Laserfiche WebLink
integrity, including scientific integrity, of the discussions and analyses" in NEPA documents. 40 <br />CFR § 1502.24. Therefore, if an FEIS is not based on "high quality information" and "accurate <br />scientific analysis," and does not "insure the professional integrity" or "scientific integrity" of <br />the document, then that FEIS must be rewritten or supplemented to correct these deficiencies. <br />Accordingly, if an FEIS is rewritten to correct deficiencies or "fix" flaws, then that document <br />must also be prepared and circulated in the same fashion as a draft and final document. See 40 <br />CFR § 1502.9(b)(4) (supplemental EISs must be "prepare[d], circulate[d], and file[d]...in the <br />same fashion as a draft and final statement[.]" Such a procedure is mandated by CEQ NEPA <br />regulations, as well as Forest Service notice and comment regulations (e.g.. 36 CFR § 215). <br />Here, the Regional Office of the Forest Service ruled on February 13, 2008 that the <br />GMUG National Forest had failed to adequately analyze and assess "the viability of methane <br />flaring." See Exh. 8. The Regional Office also directed the Supervisor of the GMUG National <br />Forest to "further evaluate the feasibility of methane flaring as an alternative." Id. In this case, <br />the Regional Office clearly found that the FEIS had failed to adequately analyze and assess <br />methane flaring as an alternative. In other words, the FEIS was deficient under CEQ NEPA <br />regulations in that it failed to adequately analyze and assess alternatives. <br />Unfortunately, rather than rewrite or supplement the FEIS to include the information and <br />analysis that was originally required, Supervisor Richmond instead inappropriately relied upon <br />an in-house and post-hoc SIR to correct the NEPA document. The report was issued the same <br />day as Supervisor Richmond's March 7, 2008 ROD and was attached as Appendix D. However, <br />no attempt was made to solicit public comment on the Report and the information and analysis in <br />the report was not incorporated into the original FEIS following proper NEPA and FSH <br />procedures. <br />APPEAL OF E SEAM METHANE DRAINAGE WELLS PROJECT, APRIL 28, 2008 PAGE 35