Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />255. Each of the negative impacts from the proposed Bayport facility on the plaintiffs <br />or. the plaintiffs' properties would be redressed by a decision of this Court favorable to the <br />Plaintiffs. <br />VIII. RELIEF REQUESTED <br />256. Plaintiffs request that an injunction be issued prohibiting the Defendants from <br />issuing a permit for the Bayport Project until a Supplemental Draft EIS is prepazed that <br />incorporates the changed conditions and new information previously discussed, the public is <br />allowed to meaningfully comment, and the NEPA process properly followed. <br />257. Plaintiffs also request that an injunction be issued preventing Defendants from <br />using the Galveston District's Policy No. 01-001 that. overland sheet flow is not a sufficient <br />hydrologic connection, unless and until the rule-making procedures of the APA have been <br />followed. <br />258. Plaintiffs also request that this Court declare that overland flow of surface waters <br />that connect wetlands with navigable waters is sufficient to make these wetlands jurisdictional <br />water of the United States under § 404 of the Clean Water Act. <br />259. Finally, Plaintiffs request that this Court remand the delineation of jurisdictional <br />wetlands to the Corps for further evaluation and direct that the extent of jurisdictional wetlands <br />at the proposed Bayport Project location be re-examined using the best available topographic <br />information as well as other factors deemed appropriate by the Court. <br />36. <br />