2011-11-14_REVISION - C1981022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Appeal Deciding Officer 24 40 CFR § 1502.22 – Incomplete or unavailable information – When an agency is evaluating reasonably foreseeable significant adverse effects on the human environment in an environmental impact statement and there is incomplete or unavailab le information the agency shall always make clear that such information is lacking. 42 U.S.C. § 7475(a) Major emitting facilities on which construction is commenced No major emitting facility on which construction is commenced after August 7, 1977, may be constructed in any area to which this part applies unless - (3) the own er or operator of such facility demonstrates, as required pursuant to section 7410(j) of this title, t hat emissions from construction or operation of such facility will not cause, or c ontrib ute to, air pollution in excess of any (A) maximum allowable increase or maximum allowable concentration for any pollutant in any area to which this part applies more than one time per year, (B) national ambient air quality standard in any air qualit y control region, or (C) any other applicable emission standard or standard of performance under this chapter; 42 U.S.C. § 7475 (e) Analysis; continuous air quality monitoring data; regulations; model adjustments (1) The review provided for in subsection (a) of this section shall be preceded by an analysis in accordance with regulations of the Administrator, promulgated under this subsection, which may be conducted by the State (or any general purpose unit of local government) or by the major emitting fac ility applying for such permit, of the ambient air quality at the proposed site and in areas which may be affected by emissions from such facility for each pollutant subject to regulation under this chapter which will be emitted from such facility. Discus sion: Air quality impacts were addressed at many points in the record. The deciding officer made several findings in the DN/FONSI (DN/FONSI, page 5): “The EA (Section 3.2) documents issues related to air quality standards and possible effects globally a nd locally from climate change. A f ew commenters undoubtedly would like to see modeling impacts of criteria pollutants and climate change from this project. Criteria pollutants for this area were previously modeled under the North Fork Coal EIS which this EA is tiered to. Regulations at 40 CFR 1502.14 -1502.16 describe that a comparison between the existing or baseline condition and the proposed activities be described “as is necessary to support the comparisons” and “provide a clear basis for choice by the decision maker”. This has been sufficiently described to me as exte nding the existing condition which is in compliance with Clean Air Act permits issued to OMLLC. The addition of the lease modification area w ould add only about 2 days to 3 weeks worth of m ining to the life -of -mine depending upon which mine plan is approve d. However, leasing the small amount of reserves on the mo dification would facilitate the mining of an additional 0.52 million tons of coa l on the parent lease. There is disagreement betwee n BLM and OMLLC whether this quantity of coal would be mined on the parent lease with or without the lease modi fication; however, effects were disclosed in the EA (Section 3.2) such that either sc enario may apply. The permitted baseline condition such as t he rate of mining and mining systems will not change. Additionally, trends in air quality and climate change impacts have been identified.”