Dam removal regulatory processes: “In a recent column, Liz Bowen asserted that the California
State Water Resources Control Board’s (Water Board) Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on the Klamath dam removal project is premature because it pre-dates any decision by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) or additional National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) analysis that FERC may require. We consulted with the AECOM technical experts working on the dam removal project (including experts on the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process) in order to clarify for everyone the regulatory
processes and how they all fit together. Here’s how it goes. FERC ultimately decides whether to accept or reject the Klamath River Renewal Corporation’s (KRRC) application to surrender the licenses for the hydroelectric dams and then remove them. And FERC
must receive the final Clean Water Act 401 Certifications from Oregon and California (along with other permits and approvals) before it can issue a decision on KRRC’s application to surrender the licenses. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality already
issued its 401 Certification in September. It was a somewhat easier process in Oregon, which does not have its version of CEQA. The Water Board requires a CEQA analysis, including a Draft and then a Final EIR, before it can decide on issuing its final 401
Certification. Therefore, the entire CEQA process must be completed before FERC makes its final decision on the license surrender. The cart is therefore not before the horse. FERC will commence the NEPA analysis after it has received the required documents
from the Water Board and other parties with regulatory roles to play. One of the reasons this part of the process has confused people is because under the 2010 KHSA, federal legislation would have allowed for a combined CEQA/NEPA study. But that legislation
never passed. Under the current Amended 2016 KHSA, the states and federal government retain their unique authorities and the CEQA/NEPA studies are conducted separately.”
[Siskiyou Daily News, 4/3/19]
http://bit.ly/2YLAHVX
Court examines oil and gas wastewater dumping in Gulf of Mexico: “Green groups yesterday
asked a federal appellate court to review a permit for waste disposal from hydraulic fracturing operations in the Gulf of Mexico. EPA fell short of its duties under the National Environmental Policy Act and the Clean Water Act to study the impact of wastewater
discharges on sea turtles, whales and other ocean species, Center for Biological Diversity attorney Kristen Monsell argued before the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. "I think the judges were a bit skeptical of our position, but we think it's absolutely
the right one under the law here," she said after oral arguments in Houston yesterday. "The agency is allowing oil companies to dump massive amounts of wastewater and fracking chemicals into the Gulf without studying impacts on marine life." Plaintiffs in
the case, which also include the Gulf Restoration Network and the Louisiana Bucket Brigade, filed their lawsuit last year. Judge Edith Jones, a Reagan appointee, led the questioning, Monsell said. The panel, which also comprised Trump picks James Ho and Andy
Oldham, seemed curious about plaintiffs' arguments that EPA should not have relied on an environmental analysis that predated the widespread use of fracking about a decade ago, she said. The oil and gas extraction technique carries different risks than conventional
approaches, Monsell said. "There's been a whole host of new information indicating that the impacts of fracking may be quite significant and cause harm to the marine environment," she said. "EPA just dismissed those entirely." The judges had fewer questions
for opposing counsel, she said. EPA does not comment on pending lawsuits. Lawyers for the American Petroleum Institute, an intervenor in the case, did not respond to a request for comment.”
[E&E News, 4/3/19]
http://bit.ly/2UtoQwE
The butterflies that could stop Trump’s wall: “The butterfly centre, of which Wright is
the director, sits on 110 acres near the southern tip of Texas - an area of low-lying marshes, brush and scrub forests, offering a variety of ecosystems that provide ample habitat for migratory species of all shapes and sizes. It is also flush along the Rio
Grande River, which forms more than 1,260 miles (2027 km) of the 2,000-mile border between the United States and Mexico. That puts the small, private environmental preserve in the centre of a raging debate over immigration and national security - and whether
and where to build Donald Trump's oft-promised border wall. "It is a war zone," Wright says. "That's what the government wants it to appear to be. It's all theatre. So they've got to have all the actors, all the costumes and all the props." It has made her
a hero to environmentalists and immigration activists, and the target of obscenity-laden vitriol from some Trump supporters and wall proponents. Added to the centre's gift shop collection of insect-related knick-knacks and books are displays explaining the
ongoing legal battle and "Ay Mariposa" butterfly T-shirts, captioned "Battle for the Borderlands". More than $100,000 has been raised for the centre's legal fees. "We're suing over the violation of the NEPA [National Environmental Policy Act] and the Endangered
Species Act and the de facto seizure of our private property, as well as multiple other egregious acts by Border Patrol," Wright says.”
