|
| |
Draft EIR/EIS
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) became involved when its
Fiscal Year (FY) 1999 budget included a special appropriation to assist Inyo
County in carrying out the LORP. This funding action triggered EPA's obligation
to conduct environmental review, including an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Subsequently, EPA's budget
has included additional funding items for the LORP to be awarded to the County
or LADWP in its FY 2000, 2001 and 2002 budgets. LADWP, the County, and EPA
determined that a joint EIR/EIS would be the most effective way to conduct the
environmental review. LADWP, as CEQA Lead Agency, began the environmental review
process by issuing a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of the joint EIR/EIS in January
2000. The NOP described the project background and proposal. At the same time,
EPA, as NEPA lead agency, issued a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare the joint
EIR/EIS. The NOI, which is published in the Federal Register, briefly identifies
the project and provides contact information. Thereafter, several MOU parties
expressed concern about the capacity the pump station (maximum pump capacity of
200 cubic feet per second) proposed by LADWP in the NOP. These MOU parties
asserted that the maximum pump capacity should not exceed 50 cubic feet per
second (cfs), as specified in the Agreement. The parties also asserted that the
MOU does not allow for a pump station greater than 50 cfs. LADWP disagreed,
indicating that it believed that provisions of the MOU supercede the Agreement
and allow a pump station to be constructed with a pump capacity up to 200 cfs.
In December 2000, LADWP as CEQA lead agency decided that because disagreement
remained on the pump station issues, and to avoid a further delay in the
preparation and release of the draft EIR/EIS, the EIR/EIS should describe and
address alternative pump capacities that reflect the differing opinions of LADWP
and the other MOU parties. In 2001, EPA identified the 50 cfs pump station
capacity as its preferred alternative. Consequently, the Draft EIR/EIS,
published in November 2002, described these main options: (1) a pump station
with a capacity of up to 150 cfs; and (2) a pump station with a capacity of 50
cfs. Several alternatives to these proposals were also identified, including a
50-cfs pump station with physical modifications to the Delta Habitat Area to
modify the flow patterns of water released to the Delta.
[LORP Final EIR/EIS 1.0 INTRODUCTION - 1.1.3 Draft EIR/EIS]
| |
|
