Laserfiche WebLink
EPA's comments indicate that the Forest Service limited the "purpose" of the project to the <br />narrow goal of "maintain[ing] health and safety in the underground mine." See Exh. 4, at un- <br />numbered page 2. This definition of the project's "purpose" is arbitrarily narrow and ignores the <br />agency's own definition of the project's purpose. Indeed, the Project FEIS itself stated that that <br />the purpose of the project is, among other things, to "protect public health and safety, to prevent <br />the loss of leased federal coal resources, and to facilitate safe and efficient production of <br />compliant and super compliant coal reserves." Project FEIS at 2. A methane-capture alternative, <br />which would protect public health and safety from the impacts of global warming and air <br />pollution while facilitating efficient coal production, is fully consistent with these goal S.22 <br />In sum, the Forest Service must analyze an alternative of methane capture, given that it is <br />practical to implement, that legal complexities can be overcome, as they have been elsewhere, <br />that economic costs are not a bar, and that capture is consistent with the project's purpose.`3 <br />3. The Forest Service Must Analyze Flaring and Capture Alternatives <br />Even If They Are Beyond Its Authority to Implement. <br />The Forest Service declined to fully analyze an alternative to capture and use methane in <br />part because "some of the components of the capture/use of methane concept are outside of the <br />FS control as they are tied to national policy or direction." Project FEIS at S-1 1, 44. Federal law <br />is clear, however, that the Forest Service may not refuse to evaluate a methane capture (or <br />methane flaring) alternative by claiming that implementing methane capture would be outside its <br />jurisdiction. As the EPA stated in its comments, the Council on Environmental Quality's <br />zz Similarly, the fact that a system for methane capture "was not forwarded as part of the <br />proposal made to meet mine ventilation needs to satisfy MSHA requirements," Project FEIS at <br />44, does not nullify the Forest Service's independent obligation under NEPA to consider <br />methane capture as a reasonable alternative. <br />" Further, based on a review of data from methane gas near the West Elk Mine, EEI <br />Geophysical's John Hempel concluded that there was "no concern about the usability of methane <br />gas [for commercial purposes] in this area." EEI Geophysical Report at 4-5. <br />APPEAL OF E SEAM METHANE DRAINAGE WELLS PROJECT, APRIL 28, 2008 PAGE 31