[BBC, 4/3/19]
https://bbc.in/2HZAsBs
Elected officials ask Maryland Senate to hear bill on oversight with public-private partnerships:
“With just days left in the 2019 session of the General Assembly, leaders across Montgomery County, Maryland, are trying to push forward legislation regarding major road projects. "It stores practical common sense oversight that many of us feel here it is
getting out of control,” said Del. Jared Solomon, (D) District 18. Elected officials and civic leaders are eager to pass, the P3 Transportation Safeguards Act. The bill would reform what officials say is a flawed process on the public-private partnership to
widen I-495 and I-270. In September 2017, Gov. Hogan announced plans to add four new lanes to I-270 in Montgomery County, the Capital Beltway (I-495), and several other major interstates. In the bill, it states the Maryland Department of Transportation or
MDOT and MDTA delivered a report for the tolled lane project that did not include a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) study. The proposed bill would require a completed environmental impact statement and will aim to protect taxpayers if the private
partner would not be able to complete the project. Local citizens said the state has already widened I-270 and the interstate is still congested. They say it will impact homes, taxpayers, and will place the states credit at risk. “It does not stop anything...but
it makes the process better,” said Brad German, Citizens Against Beltway Expansion Chairman Peter Rahn was in Annapolis on Wednesday and said the NEPA study is underway and is providing information as it becomes available. Community members were held to discuss
the upcoming project.”
[WDVM, 4/4/19]
http://bit.ly/2Vo4QIT
With pipeline permits on hold, Dominion Energy shares news of methane emissions: “On Wednesday,
the Virginia-based energy company met with reporters, editors, publishers and owners of the Charleston Gazette-Mail and its parent company, HD Media, to talk about the company’s initiative to cut down on methane emissions by half across its system in the next
decade, based on figures from 2010. That includes emissions from the 600-mile-long Atlantic Coast Pipeline, which Dominion Energy is involved in building. Company officials said Wednesday they aren’t sure how much methane the natural gas pipeline might emit.
The company is currently appealing the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision to vacate U.S. Forest Service permits required to build the pipeline across the George Washington and Monongahela national forests and Appalachian Trail. The 4th Circuit opinion,
written by Judge Stephanie Thacker and joined by Chief Judge Roger Gregory and Judge James Wynn, noted that the Forest Service had initially asked pipeline developers for multiple routes, and expressed concern about the project’s potential effects on erosion
and endangered species. Later, the Forest Service changed course, saying it didn’t need alternative plans before it authorized the project. The Forest Service violated the National Forest Management Act, National Environmental Policy Act and Mineral Leasing
Act, the judges wrote. The Forest Service should have required pipeline developers to submit alternative routes for the pipeline and demonstrate that the project couldn’t have been built on nonnational forest land. In January, lawyers for Dominion Energy filed
a petition for rehearing en banc, meaning the case would have been heard in front of a panel of all 4th Circuit judges. Bob Orndorff, state policy director for Dominion Energy, blamed the work stoppage on “rogue environmental groups” at the Legislature in
January. Wednesday, he doubled down on the statement, and said the organizations that appealed the project’s permits are “rogue” because they had received out-of-state funding. “They had no connections to West Virginia, they had no concerns for what happens
in West Virginia, nor the population in West Virginia, and they’re all part of the ‘keep it in the ground movement,’ ” Orndorff said. “They want to end or eliminate all fossil fuel in West Virginia and they want to destroy the economy in West Virginia. So,
I thought the word ‘rogue’ was somewhat of a kind word to describe their interests.’”
[Charleston Gazette-Mail, 4/4/19]
http://bit.ly/2ONIwGd
Last Minute “Transparency” – TVA releases key planning data days before comment deadline:
“Reports predict some lovely spring weather this weekend… but instead of frolicking outdoors, SACE staff will be diligently reviewing the last-minute release of data from TVA just days before the deadline to comment on the utility’s long-term plan. Federal
law prohibits TVA from basing its long-term plan, known as the Integrated Resource Plan or IRP, on information that is not publicly available. SACE and the Center for Biological Diversity requested documents referenced in the draft IRP, but were told to submit
the request as a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request – a process that can take months…“TVA’s draft planning documents paint a grim picture, projecting continued reliance on dirty fossil fuels for the next 20 years.” TVA is still in the process of putting
all of the documents online, so we are providing them in a shared folder here. As of 8:00pm ET April 3, 2019 TVA had only made 10 of the 68 documents provided to SACE under the request public. This is the latest hangup in a poorly managed process that has
symbolized TVA’s worrisome turn away from public accountability and meaningful public participation. Regarding the requested data, Howard Crystal, Senior Attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, provided the following statement: “TVA’s draft planning
documents paint a grim picture, projecting continued reliance on dirty fossil fuels for the next 20 years. Such a future is unacceptable given we have the technology and urgent need to transition to renewables much sooner. It’s impossible to understand how
these troubling projections were made when TVA is hiding the underlying data.’”
[Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, 4/3/19]
http://bit.ly/2VorEsa
Justin McCarthy
Communications Director, NEPA Campaign
The Partnership Project
1101 Connecticut Ave NW, 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20036 USA
T: (202) 650-0327
C: (540) 312-3797
E: jmccarthy@partnershipproject.org
The Partnership Project, a registered 501 (c) (3) non-profit, is a collaborative effort of over 20 of the country’s most influential advocacy organizations, including Sierra Club, Defenders
of Wildlife, League of Conservation Voters, Earthjustice, and Natural Resources Defense Council.