Laserfiche WebLink
In similar circumstances, the Forest Service has held that deficient NEPA documents <br />cannot be fixed without circulating any corrected document for public review and comment. In a <br />2003 appeal decision regarding a timber sale in the Black Hills National Forest of South Dakota, <br />the Regional Office ordered the Forest Supervisor to circulate "for public comment" a section of <br />an EA that was revised by an additional "Soils and Water" report. See letter of Greg Griffith, <br />Appeal Deciding Officer to Jeremy Nichols and Brian Brademeyer (June 9, 2003) at page 4 of 18 <br />(concluding that report "should have been made available for public comment prior to the <br />issuance of a new decision"), attached as Exh. 38. In that case, the Black Hills National Forest <br />relied on a "Soils and Water" report to correct deficiencies in an EA. That report was not <br />circulated for public review and comment, prompting a rebuke from the Regional Office. <br />Similar to that case, the GMUG National Forest is relying on a SIR to correct deficiencies in the <br />FEIS. The Regional Office must similarly respond by requiring the GMUG National Forest to <br />circulate the SIR for public review and comment, and to issue a new decision based on <br />consideration of this comment. <br />Because the SIR was not prepared or circulated in the same fashion as a draft and final <br />document in accordance with the CEQ NEPA regulations and the FSH, the GMUG National <br />Forest has failed to ensure the decision to implement the Project is the result of accurate <br />scientific analysis, high quality information, and public scrutiny. The Forest has thus, failed to <br />implement the most essential components of NEPA. <br />III. THE PROJECT DECISION VIOLATES THE CLEAN AIR ACT. <br />The Forest Service erred in not requiring that the Project be properly permitted for its <br />methane emissions. The federal Clean Air Act applies to methane emissions, and methane <br />emissions of the Project as approved will exceed state-established thresholds for a Prevention of <br />APPEAL OF E SEAM METHANE DRAINAGE WELLS PROJECT, APRIL 28, 2008 PAGE 37