For full information on this topic see the LPA web site, here
The Farmington BLM office has responded to the request (see here) by LPA (Las Placitas Association) and ES-CA for an extension to the comment period on the WEPIII Pipeline Project Environmental Assessment (EA), by denying that request. See the BLM’s denial of request letter here. The proposed pipeline would carry natural gas liquids, such as butane and propane, and would utilize old pipelines presently running through Placitas, through Las Huertas Creek and in the vicinity of the Creek. It would increase the volume and pressure of material running through those pipes. There are already safety concerns with the present pipeline, due to its age, how it is subject to erosive damage, as became apparent during flooding events such as occurred in 2006, and how it was originally built when there was a far lower population density in the Placitas area, such that even if the pipes were in brand new condition they might not be safe to operate in our present community. So the added volume and pressure running through these old pipes raise very legitimate concerns for the safety of our community. This is especially so in the present drought, with conditions so tinder dry, such that an explosion of highly volatile fuels could easily ignite a major fire that would spread throughout large portions of Placitas and beyond.
Due to the denial of extension,the official comment period ended last Friday, April 26. LPA and ES-CA issued our comments on April 26 (see here), which also protested the BLM’s denial of our request for extension. The BLM also disappointed us by backing away from a previous offer to host a public meeting on this important matter for our community.
The most objectionable aspect of the BLM’s response was to deny that they had any responsibility to report on public safety concerns in the EA. They passed the buck on this to the federal Dept. of Transportation PHMSA (Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration). We have been in contact with PHMSA on this issue, and at their request have issued FOIAs (Freedom of Information Act requests) for vital information on the safety issues involving this pipeline running through Placitas. Thus far PHMSA has not responded, long past the 20 days they had to respond.
In our response letter we cite a recent federal district court ruling in California by Judge Grewal, which invalidates BLM’s similar attempt there to pass the buck on public safety concerns as regards a fracking project. Judge Grewal ruled that because BLM took the lead on the EA for that project, it could not properly claim that public safety factors were “outside the scope of this EA because they are not under the authority or within the jurisdiction of the BLM”. Applying this to the Farmington BLM office’s attempt to evade the public safety issues in their EA, it should also be ruled as inadequate. The BLM office issued a FONSI – a “Finding of No Significant Impact” – on this EA, thus claiming that a more extensive EIS (Environmental Impact Study), with full risk assessment, is unnecessary. But clearly there is major impact on our community if there are any unanswered safety problems with the proposed project.
We will be pursuing this issue, vital to Placitas, at various governmental levels.
None of this is very surprising after 6+ years of being involved with the Santa Fe National Forest’s Travel Management Plan (TMP) that most recently closed 95% of all roadside camping as well as 70% of all roads and trails to vehicles. Public comments revealed the number two thing to do in the forest was “drive for pleasure.” Public Comment is a small formality that carries little influence when the Final Decision becomes law. The Santa Fe National Forest (SFNF) ignored their own rules so often that the New Mexico Off Highway Vehicle Alliance filed a lawsuit this last December that should come to a hearing by the end of the year. Interestingly the SFNF found “No Significant Impact” of their closing 95% of roadside camping and 70% closure of all roads and trails to motorized vehicles.
Thanks, Orin, for your continued diligence on our behalf. A thought from having worked inside government for 30 years: both agencies are likely understaffed and underfunded, dynamics made worse by the current sequester. Something that always took precedence for overworked staffers in organizations knew was when a request for information from a congressman arrived. “Congressionals” were tracked differently than FOIA requests. Can we contact our new congresswoman, or either of our ecologically sensitve senators about our concerns about the safety of the pipeline? It might get better attention from the BLM and DOT that way.