...
Since this issue is striking such a raw nerve, and since there is no proper documentation forthcoming, and since the starting documents have vanished from the internet, I'm getting the impression they really didn't follow environmental law when they initiated their policy. Any one else getting that sense?
You presume that there was a reason to bring the NEPA process to a completion. Such actions can be withdrawn when there is no longer any party proposing to implement an action requiring a NEPA process.
I don't think that removing a disfunctional sewage system requires a NEPA process. I don't think that requiring the minimum possible method to implement an environmental protection required by law necessitates the NEPA process.
Someday, if someone successfully lobbies Congress for funding, staffing and direction or otherwise authorizes and funds a design for a replacement sewage process for the Mt Whitney corridor of the John Muir Wilderness, a NEPA process will be appropriate. Until then, no one is wasting the money, no one should be.
Dale B. Dalrymple
