BLM tells oil firm to protect Native American women:
“The Bureau of Land Management has advised an oil operator to help prevent violence against Native American women living nearby in Wyoming. BLM recommended that Aethon Energy Management
LLC and its partner, Burlington Resources Oil and Gas Co., adopt the U.N. Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights for its central Wyoming oil and gas project. Such a move is rare. "I'm not certain but believe it's precedent setting," said Tom Nelson,
vice president of operations for Aethon. "I expect industry will be weighing in on it, not just in Wyoming, but industry across the country would be interested in having a discussion on that." Dallas-based Aethon has spent seven years trying to expand an oil
and gas development in the center of Wyoming. The Moneta Divide project would allow industry to drill up to 4,250 new oil and gas wells northeast of the Wind River Reservation, where members of the Eastern Shoshone and Northern Arapaho nations reside. BLM
included the human rights recommendation in its final environmental analysis of the project published in February. The guidelines "include employee screening and background checks, law enforcement coordination, employee training, internal policing, and victim
services." The BLM analysis notes that there are economic benefits to the local community from industrial development. But it also acknowledged the well-documented spikes in crime rates near oil field developments and included statistics relating to Native
communities' vulnerability to crime from non-Natives.”
[E&E News, 3/6/20]
http://bit.ly/2VSF4zM
OPINION: Trump’s proposed environmental law changes will hit Alaska hardest: “Last month,
President Donald Trump chose to celebrate the 50th anniversary of our nation’s landmark environmental law — the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) — with a plan to virtually demolish it. Trump, who has assailed nearly 100 of the country’s environmental
rules since taking office, according to The New York Times, proposed the changes to “modernize” NEPA. If they are adopted, it would be an epic assault on the public’s say in how our country’s lands and resources are developed. or starters, the changes deeply
undercut the public’s interest. Trump deleted the guiding language in NEPA to “encourage and facilitate public involvement in decisions which affect the quality of the human environment.” New language would allow federal agencies to set schedules for NEPA
reviews that potentially can’t be met by tribes, other cooperating agencies or the public. Criteria to hold public meetings where there is substantial interest or controversy have been deleted. For federal actions like the Alaska Roadless Rule, new information
that emerges after the public comment period has ended will no longer be considered. To make public participation even harder, you’ll now be required to cite page numbers, supporting studies, and other information to back up your comments. If ratcheting down
on public involvement wasn’t enough, there are provisions that favor industry. Project developers such as mining companies would be allowed to write their own environmental impact statements, opening the door to minimize the environmental consequences and
propose alternatives biased in favor of their project.”
[Anchorage Daily News, 3/6/20]
http://bit.ly/3cBjMwn
OPINION: Trump’s NEPA Changes Gutting Environmental Reviews Will Backfire:
“The Trump administration’s proposal to gut environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act is radical and ill-thought out, and will lead to more delays in the process—not
less. The plan is a regulatory attempt to overturn federal law—and the court decisions that have established a well-understood process for considering the environmental impact of major federal decisions. But regulations don’t trump statutes, so if this plan
or something similar is adopted, it’s going to lead to more lawsuits—and, thus, more delays. In fact, we already have evidence of what can happen when this administration tries to short-circuit the process. Between 2001 and 2013, the federal government has
prevailed in 70% of the 100 or so environmental impact cases filed each year. But, since 2017, this administration has sustained legal setback after legal setback over its rushed, shoddy environmental reviews. For all its bluster, the attempts to ram through
pipelines in sensitive areas or similar projects hit roadblocks in court. In fact, on Feb. 27 a federal judge voided oil and gas leases on nearly 1 million acres of federal lands over the administration’s attempts to cut corners. This is exactly the opposite
of what any of us should want. The best outcome is for reviews to proceed in an orderly manner and have decisions take place under a predictable set of criteria. As a congressional aide, federal official, industry lobbyist, and environmental advocate, I have
followed NEPA for a long time. I have seen first-hand the benefits of these reviews. Whether it was highway projects planned for flood zones, oil pipelines across sensitive aquifers, or hazardous waste incinerators in local communities, these reviews allowed
people to make their voices heard before bureaucrats or industry destroyed a neighborhood or one of our treasured natural resources.”
[Bloomberg, 3/6/20]
http://bit.ly/2Tw1GUZ
OPINION: Leland Pollock: Fixing this outdated law can save Utah: “It took more than a spark
to start the Brian Head Fire. The 2017 blaze — which torched 71,000 acres of land, destroyed 13 homes and cost $34 million to fight — has been pinned on an area cabin owner. But just as much blame — if not more — should be leveled at an outdated federal law
that regulates major public works. The National Environmental Policy Act, which took effect 50 years ago, forced the shutdown of a timber mill in the Dixie National Forest. The shutdown of that mill led to a buildup of timber that was just waiting to fuel
a wildfire. The Brian Head Fire is just one of many problems caused by NEPA.
