I've mentioned this here and there but just so everybody know:

Please distribute this to all your networks: The Marines goofed!

When preparing the website and public documents for the 29Palms Marine Base proposed expansion, the Marines neglected to give the correct mailing address for public comments on the home page of the website, and it is missing from all the public documents including:

1. The Project Briefing Paper
2. The Project Overview
3. The Public Info Brief
4. The Trifold Brochure
5. The Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
6. The Contact
7. The Public Comment Link on the home page

Instead, the contact info is given only for the project office on the 29Palms Marine Base. The Project Manager, Mr. Chris Proudfoot, has been made aware of this problem, and has not responded to requests for an extension, and an investigation to find out how many public comments have been sent to the wrong address, what has been done with those comments, and what can be done to rectify a mistake that has existed since the release of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement.

NEPA requires and encourages public comment, and the Marines have not given the public the information needed to send in their comments. EVERYONE - send a message to the Marines politely requesting a 60 day extension of the comment period during which time they are to conduct an investigation and good faith effort to find out how many comments were submitted to the wrong address. This is a major NEPA violation, and they must rectify this mistake.

Please contact immediately: Chris Proudfoot, Project Manager, at (760) 830-3764 and leave a message asking for a 60 day extension, or email:SMBPLMSWEBPAO@usmc.mil or do both!

Please act now!

Thanks,
Amy


(Thanks Steve Gardiner!)

--

I was on the phone today with a reporter from a major newspaper I brought this and the Federal Register Notice goof-up to his attention.

We are to be in contact with each other Monday morning and I would expect a major article on this on Tuesday morning.

i would like to read that article. will it be in the times , register or....? either way that is great news. the more people that know about this the better.

they didnt goof. it is intentional.

if they dont recieve any letters and so on then there is no resistance and to go ahead and take over.

of coarse they arne tresponding to a request for an extention, its not in thier interest.

i would like to read that article. will it be in the times , register or....? either way that is great news. the more people that know about this the better.



I'll let you know when its published. The writer is garnering information for the story and is VERY interested in what we have provided them with.

I started threads on this here: http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?p=12918478

and here: http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?t=981227

Got the following idea from navy-jeepster . . .


Originally Posted by navy-jeepster
Since the Marines are a department of the Navy, and fall under the secretary of the Navy, he has his own facebook page. I liked it, and posted info from above on it.
See if that gets their attention.

http://www.facebook.com/SecretaryoftheNavy?sk=wall

Maybe if everyone else does the same, it will generate interest from way on top.

Todd
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?p=12918478

I dont understand the big deal. So what if the Marines have an address on their website for the project people at 29 Palms? Its still pretty clear where the comments are supposed to be sent. Thats all over the internet, their website, news releases and notices. Even if someone screwed up and sent comments to the base address by mistake (instead of san diego), are they going to return them? ignore them? trash them? forward them to san diego? The answer would be important. I think the base PAO already said they wouldnt be considered right? If they were postmarked by next thursday, I find that hard to believe. Im still for an extension because of the size of the EIS and its damn hard to read.

Extension should also be given because they screwed up the date in their federal register notice. They originally said comments closed April 11.
It wasn't until May 13 that they published a "extension" notice in federal register giving us until May 26.

Difference between April 11 and May 13 is 32 days. At a minimum, thats what they owe us for a comment period extension.

I just found another major issue with the DEIS.

It states:

1.5.5 Draft EIS

Concurrently, a Notice of Availability of the Draft EIS was announced in the Federal Register, local newspapers, and on the project website (see Appendix C, Public Involvement). This notice indicates locations (e.g., public libraries) where the Draft EIS can be reviewed, the duration of the public review and comment period, the address where comments can be sent, and the time and location of the public meetings.

Now compare the Federal Register Notice from page 10584 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 38 / Friday, February 25, 2011 / Notices

EIS No. 20110051, Draft EIS, USN, CA,
Marine Corps Air Ground Combat
Center Project, Land Acquisition and
Airspace Establishment to Support
Large-Scale MAGTF Live-Fire and
Maneuver Training Facility, San
Bernardino County, CA, Comment
Period Ends: 04/11/2011, Contact:
Chris Proudfoot 760–830–3764.

And the "amended" Notice of Federal Register Volume 76, Number 93 (Friday, May 13, 2011) Page 28029


EIS No. 20110051, Draft EIS, USN, CA, Marine Corps Air Ground Combat
Center Project, Land Acquisition and Airspace Establishment to Support
Large-Scale MAGTF Live-Fire and Maneuver Training Facility, San
Bernardino County, CA, Comment Period Ends: 05/26/2011, Contact: Chris
Proudfoot 760-830-3764.
Revision of FR Notice Published 02/24/2011: Extending Comment
Period from 04/11/2011 to 05/26/2011.

Clearly the Federal Register Notices are not in keeping with what is provided in the DEIS.

Yet one more reason to call the USMC and demand an extension of time to submit comments.

[QUOTE=LYIN' KING;12919272]

http://www.facebook.com/SecretaryoftheNavy?sk=wall

Maybe if everyone else does the same, it will generate interest from way on top.
QUOTE]

I see that the Secretary of Navy responded (on Tuesday at 3:13 pm) but he didn't say much:

"Thank you all for voicing your concerns about the proposed 29 Palms Land Acquisition Project. Your comments are important to me; however please understand that comments posted here are not being collected as part of the public comment process. It would be most beneficial if they're submitted through the channels put in place for public comment:"

http://www.facebook.com/SecretaryoftheNavy?sk=wall


Just a 10-second phonecall and he could at least get the comment period extended for another couple months.

It's the DiFi/Blum/Milcon/EnviRoMantisist connection that got rolling on this issue over seven years ago!

The don't bite the hands that fed/feed you syndrome!!!