|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
||||
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Katie Chimenti 281-326-3343
Nancy Edmonson 281-471-4567
November 14, 2001
Bay advocates are angry--although not altogether surprised--to find key topics entirely missing from the draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the proposed container port at Bayport. And they are furious to find the Army Corps of Engineers setting public comment deadlines that are designed to disembowel a great deal of public participation.
The draft EIS released by the Corps this week consists of six large volumes amounting to 1,700 pages. The major public hearing on it is scheduled for December 12, and the deadline for submitting public comments on it is February 11.
But the Corps has also announced another deadline, one day before the big December 12 public hearing on the draft EIS. December 11 is the final date for comments on the "Public Notice"--an evaluation of whether the Bayport plan is in the public interest. And it is based on this evaluation that the Corps will decide whether to issue a permit for the project.
"This is outrageous manipulation of citizens. The Corps is using the administrative process to confuse people," said Jim Blackburn, Chair of the Galveston Bay Conservation and Preservation Association (GBCPA).
"The public interest determination by the Corps is ultimately the basis for the permit being granted. Setting a comments deadline for this one day before the draft EIS public hearing on December 12 is a ploy to render the sentiments of thousands of citizens attending the public meeting absolutely meaningless. Their comments would not even be included in determination of the so-called public interest. It's a cheap shot," said Blackburn.
GBCPA has formally requested that the deadlines for these two components in the permit process should be the same--no sooner than February 11. It is also requesting that this joint deadline be extended by at least 30 days. Citizens in Charleston, South Carolina, had 120 days to prepare responses in a similar situation for a port proposal, according to GBCPA's Charlotte Cherry.
GBCPA is urging all who oppose the Bayport project to contact Colonel Leonard D. Waterworth, the Corps' Galveston District commander, and Mr. Kerry Stanley, its coordinator for Bayport, to request joint deadlines for comment on the draft EIS and on the "Public Notice" pertaining to the public interest determinations (under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act). Contact information is:
Col. Leonard D. Waterworth, District Engineer and Commanding Officer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Galveston District, CESWG-DE
P.O. Box 1229, Galveston, TX 77551
Phone 409-766-3002; fax 409-766-3951
(Stanley's address is the same; phone 409-766-6345; fax 409-766-6301.)
Further, GBCPA is urging opponents to gather for the draft EIS hearing on December 12 at the George R. Brown Convention Center in Houston, beginning at 7:30 p.m.
"Massive as it is, the draft EIS is seriously incomplete," said GBCPA Vice Chair Katie Chimenti. "Showing up at the hearing is the way to show elected officials, the Corps, and the Port Authority the extent of public opposition to the ill-conceived project and the high-handedness of the Port and the Corps."
Specific shortfalls already noted in the intimidatingly long draft EIS involve failure to analyze the effects of channel deepening to 50 feet, and failure to address fine-particle air pollution.
"When the plans filed by the Port of Houston Authority for Bayport show wharves and docks engineered to 50-foot depth, the effects of dredging to that depth must also be addressed," said Nancy Edmonson, transportation specialist for GBCPA. "Because dredging to 50 feet would do significant damage to the ecological functioning of the bay system, citizens have repeatedly rejected it--there is no pretending it is not an issue."
Katie Chimenti noted that there is no analysis at all of the fine-particle air pollution known as PM 2.5. "Fine particles come with diesel. They are a well-documented threat to human health. A container port served by thousands of trucks a day is a powerful, concentrated source of many tons of such pollution. It must be addressed."
"This is certainly not a done deal," Chimenti added. "The Corps has not even begun to evaluate all the alternatives properly. If it ever does, it will find that Bayport has deficiencies that cannot be overcome."
--30--
Galveston Bay Conservation and Preservation Association
P.O. Box 323, Seabrook, Texas 77586
Phone: 281-326-3343
Website: www.gbcpa.org
E-mail: gbcpa@gbcpa.org