Fortunately, the Trump administration has proposed improving how federal agencies implement this law. Doing so would prevent future disasters and help get much-needed infrastructure improvements
off the ground. Since 1970, NEPA has required federal officials to evaluate the potential environmental impact of federally funded infrastructure projects. The majority of bridges, highways and pipelines built in the United States are subject to NEPA review
and approval. The NEPA review process has grown complicated since the law was last updated in the 1980s. To obtain a NEPA permit, business owners have to navigate a minefield of federal agencies, each with their own protocol. Activists and interest groups
frequently exploit the law’s ambiguities to bog down projects they oppose, even once they’ve undergone environmental review.”
[Salt Lake Tribune, 3/6/20]
http://bit.ly/2PV6VLH
LETTER: Current NEPA process already worked for bike trail: “Rose Femia Pugliese’s discourse
on the approval of the Palisade Plunge mountain bike trail under the National Environmental Policy Act makes a case for why the act should be changed, as proposed by the Trump administration. Yet, the existing process apparently worked for this proposed trail,
which was evaluated by the BLM under an environmental assessment and finalized in a “finding of no significant impact” on June 19. President Donald Trump’s push for changes to NEPA may be noble in terms of shortening the length of the process and the thickness
of documents. However, the plan proposes to avoid evaluating cumulative effects and reduces the need for separating direct effects from indirect (downstream damage, for example). Most people should be in favor of ways to streamline the NEPA process, but not
if it short-changes evaluating the full effects on the environment. For complex projects, such as a mining conglomerate that would cause significant impacts to wildlife, it is unrealistic to expect a comprehensive review in two years, as is proposed for a
time limit. As a mountain biker, I applaud the establishment of a new trail and expansion of recreation as an economic stimulus for our communities. I also applaud the process that deemed the trail would have no significant effects on the environment. However,
it seems to me that although Pugliese indicates, “As Coloradans, we care deeply about the environment,” not everyone feels this way if the environment and the need to protect it get in the way of what we want to do.”
[Denver Post, 3/6/20]
https://dpo.st/2TrpucC
LETTER: Protect Democratic participation in government decisions: “The National Environmental
Policy Act — NEPA — is our country’s bedrock environmental law. Enacted in 1970, NEPA provides the framework for citizen participation in government decisions that may impact communities, health and the environment. Examples of such decisions include proposed
industrial facilities near neighborhoods and projects that affect our public lands. In North Carolina, the NEPA process helped save $685 million when it led to the conclusion that improving existing roads rather than constructing a new bypass could meet infrastructure
needs while reducing costs and impact to the environment. The Trump Administration is proposing changes to NEPA that would erode government accountability and diminish our right to participate in decisions that affect us. The proposed rule changes would remove
language that heralds NEPA as “our nation’s basic charter for environmental protection” and would instead allow contractors to minimally disclose impacts and even conduct their own environmental assessments. While this may sound like “streamlining big government,”
we need only to look at the hundreds of lives lost when Boeing, in charge of its own safety plan, allowed the 737 Max jet to fly. By encouraging citizen participation and oversight, NEPA ensures, thorough analysis and commonsense protections, that prioritize
health and safety. These proposed rule changes would also have a chilling effect on our ability to assess projects through the lens of climate change by requiring that, “effects should not be considered if they are remote in time (or) geographically remote.”
This is dangerously myopic and would prevent citizens from using the best available science to protect our children and future generations.”
[Steamboat Pilot, 3/6/20]
http://bit.ly/3cGenEq
Corps Rejects Dam Breaches For Columbia River System: “A draft environmental impact statement
(EIS) for the Columbia River System, the culmination of a years-long process, rejected calls to breach dams on the lower Snake River. The Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Reclamation and Bonneville Power Administration jointly released the EIS for public review
February 28. The last comprehensive update to the operating strategy for the Columbia River System was issued in 1995. The comment period, which closes April 13, was shortened because of a White House push for streamlining of Corps projects. The draft EIS
is the result of more than three years of regional collaboration between the lead federal agencies and more than 30 tribes and state, federal and county agencies in this National Environmental Policy Act process. The agencies were instructed to compete their
review by September 2020, a year earlier than previous timelines. The draft’s preferred alternative for the operations, maintenance and configuration of the 14 federal dam and reservoir projects that comprise the Columbia River System considers and rejects
the possibility of dam breaches, something that some environmental groups and native American tribes have been calling for to support spawning chinook and steelhead salmon and the offshore orcas that feed on them. The orca population that lives offshore between
Washington state and Vancouver has declined since the 1970s. In December 2018, Washington Gov. Jay Inslee announced a billion-dollar plan to revive the resident orca population that includes allowing more water to be spilled over dams, making it easier for
salmon to reach the ocean. Oregon Gov. Kate Brown, a Democrat, recently sent a letter to Inslee calling for the breaching of the lower four dams on the Snake River as a way to revive the salmon population. Oregon’s three Republican members of Congress, Reps.
Dan Newhouse, Cathy McMorris Rodgers and Jaime Herrera Beutler, responded with a public letter in which they called Brown’s position “not only misguided, [but] shocking and extreme.’”
[Waterways Journal Weekly, 3/6/20]
http://bit.ly/2wvMH4l
Justin McCarthy
Interim Director, NEPA Campaign
The Partnership Project
1612 K St, NW
Washington, DC 20006 USA
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, Earthjustice, League of Conservation Voters, and Natural
Resources Defense Council.