), it must contain a substantive discussion of the <br />impacts of climate change on the environment and an acknowledgement that this much methane <br />emission would contribute materially to the problem. To do less would be to invite this agency <br />and others to participate blindly in the piecemeal acceleration of fundamental changes to the <br />world in which we live. <br />Worse, the Forest Service's conclusion that the project would create a "non-significant" <br />effect on the human environment not only conflicts with Governor Bill Ritter, Jr.'s, recent <br />Executive Order and Climate Action Plan, but ignores these groundbreaking policy statements. <br />Neither the Project FEIS nor the ROD addresses the Colorado Climate Action Plan, nor do they <br />accurately assess the significance of the Project's increased methane emissions in this context. <br />Without an analysis of the Project's impacts on global warming, the Forest Service's <br />decision fails to meet NEPA's requirements. <br />B. The Project FEIS Failed To Satisfy The Procedural Requirements Of 40 <br />C.F.R. § 1502.22(B). <br />In refusing to conduct a meaningful analysis of the Project's impact on climate change, <br />the Forest Service summarily concluded that insufficient information exists to fully analyze and <br />assess the global warming effects, thereby failing to satisfy the requirements of 40 C.F.R. <br />§ 1502.22(b). Where information is not available concerning a reasonably foreseeable <br />significant environmental consequence, 40 C.F.R. § 1502.22(b) requires an EIS to include (1) a <br />APPEAL OF E SEAM METHANE DRAINAGE WELLS PROJECT, APRIL 28, 2008 PAGE 9