How Pebble Mine opponents used Fox News to push Trump to delay the Alaska project: “A small but influential group of conservatives used Fox News to successfully pressure President Trump to pause issuing a permit to a controversial gold and copper mine in Alaska. The unusual, pro-environment campaign from host Tucker Carlson and others concerned that developing the mine would permanently damage streams and wetlands that sustain sockeye salmon popular with anglers will pay off this week with the Trump administration set to announce a delay in permitting the project. The mining firm was on the cusp of getting the green light despite concerns the project would damage fish populations in nearby Bristol Bay. But the Fox News host, noting the popularity of the bay among fishers, argued against the project in a segment on his prime-time show earlier this month. Interestingly, in most environmental controversies, there is a clean partisan split: Republicans are on one side, Democrats are on the other. But this is not so clear,” he said on air. “Suddenly you are seeing a number of Republicans, including some prominent ones, including some very conservative ones, saying, 'Hold on, maybe Pebble Mine is not a good idea, maybe you should do whatever you can not to despoil nature, and maybe not all environmentalism is about climate.' " Tucker interviewed Bass Pro Shop founder Johnny Morris, who argued more jobs are sustained by tourism in the region than would be by the mine. “There's a lot of economics with this,” Morris said. Outside of Carlson's show, the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, a coalition of conservation groups focused on increasing land and water access for hunters and fishers, ran ads on the network against the project in an effort to get Trump's attention.”

[Washington Post, 8/24/20] https://wapo.st/2QlRnjS

Army Corps review shows Pebble is still the wrong mine for Alaska: “When the Army Corps of Engineers released the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Pebble mine, the reaction from the Pebble Limited Partnership was predictable. Pebble declared it had “passed a critical milestone” for the mine meeting a high standard for permitting. A subsequent mailer sent to homes across Alaska glosses over reality and misrepresents the project’s true impacts. Pebble likes to call the National Environmental Policy Act review of its project proposal “robust” and “transparent.” In reality, the review has not been either, and the Final EIS confirms that Pebble is still the wrong mine in the wrong place. Let’s take a look at the facts – or, in many instances, the lack thereof. The Final EIS includes findings that Pebble would impact over 4,500 acres of wetlands and more than 190 miles of streams in the Nushagak and Kvichak drainages, where 60-70% of Bristol Bay’s tens of millions of sockeye salmon return. To make matters worse, these impact estimates are only a fraction of the damage the mine would cause in its lifetime, as the FEIS only assessed the impacts of a 20-year mining plan that would extract 12% of the ore body. Pebble’s executives are touting a much larger operation to investors. And the FEIS documents that even a mine plan that targets 55% of the ore deposit would impact more than 15,000 acres of wetlands and 500 miles of streams. Pebble’s concept-only design for the proposed tailings impoundment has, by the Corps’ own admission, “implications for (dam) stability.” Despite promising to prevent disaster in Bristol Bay like that experienced at the Mount Polley mine in British Columbia, Pebble’s answer is “trust us.” The mine’s impoundment design cannot be verified, because the Corps did not require that Pebble provide the details. The Corps also refused to model a catastrophic dam failure, further limiting the understanding of Pebble’s potential impacts.”

[Anchorage Daily News, 8/23/20] https://bit.ly/34rDXem

Minn. governor keeps up fight against Line 3: “Democratic Gov. Tim Walz's administration said Tuesday it will appeal the latest approvals by state utility regulators for Enbridge Energy's plan to replace its old and corroding Line 3 crude oil pipeline across northern Minnesota. The state Commerce Department faced a deadline yesterday to ask the Minnesota Court of Appeals to take another look at the project. Environmental and tribal groups opposed to the pipeline have already filed their appeals. Walz said in a statement that the state must follow "the process, the law, and the science" for any project that affects Minnesota's environment and economy. "The Department of Commerce's appeal is a part of that process, and it is important to ensure clarity in the steps that Minnesota takes to evaluate and approve projects like this one," Walz said. House Republican Leader Kurt Daudt of Crown said Walz was "wasting taxpayer resources in an attempt to stop this project." "Instead of helping the one in four Minnesotans unemployed along the Line 3 route, the Governor has once again chosen to obstruct and delay this critical project and the thousands of jobs it would bring to Northern Minnesota," Daudt said in a statement. Calgary, Alberta-based Enbridge says its planned $2.6 billion investment will put 4,200 people to work in union construction jobs while boosting tax revenues for the state and communities along the route. The company called the Walz administration's decision disappointing. The project has undergone six years of review, more than 70 public meetings and a 13,500-page environmental impact statement, the company said.”

[E&E News, 8/20/20] https://bit.ly/32p96MU

Could NEPA hamstring Postal Service changes?: “U.S. Postal Service reforms that have sparked a political firestorm across the nation could encounter an unlikely obstacle: the National Environmental Policy Act. Reports indicate the Postal Service has moved to cut overtime, reduce post office hours, and remove some collection boxes and processing machines. New Postmaster General Louis DeJoy has denied claims from critics and has defended any moves as addressing drops in letter volumes, but Democrats — fueled by comments from President Trump — see an effort to undermine mail-in voting. Politics aside, environmental experts have noted that significant changes in how the Postal Service operates could trigger the need to conduct environmental analysis. "The statute says you have to look before you leap," said Michael Gerrard, director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University. Under NEPA, agencies are required to study the environmental impacts of major federal actions. Postal Service reforms could fall under that category. Cutting staffing levels could force less efficient delivery routes, increasing air pollution. Building a new facility in a state with a dirtier fuel mix could increase emissions. While environmental analysis for postal actions is rare, it has happened. In 2017, USPS conducted an environmental assessment for purchasing commercial vehicles to accommodate route growth. Specifically, according to the agency's NEPA regulations, USPS would be required to complete environmental analysis for cutting 1,000 or more workers, relocating 300 or more employees more than 50 miles, or changing a facility's function to include new uses of "greater environmental intensity," among other things.”

[E&E News, 8/24/20] https://bit.ly/2CXPk2w

How to Reverse Course on Trump’s Environmental Damage: “That the Interior Department has now blessed oil and gas drilling in the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge comes as no surprise. It was a foregone conclusion once Lisa Murkowski, in 2017, persuaded her Senate colleagues to authorize drilling in the refuge as part of a tax bill, ending protections that have been in place since the Eisenhower administration. Still, given the refuge’s obvious importance to the abundant wildlife there, its talismanic significance to the environmental community and the climate-wrecking potential of the oil that lies underneath it, the announcement came as one more disheartening blow from the Trump administration. The administration’s contempt for public lands is equaled only by President Trump’s fealty to the country’s fossil fuel interests and by his determination to obliterate anything President Barack Obama did to preserve open space, ensure cleaner air and water and reduce global warming gases. The courts have already intervened to limit some of the damage; a new president, with a favorable Congress, can do much more. This will take patience and discipline. Mr. Trump has left the country’s environmental policies in wreckage. Most of that destruction has been in service of a misbegotten strategy of “energy dominance” that emphasized the production of more and more fossil fuels at a time when mainstream science — and the fires, floods, hurricanes and other evidence before our eyes — insisted that what we need is less of them.”

[New York Times, 8/24/20] https://nyti.ms/34tZUJK

BLM’s resource management plan lacks appropriate consideration for Gunnison sage-grouse and climate change, suit alleges: “Bad science and analyses that do not meet the requirements of federal law mean the recently updated resource management plan for Bureau of Land Management administered lands in Montrose and surrounding counties is insufficient, and oil and gas development must be shelved for now, conservation groups said in a Wednesday lawsuit. The groups want federal courts to halt implementation of the updated Uncompahgre Field Office resource management plan that was approved in April, until there is compliance with applicable laws. The BLM in announcing the plan’s first update in about 30 years said it struck a fair balance between resources and multiple uses, including energy extraction. The approved plan gives a nod, but not much else, to the imperiled Gunission sage-grouse, despite its critically low numbers, both the suit and a separate notice to sue sent to the BLM and US Fish and Wildlife Service allege. The plaintiffs also argue in the filed suit that the BLM did not appropriately consider climate change in adopting the new resource management plan, or RMP. “The Gunnison sage-grouse is presently experiencing catastrophic declines range-wide,” Talasi Brooks, an attorney for one of the plaintiffs, Western Watersheds Project, said in a provided statement. “The plan’s business as usual approach falls short of the urgent action required to preserve this species from the effects of rampant livestock grazing and oil and gas development.” The BLM does not comment on ongoing or pending litigation and the government has not yet filed a response to the suit, which in addition to Western Watersheds Project, was brought by Citizens for a Healthy Community in Paonia, Western Environmental Law Center, the Center for Biological Diversity, WildEarth Guardians, High Country Conservation Advocates and the Sierra Club.”

