The law governing whether the XL Tar Sands Pipeline should be approved makes our views expressed in public comments an integral part of the process. The number of comments received and substantive issues raised, particularly when the comments don't look like "form letters," can make a difference. Thus, we are holding a blogathon as part of a campaign to obtain one million public comments in opposition to the XL Tar Sands Pipeline Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement or SEIS. It is coordinated with Bill McKibben and 350.org and in coalition with Sierra Club, National Wildlife Federation, League of Conservation Voters, Natural Resources Defense Council, Oil Change International and Bold Nebraska. (Photo with permission of Fast for the Earth.)
The deadline for submission of public comments is April 22, 2013. We encourage everyone to submit a public comment. The comment period provides citizens with a direct voice to governmental decision makers that is not watered down or "misinterpreted" by the media and provides us with access that usually is restricted to lobbyists. You make your case in your comment, and the government is required by law to review and consider your views expressed in your comment. It is precisely because the public comment process provides such a powerful tool to ordinary citizens that the GOP often seeks to "reform" NEPA (the National Environmental Policy Act) and state counterparts to dilute or restrict public comments or lawsuits filed by citizens and environmental organizations to compel compliance with the law.
The blogathon runs from April 12-22 at Daily Kos in an attempt to make the submission of public comments easier. Each guest blogger will be posting a diary on opposition to the XL Tar Sands Pipeline. Some guests will be including a brief "sample comment" that readers can customize into their own voice and submit at the State Department website. Readers who have specialized skills relating to the pipeline, tar sands, climate change or the petroleum industry may, of course, choose to create their own comments with more detail.
It is important to remember that the civil comments we post at Daily Kos could be submitted as comments to the State Department. You do not need any special expertise or technological knowledge to post a comment. As one who has drafted and reviewed many comments submitted to federal agencies, the content of comments ranges from "Your plan sucks!" to "legal briefs" written by lawyers, complete with studies and exhibits. The length of comments varies too from one sentence to many pages. Most people will post a comment of one or two paragraphs stating why they oppose the XL Pipeline based on reading media reports because most have not read the 2000 pages of the SEIS.
We ask that you customize your comments from the samples provided because agencies tend to group together those comments that appear to be form letters and dismiss them. It was the "unique" and "substantive" comments that were evaluated for the EIS for the XL earlier in this process:
Comments from letters and emails received during the scoping period were entered into the administrative record, reviewed, and assigned an issue code. In total, 406,712 letters, cards, emails, e-comments, or telephone conversation records (henceforth referred to as “submissions”) were received from the public, agencies, and other interested groups and stakeholders. Of this total, 405,813 were duplicate form letters sponsored by nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), while the remaining 899 were not form letters. The 406,712 submissions contained 6,551 unique, substantive comments. These comments were evaluated and addressed as appropriate in the Supplemental EIS. Issues addressed in comments from all of these sources are summarized in this scoping summary document.
All comments were categorized by the specific issue addressed in the comment and entered into a database for ease of review. The following sections summarize the comments by EIS section or issue. Comments have been summarized as appropriate, particularly for concerns that were raised by several commenters. Statements regarding the Final EIS refer to the Final EIS for the Keystone XL Pipeline Project, published on August 26, 2011.
Our special guests include Sen. Sanders, Rep. Barbara Lee, Rep. Markey, Van Jones (interview by Meteor Blades), Rev. Lennox Yearwood (Hip-Hop Caucus President), Jane Kleeb (Bold Nebraska – She will be blogging while attending the final XL public hearing in Nebraska), Bill McKibben, Marty Cobenais (Indigenous Environmental Network), David Turnbull (Oil Change International), Ross Hammond (Friends of the Earth), Eddie Scher (Sierra Club), Jason Mogus (Tar Sands Solutions Network in Canada), Duncan Meisel (350.org), Eriel Deranger (Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation), Michael Brune (Sierra Club), Peter LaFontaine (National Wildlife Federation), Daniel Kessler (350.org), and Robyn Carmichael (National Wildlife Federation).
Blogathon participants will also include our terrific Daily Kos bloggers: beach babe in fl, DWG, James Wells, boatsie, ericlewis0, and Warren S.
Our daily calendars that we will post around DK will add more participants and guests as we finalize calendar slots.
Our blogathon team: JekyllnHyde, boatsie, rb137, DWG, peregrine kate, citisven, John Crapper, Onomastic and Meteor Blades as adviser.
If you would like to receive email notice when participants post or join our blogathon, please email patriotdaily@gmail.com.
Public comments play a key role in the process to determine whether the XL Pipeline should be granted a presidential permit. Under the NEPA, the State Department is required to provide a public comment period. In fact, when a government agency fails to prepare an EIS (which, of course, is not the case with the XL), the "sheer volume of negative comments" from the public is considered persuasive evidence by the courts to compel preparation of an EIS because "public controversy" is a factor considered under NEPA.
Public controversy plays a role in the public comment process too. The State Department needs to consider and incorporate the public comments into the final SEIS. For example, the environmental impact statements must contain a summary that includes the areas of controversy, including issues raised by the public.
The State Department must consider our public comments before drafting the final SEIS, and "where appropriate," must revise the SEIS in response to public comments. It is the final SEIS, complete with public comments, which will also be evaluated when the government commences the final step of the approval process, the national interest review where the government must decide whether the XL pipeline serves our national interest.
Public comments have already played a role in the XL pipeline process. "For the 2008 permit application, a final EIS was issued in August 2011, followed by a public review period. Largely in response to public comments and efforts by the state of Nebraska, the State Department determined that it needed to examine alternative pipeline routes that would avoid the environmentally sensitive Sand Hills region of Nebraska, a sand dune formation with highly porous soil and shallow groundwater that recharges the Ogallala aquifer." In 2011, environmental issues identified in the Final EIS and stressed in public comments led to the State Department's decision to delay a determination on national interest until it had more information. Similarly, President Obama decided that more information was needed based on the NEPA public comment process:
Because this permit decision could affect the health and safety of the American people as well as the environment, and because a number of concerns have been raised through a public process, we should take the time to ensure that all questions are properly addressed and all the potential impacts are properly understood.
It is because the public comments can and have played a role in the XL pipeline process that
Oklahoma GOP Rep. Markwayne Mullin, who supports the pipeline, has been encouraging citizens to submit public comments at his website. Mullin wants to make it easier for citizens to submit comments because the State Department website can be confusing as to how and where to submit comments.
Mullin is right. The website is confusing. The left sidebar on the home page does not provide a link for public comments. But, if you click onto "Contact Information," it will take you to the public comment submission page. Or, you can read the entire front page, and in the last line, you will find the email address for public comments.
Here are more resources for Public Comments:
1. 350.org will deliver your comments directly to the State Department and has a system set up so that you can customize your comment.
Two fact sheets: Fact sheet on the SEIS and key points from the SEIS, such as the creation of only 35 permanent jobs.
2. Sierra Club has a sample public comment that allows you to personalize your message.
3. Van Jones explains some of the tar sands myths:
So, let's contribute to some more public controversy over the XL Pipeline by posting comments and asking friends and family to do the same. But please remember to keep your comments civil because public comments become part of the administrative record.
