Laserfiche WebLink
or capturing of methane gas - which, in addition to being alternatives to the current project <br />configuration, could also be viewed as mitigation measures- would be "very effective in <br />reducing greenhouse gas emissions," but rejected both mitigation options because: (1) flaring is <br />not approved by MSHA; and (2) the methane, which is subject to federal gas lease terms, was <br />not under lease at the time of the FEIS, making its beneficial use through capturing impossible. <br />Project FEIS at 61. The FEIS contains no further discussion of the specific environmental <br />benefits of these respective forms of mitigation. <br />The Forest Service's analysis of and discussion of the effectiveness of both methane <br />flaring and methane capture is plainly inadequate for the numerous reasons discussed above. <br />Flaring may well be approved by MSHA, despite Mr. Davis's uninformed response upon which <br />the SIR relies. See discussion above. Further, BLM and the Forest Service have approved <br />capture of methane on federal lands in other cases, and there is no reason they could not do so <br />here, particularly since the Forest Service is currently pursuing that option. By failing to analyze <br />the benefits (and effects) of adopting either mitigation measure, the Forest Service violated <br />NEPA. <br />II. THE FOREST SERVICE'S RELIANCE ON THE SUPPLEMENTAL <br />INFORMATION REPORT TO CORRECT NEPA DEFICIENCIES VIOLATES <br />NEPA AND THE FOREST SERVICE HANDBOOK. <br />The reliance on the May 7, 2008 SIR to correct deficiencies in the original FEIS violates <br />NEPA and the Forest Service Handbook (FSH). Not only was the SIR not circulated for public <br />comment and scrutiny, it is not based on high quality information and scientific analysis required <br />by NEPA and failed to appropriately correct deficiencies in the FEIS. <br />The FSH and NEPA's implementing regulations are clear that an EIS must be based on <br />"high quality information" and "accurate scientific analysis." FSH 1909.15, 15, 40 C.F.R. <br />§ 1500.1(b), 40 CFR § 1502.15 and 16. Indeed, Federal agencies must "insure the professional <br />APPEAL OF E SEAM METHANE DRAINAGE WELLS PROJECT, APRIL 28, 2008 PAGE 34