Reviewing Officer Tony Tooke,Regional Forester

DATE

Reviewing Officer Tony Tooke,Regional Forester

USDA Forest Service

1720 Peachtree Street

Atlanta, GA 30309

Facsimile 404-347-4821

Emailto:

With this letter I am objecting to the Draft Record of Decision (DROD) for the Mountain Valley Project Land and Resource Management Plan Amendment for the Jefferson National Forest for whom the responsible official is Joby P. Timm, Forest Supervisor.

The Forest Service Erred in Not Providing an Opportunity for Public Comment on Revised Plan Amendments

My primary objection is that the Forest Service did not provide a comment period for a Notice that was issued on June 5, 2017. The failure to provide for public participation on information that was first published on June 5, 2017, violates Forest Service Regulation 36 CFR §219.4.

The Forest Service Has Not Provided Timely Public Notice of the Proposed Amendments to all the Parties to the MVP Certificate Proceeding

The June 5, 2017 Notice was published only in the Federal Register. 82 FedReg 25761. The failure to also post the Notice on the project’s docket at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) violates the standards and procedures set forth by the Forest Service in the Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. 81 Fed Reg 71042(“All comments must besubmitted to the FERC, the Lead FederalAgency…”). I expected the Forest Service to also electronically file any such notices on the FERC project docket where interested parties would be timely informed of the Forest Service actions.

The Forest Service Has Not Provided Adequate Notice of Publication of the Draft ROD

Similarly, the public has not been informed of the DROD by publication on the FERC docket. Based on the Forest Service’s previous representations, I did not anticipate the DROD would be published on the same date as the Final Environmental Impact Statement. The Forest Service had rejected the FERC-imposed schedule. By letter dated March 24, 2017, the Forest Service objected to the FERC timetable and described certain prerequisites before the Forest Service could act. Accession number 20170324-5024. The Forest Service specified that it could not make a decision until “1. All consultations under the Endangered Species Act and the National Historic Preservation Act have been completed;” and “2.The Forest Service has all of the information needed to make these decisions. This would include requested data, analyses, and design criteria. All avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures must have been identified, agreed upon, and disclosed to the public through the NEPA process.” Timm Letter, March 24, 2017. The letter also advised FERC that “the Forest Service cannot make decisions for authorizing the special use or approving any Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) amendments until the order is certificated [by FERC].” The consultations are not complete, the mitigation measures have not been identified and disclosed to the public through the NEPA process, and the order is not certificated.

The Premature Draft ROD Precludes Comment and Objection to Consultation Outcomes and Proposed Mitigation Including Compensatory Mitigation

The Forest Service Plan Amendment regulations prescribe detailed notification, public comment, and objection procedures that apply to every aspect of a proposed project and the decision-making process. Nothing in the regulations or in NEPA allows the Forest Service to issue a draft decision before all of the information on which the decision is based has been subject to public notice, comment and objection procedures. The Forest Service’s compliance with the Endangered Species Act and the National Historic Preservation Act, and the mitigation and monitoring requirements are important components of the decision and must be subject to public review, comment, and objection. With this letter, I am objecting to the premature issuance of a draft decision, and I am objecting to the failure to publicly disclose the outcomes of consultation and mitigation prior to the commencement of the objection process.

The Forest Service Must Comply with All Requirements for Plan Amendment

In addition, I object to Supervisor Timm’s conclusion that the substantive provisionswithin 36 CFR §§219.8 through 219.11 are not implicated by the Forest Planamendmentsto the Jefferson National Forest Plan. The Forest Service never provided a comment period on the implication of these regulations to the proposed Forest Plan amendments. The first time the Forest Service even mentioned the planning regulations was in the June 5, 2017 Federal Register notice for which the public was not given an opportunity to comment. The proposed amendments to the Forest Plan undermine the achievement of the Goals, Objectives and Direction in the Forest Plan. Furthermore, the unsupported conclusion that the regulations are not implicated is based on “mitigation” for which there is no evidence that any mitigation can be effective in the extraordinarily steep terrain with geologic hazards, and fragile soil and water systems. The failure to show that mitigation is effective violates the National Environmental Policy Act.

Requested Relief

The Forest Service must withdraw the DROD, provide notice on the FERC docket of the information in the June 5, 2017 Federal Register notice, and provide a public comment period on the information in the notice before reissuing a draft decision. In addition, I am requesting a meeting to discuss and potentially resolve the objections in accordance with 36 CFR §218.11.

Page 1 of 3