A NEPA Primer for Black Rock Citizens

[theCryptofishist]

If I lose my current job, I will no longer be checking the Federal Register for Environmental Documents daily as a portion of my duties. This means that I cannot promise to alert e-playa of the critical postings reguarding the proposed Sempra Energy Plant. Therefore, I am posting a summary of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) procedures for public information and comments. I hope that with a better idea of the process you can be more effective watchdogs of remote corners of Pershing and Washoe Counties as well as other federal lands that you love.

When a project is proposed to be built on federal land or by a federal agency, it is supposed to be reviewed by the EPA and opened to the public for comments. The first step in this process is a Notice of Intent (or NOI) usually posted in the Federal Register and announced in local papers in the area of the project. Local libraries and government offices are often notified as well.
http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-IMPACT/index.html
The above is a link to the EPA's environmental impact website, with links for each year going back to 1994. The year pages are divided into Months and each month is divided into Days. (This is not the full Federal Register--just documents and rules of concern to the EPA. There are links from the EPA's site to the full Federal Register.)
The posting of an NOI starts a Scoping period of usually at least 30 days, depending on the scale of the project (more on that in a bit.) This is the first time for the public to comment on the scope of the project. You can bring up your concerns in any public meetings that are announced or if they at are a time and place that is inconvient to you, you may comment by Fax, E-mail, or Letter. Appropriate addresses and phone numbers are provided--in a section called "Addresses."

[theCryptofishist]

There are two major types of NEPA documents: EAs and EISs. An Environmental Assessment (EA) is a short document, often 20 pages or less. It usually deals with a relatively minor change, unlikely to be controversial or have a "significant" environmental impact. An Environmental Impact Statement can be 100 pages or more. I've seen some that are two volumes with multiple technical appendices collected in 5 or 6 binders. This will involve big changes and may be locally or nationally controversial. Or maybe the project is well designed and supplies a legitemate need. Part of the job of the NEPA reviewers is to make a determination.
Sometimes the preparing agency will try to hide a controversial project as an EA. The EPA is not obliged by law to review these documents, and the submitting agency is not obliged to provide copies to the EPA. This is why commenting on the scoping can be important. If enough issues are brought up on a proposed EA it may be elevated to an EIS. Or if it generates enough controversy the EPA may chose to review an EA.
Two cases may provide a general sense of how this can work. (Note: I'm not absolutely certain of all the details, just a general sense of them. So don't quote me on this--I'm sure in both these cases further information is available on the web, if you're interested in doing the research.)
The first case involves Sempra Energy and another energy company who built energy transmission lines across the Mexico/Imperial County (California) border. (I believe it was called the Mexicali project.) The Department of Energy issued an Environmental Assesment, against the advise of the EPA. An environmental non-profit sued the DoE on this basis, and won a judgement saying that an EIS had to be prepared. Unfortunately, because there was no injunction granted against the project, they built the project before they issued the DEIS. This means, of course that they are unable to incorporate changes that the EPA may suggest.
In another case, the BLM wanted to do an environmental assesment for a Land Management Plan of land in San Benito County (California again) where there is naturally occurring asbestos in a popular local recreational area. Here, the controversy was enough to elevate the project BEFORE the assesment was issued and an EIS has been written instead.
The EPA is obliged by law to review all Environmental Impact Statements.
Both EAs and EISs go through a Draft and a Final phase.
More later--I've been at this for more that 45 minutes and my typing fingers are a little numb.

[DVD Burner]

Are you going to loose your job?

[theCryptofishist]

Things are still in motion, but I have been asked to submit a resignation.

[BAS]

That sucks. You have my sympathy.

[JezebelinHell]

I find out tomorrow if I still have a job, so I'm with ya...