Laserfiche WebLink
Appeal Deciding Officer 24 <br />40 CFR § 1502.22 — Incomplete or unavailable information — When an agency is evaluating <br />reasonably foreseeable significant adverse effects on the human environment in an <br />environmental impact statement and there is incomplete or unavailable information the agency <br />shall always make clear that such information is lacking. <br />42 U.S.C. § 7475(a) Major emitting facilities on which construction is commenced No major <br />emitting facility on which construction is commenced after August 7, 1977, may be constructed <br />in any area to which this part applies unless - (3) the owner or operator of such facility <br />demonstrates, as required pursuant to section 74100) of this title, that emissions from <br />construction or operation of such facility will not cause, or contribute to, air pollution in excess <br />of any (A) maximum allowable increase or maximum allowable concentration for any pollutant <br />in any area to which this part applies more than one time per year, (B) national ambient air <br />quality standard in any air quality control region, or (C) any other applicable emission standard <br />or standard of performance under this chapter; <br />42 U.S.C. § 7475 (e) Analysis; continuous air quality monitoring data; regulations; model <br />adjustments (1) The review provided for in subsection (a) of this section shall be preceded by an <br />analysis in accordance with regulations of the Administrator, promulgated under this subsection, <br />which may be conducted by the State (or any general purpose unit of local government) or by the <br />major emitting facility applying for such permit, of the ambient air quality at the proposed site <br />and in areas which may be affected by emissions from such facility for each pollutant subject to <br />regulation under this chapter which will be emitted from such facility. <br />Discussion: <br />Air quality impacts were addressed at many points in the record. The deciding officer made <br />several findings in the DN/FONSI (DN/FONSI, page 5): <br />"The EA (Section 3.2) documents issues related to air quality standards and possible <br />effects globally and locally from climate change. A few commenters undoubtedly would like to <br />see modeling impacts of criteria pollutants and climate change from this project. <br />Criteria pollutants for this area were previously modeled under the North Fork Coal EIS which <br />this EA is tiered to. Regulations at 40 CFR 1502.14- 1502.16 describe that a comparison between <br />the existing or baseline condition and the proposed activities be described "as is necessary to <br />support the comparisons " and `provide a clear basis for choice by the decision maker ". This <br />has been sufficiently described to me as extending the existing condition which is in compliance <br />with Clean Air Act permits issued to OMLLC. The addition of the lease modification area would <br />add only about 2 days to 3 weeks worth of mining to the life -of -mine depending upon which mine <br />plan is approved. However, leasing the small amount of reserves on the modification would <br />facilitate the mining of an additional 0.52 million tons of coal on the parent lease. There is <br />disagreement between BLM and OMLLC whether this quantity of coal would be mined on the <br />parent lease with or without the lease modification; however, effects were disclosed in the EA <br />(Section 3.2) such that either scenario may apply. The permitted baseline condition such as the <br />rate of mining and mining systems will not change. Additionally, trends in air quality and <br />climate change impacts have been identified. " <br />