[Montrose Daily Press, [8/23/20] https://bit.ly/3aSEMyj

OPINION: Denver Water, Trump Administration Threaten National Environmental Policy Act: “Two days ago, Denver Water and the Trump administration joined together in trying to undermine the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other environmental laws, as part of the federal government’s review of the proposed Gross Dam expansion in Boulder County, Colorado. Both Denver Water and Trump’s Department of Justice issued “motions to dismiss” in the lawsuit that Save The Colorado et al. have brought against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for giving a permit to the dam project. Both entities argue that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Federal Power Act “pre-empt” the Army Corps’ environmental reviews under NEPA and other laws, and thus the case can only be litigated against FERC. However, earlier in the this ongoing legal battle, FERC — whose commissioners are appointed directly by President Trump — denied Save The Colorado’s motion to intervene in the FERC permit process. If both motions are successful, Save The Colorado and the public would be shut out of the permitting review process. Denver Water is locking arms with the Trump administration trying to silence public review, wreck the environment, and undermine an Act of Congress. The legal attempt to shut out the public has no precedent in case law, and is directly countered by FERC’s own order which shut out Save The Colorado from the FERC proceeding. The FERC order states that the Corps is the “lead” agency and that FERC’s order does not “shield the Corps from judicial review.” Our attorneys are engaged and we are fighting this outrageous attempt to lock out the public every step of the way. Denver Water’s bullying antics are now aligned directly with that of President Trump — we will fight them both as long as it takes.”

[Pagosa Daily Post, 8/20/20] https://bit.ly/2EAifda

Fifth Circuit Reels In NMFS' Aquaculture Permitting Program in Gulf of Mexico: “The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently held the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) does not have the authority to regulate aquaculture under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (the “MSA” or the “Act”). The decision could affect recent efforts by the federal government to permit and facilitate the expansion of aquaculture facilities in federal coastal waters. While the decision’s immediate impact is limited to federal waters in the Gulf of Mexico, it has potentially significant ramifications for aquaculture in other federal coastal areas across the United States. In 2016, NMFS proposed establishing an aquaculture permitting program in federal waters in the Gulf of Mexico, whereby it would permit a significant expansion of aquaculture estimated to produce annually up to 64 million pounds of seafood. In the proposed rulemaking, NMFS claimed the authority to permit aquaculture under the MSA. A diverse coalition of plaintiffs challenged the rule, including the Gulf Fishermens Association, Gulf Restoration Network, Recirculating Farms Coalition, and Center for Food Safety, which claimed that the MSA did not authorize NMFS to create a permitting program for aquaculture. The district court agreed with the plaintiffs, and NMFS appealed. The court declined to bite on NMFS’ argument. The Fifth Circuit agreed with the plaintiffs that the MSA does not authorize NMFS to permit or regulate aquaculture in federal waters. By strictly construing the text of the MSA, the Fifth Circuit refused to expand the authority of the 40-year-old Act to include governance over aquaculture projects, holding that the Act’s references to “harvesting” and “fishery” did not encompass fish farming.”

[K&L Gates LLP, 8/21/20] https://bit.ly/2Yu8vZ7

Proposed Tucson-area shooting range could be much larger, more controversial than expected: “The Tucson Rod and Gun Club’s proposed shooting range could be a complex of five facilities in one, providing space for rifle and pistol shooters, shotgun shooters, archers and practitioners of individual and group marksmanship. Proposed for Redington Pass, the range also would place a long list of auxiliary facilities in now-remote desert along Redington Pass Road. The range would lie about 4 miles northeast of where the pavement ends and about 11 miles northeast of Houghton Road. Included would be roads and trails, portable toilets, a water well, an outdoor education area, vault toilets that store waste underground, a portable generator, shade structures and solar-powered electric panels. An existing trail for off-highway vehicles would be rerouted away from the facility, as would a wash. A new “simulated hunt trail” would be added. The permit application was obtained by an environmentalist through the federal Freedom of Information Act. It’s a more intensive facility than what a gun club official outlined in a June interview about the range. The proposal is now triggering a heated debate among shooters, environmentalists and other conservationists. On a much smaller scale, it’s reminiscent of the decade-long debate between supporters and opponents of the proposed Rosemont Mine. The club’s detailed permit application touts this facility as a way to dramatically reduce “wildcat” target shooting that has been pervasive in the Redington Pass area for decades.”

[Arizona Republic, 8/23/20] https://bit.ly/3aU6FFT

LETTER: Trump distracting us from real problems: “The Post Office had no problem until Trump created one as a distraction. Distraction should be his middle name. Distraction from: children in cages, right wing fascist racist thugs, the pandemic, Russian paid bounties, and unemployment. Distraction from trying to end Medicare and Social Security. But here's the catch. While you were distracted, Trump has gutted: the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, the Noise Control Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, the Solid Waste Disposal Act and about 15 more. And for whose benefit? Certainly not yours, your children's or your grandchildren's. But his cronies in Big Business are jumping for joy with fewer restraints on safety, pollution or the rape of federal parkland. Don't be distracted folks. Don't be fooled. Be smart.”

[Port Charlotte Sun, 8/22/20] https://bit.ly/3gpBQu3

Justin McCarthy

He/Him/His

Director, NEPA Campaign

The Partnership Project
C: 540-312-3797

E: jmccarthy@partnershipproject.org

protectnepa.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.