09-14-12: Lawyers find DEIS errors so pervasive as to preclude meaningful analysis, entire dEIS must be rewritten.

09-14-12: Counsel for the Lunnys, Ryan Waterman, submitted a letter to NPS which concluded, “Based on the (National Academy of Sciences) NRC Report’s findings, NEPA regulations (Federal) prohibit the National Park Service (NPS) from finalizing the Drakes Bay Oyster Company Special Use Permit Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) because the NRC Report shows that the DEIS is so inadequate as preclude meaningful analysis pursuant to 40 C.F.R., Section 1502.9(a).  Instead, NPS must now revise the entire DEIS, and recirculate and seek public comment on the revised DEIS.”

 

The Waterman letter to NPS then states, “Yet it is simple to apply the NRC Report’s highly critical structural and substantive critique of the DEIS’s scientific information, analyses, and conclusions to NEPA regulations to reach the inescapable conclusion that the entire DEIS must be revised and recirculated.  This is so because the errors identified by the NRC Report are pervasive and effect the DEIS as a whole.”

 

Counsel then says, “The errors identified by the NRC Report go to the very heart of the DEIS.”

 

The Waterman letter concludes stating, “NEPA regulations are clear that a federal agency may not finalize a draft EIS that precludes meaningful analysis under 40 C.F.R. Section 1502.9(a).  The NRC Report demonstrates unequivocally that the DEIS fails to pass this basic test in a number of important ways.  Accordingly, NPS will commit NEPA error if it finalizes the DEIS before preparing and re-circulating a Revised DEIS because the findings made in the NRC Report demonstrate that the DEIS is so inadequate as to preclude meaningful analysis….Instead NPS must now revise the DEIS, and re-circulate and seek public comment on the Revised DEIS.”

 

The 12-page letter, part of a 100-page detailed submission, identifies one DEIS failure after another based on the National Academy’s review.  This is the second highly critical Report from the National Academy of Sciences.  In 2009, the NAS severely criticized the NPS for manipulating and misrepresenting data.  The new NAS (NRC) report concludes that little changed. 

Click here for the entire document

2012-09-14-Corresp to National Park Service

(12 page letter and “Pre-Publication of  ‘Scientific Review of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Drakes Bay Oyster Company Special Use Permit, Committee on the Evaluation of the Drakes Bay Oyster Company Special Use Permit DEIS and [Atkins] Peer Review, Ocean Studies Board, Division on Earth and Life Studies, National Research Council of the National Academies’ “)

Something odd of note: From the NRC report page 11, last three lines; and page 12, first two lines: 

“Time was also set aside for public comment. The agenda and list of participants in the pubic
session is available in Appendix D. Organizations and members of the public were also encouraged to
submit information for the committee’s consideration in writing. These documents are part of the pubic 

record for this study, available through the National Academies’ Public Access Records Office,14 and also
were posted on the internet.”

As of the publication of this posting to this blog you may find it curious that, according to Appendix D (which is the very last page of the link provided above) a “Participant List” is provided which states:

 

Participant List

(Limited to those who participated in person)

Gordon Bennett, SOS

Julie Cart, LA Times

Jeffrey Creque, Alliance for Sustainable Agriculture

Melanie Gunn, National Park Service

Brannon Ketcham, National Park Service

Kevin Lunny, Drakes Bay Oyster Company

Cicely Muldoon, National Park Service

Dominique Richard

Amy Trainer, EAC

 

I have posted both Video 1 and 2 of the “public meeting” on this blog under the heading “Videos, Slides & News Links”.

Video 1, is the panel questioning of the NPS and some questioning of Kevin Lunny.

Video 2, is the “Public Comment” section.

 

Here is the list of the ACTUAL PARTICIPANTS of the Public Comment, Video 2

Gordon Bennett – 0:01:42 to 0:05:49

Amy Trainer – 0:05:57 to 0:12:09

Dominique Richard – 0:12:32 to 0:18:31

Jane Gyorgy – 0:19:02 to 0:27:44

Jeff Crecque – 0:28:17 to 0:32:35

Phyllis Faber (letter read) – 0:33:16 to 0:38:15

Kevin Lunny – 0:39:30 to 0:42:12

Neal Desai (by phone) follows

 

  1. Their list is not in order of presenters, nor alphabetical, nor even accurate. Either they provided an incomplete list of both video’s participants or an inaccurate list of Video 2 participants.
  2. Their list Includes someone who did NOT participate in either Video 1 or 2  – Julie Cart of LA Times
  3. Their list does not include one who DID participate in Video 2 – me, Jane Gyorgy of WOW (www.oysterzone.wordpress.com)

Odd, don’t you think?

 

Leave a comment

1 Comment

  1. All of the elements of fraud seem to be present. Or perhaps we are looking at the first draft of a novel.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: