Environmental – Page 88

USFWS Rule Extending Eagle Permits to 30 Years

December 6, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

The rule extending eagle permits for up to 30 years is available for public inspection today (PDF). Will publish on Monday.

The summary:

We revise the regulations for permits for take of golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) and bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) that is associated with, but not the purpose of, an activity. We extend the maximum term for programmatic permits to 30 years, while maintaining discretion to issue permits of shorter duration as appropriate. The permits must incorporate conditions specifying additional measures that may be necessary to ensure the preservation of eagles, should monitoring data indicate the need for the measures. This change will facilitate the responsible development of renewable energy and other projects designed to operate for decades, while continuing to protect eagles consistent with our statutory mandates. For a permit valid for 5 years or more, we will assess an application processing fee sufficient to offset the estimated costs associated with working with the applicants to develop site plans and conservation measures, and prepare applications, and for us to review applications. We also will collect an administration fee when we issue a permit and at 5-year intervals.

Ponca “Cowboys and Indians” Camp against Keystone XL Pipeline

November 26, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

Hopi Tribe Objection to Interior’s Intention to Enforce Stricter Air Quality Standards at Navajo without Hopi’s Input

November 25, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Hopi Letter to Secretary of the Interior

An excerpt:

On September 4, 2013, the Hopi Tribe (“Tribe”) wrote to you expressing its serious concerns regarding the Department oflnterior’s (“DOl”) decision to join with the Salt River Project (“SRP”) and others to develop and endorse a proposed Altemative (“SRP- Altemative”) to the pending EPA rulemaking that would set stricter air quality standards and require the Best Available Retrofit Technology (“BART”) for the Navajo Generating Station (“NOS”), a coalfired power plant located on the Navajo Reservation in northeastern Arizona. In our letter, we also informed you that the Tribe would be hosting DOl attomey, Letty Belin, for a meeting (on September 5, 2013) that she had requested in order to discuss the proposed SRP-Altemative to the EPA rule, including the Tribe’s exclusion from the process. As a result of the Tribe’s meeting with Ms. Belin, the Tribe now has greater concerns regarding DOl’s explanations for its decision to exclude the Hopi Tribe from the process and its support of the proposed SRPAlternative. Rather than satisfying the concerns expressed by the Tribe, Ms. Belin’s explanation of the basis for DOl’s decisions merely senred to underscore DOI’s disregard of the Tribe’s interests as a major stakeholder in this matter and its violation of the trust responsibility it owes to the Hopi Tribe.

Documents Reveal Pacific International Terminal’s Disturbance of Native Archaeological Site in Washington

November 25, 2013Victoria Sweet

Excerpts from the article:

Three summers ago the company that wants to build the largest coal export terminal in North America failed to obtain the environmental permits it needed before bulldozing more than four miles of roads and clearing more than nine acres of land, including some wetlands.

Pacific International Terminals also failed to meet a requirement to consult first with local Native American tribes, the Lummi and Nooksack tribes, about the potential archaeological impacts of the work. Sidestepping tribal consultation meant avoiding potential delays and roadblocks for the project’s development.

Despite the ongoing review of the non-permitted disturbance at the site, the larger review of potential archaeological impacts of the Gateway Pacific Terminal under the National Historic Preservation Act got underway in late July.

It also led to the disturbance of a site from which 3,000-year-old human remains had previously been removed — and where archeologists suspect more are buried.

Pacific International Terminals and its parent corporation, SSA Marine, subsequently settled for $1.6 million for violations under the Clean Water Act.

According to company documents that were released during the lawsuit and subsequently shared with EarthFix, Pacific International Terminals drilled 37 boreholes throughout the site, ranging from 15 feet to 130 feet in depth, without following procedures required by the Army Corps of Engineers under the National Historic Preservation Act. . . .

King said Pacific International Terminals’ unpermitted drilling and disturbance at Cherry Point could put approval of the Gateway Pacific Terminal at risk because the company skirted the requirements of the so-called “106 process” under the National Historic Preservation Act.

“I think the Lummi have a very strong case,” he said. “The site, the area, the landscape – they can show that it’s a very important cultural area and permitting the terminal to go in will have a devastating effect on the cultural value of that landscape.”

The Army Corps of Engineers is now working on finalizing what’s called a “memorandum of agreement” between Pacific International Terminals and the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. The Army Corps says the document, which was obtained by EarthFix under the Freedom of Information Act, will serve as a retroactive permit “resolving adverse effects associated with the damage caused to 45WH1 associated with non-permitted geotechnical work at Cherry Point.”

The Lummi Nation refused to sign the memorandum or accept the $94,500 that was offered to the tribe as mitigation for the damage through the memorandum.

The archaeological review will follow a separate but parallel track to the environmental review of the project. The first step in the process is to determine the Area of Potential Effect (APE), and that’s already causing a dispute among state and federal agencies.

The State Historical Preservation Office, along with the Lummi and the Federal Advisory Council For Historic Preservation, have written formal letters disagreeing with the Army Corps’ plans to limit the APE to the area immediately surrounding the terminal itself.

Duke Energy Renewables Reaches Settlement with DOJ over Eagle Deaths

November 24, 2013Victoria Sweet

Duke Energy Renewables, a commercial business unit of Duke Energy, today announced it has reached a settlement agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) regarding the deaths of golden eagles and other migratory birds at two of Duke Energy’s wind generation sites in Wyoming.

The DOJ brought misdemeanor charges under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) for 14 golden eagle mortalities within the past three years at Duke Energy’s Top of the World Windpower Project and Campbell Hill Windpower Project near Casper, Wyo.

Press Release here.

SWN’s Application for Injuction in SWN Resources Canada v. Jerome et al

November 22, 2013December 3, 2013Kate Fort

Here.

Original 10/4/13 Decision 2013nbqb328

Extension of original injunction, 10/16/13 2013nbqb342

Dismissal of original injunction, 10/21/13 2013nbqb346

D.C. Circuit Amicus Brief on Impact of Climate Change on Native Nations

November 18, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the brief of the National Congress of American Indians, authored by Elizabeth Kronk Warner, in Alec L. v. McCarthy:

NCAI Amicus Brief

Toronto Star Column on Elsipogtog and Canadian Law

November 15, 2013Kate Fort

Here.

In 1997, the landmark Supreme Court Decision in Delgamuukw finally clarified that even under Canadian law, Aboriginal title to most of the land within British Columbia’s provincial borders had never been extinguished. This ruling had immediate implications for other areas of the country where no treaties ceding land ownership were ever signed. One day, Canadians woke up to a legal reality in which millions of acres of land were recognized as never having been acquired by the Crown, and that elephant has been occupying our national room ever since.

Unfortunately, this glaring issue did not seem to percolate into the wider Canadian consciousness, and many people remain unaware of it. In 1999, the Supreme Court passed down another judgement confirming that the Peace and Friendship Treaties of 1760-1761 did not cede land or resources. This cannot be emphasized strongly enough: the Mi’kmaq never gave up legal rights to their land or resources. Canada does not own the land that the people of Elsipogtog are defending.

This is not conspiracy theory, or indigenous interpretation. This is Canadian law, interpreted by the Supreme Court of Canada, applying Canadian constitutional principles. Yet somehow, this most important fact is left out of most reports on Elsipogtog as though it is barely relevant.