Laserfiche WebLink
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS <br /> 2 INTRODUCTION 1 <br /> 3 BACKGROUND 2 <br /> 4 I. NMFS HAS CONCLUDED THAT IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NFIP <br /> 5 <br /> JEOPARDIZES SALMON AND ORCAS 2 <br /> 6 <br /> A. Mapping <br /> B. Levee Maintenance Criteria 4 <br /> 7 <br /> 8 C. Minimum Eligibility Criteria 4 <br /> 9 D. Community Rating System 5 <br /> 10 II. TO AVOID JEOPARDY,NMFS RECOMMENDED SIGNIFICANT <br /> CHANGES TO EVERY MAJOR ELEMENT OF THE NFIP. 6 <br /> 11 <br /> STANDARD OF REVIEW 9 <br /> 12 <br /> ARGUMENT 10 <br /> 13 <br /> I. PLAINTIFF IS LIKELY TO SUCCEED ON THE MERITS OF ITS <br /> 14 CLAIM THAT FEMA IS VIOLATING § 7 AND § 9 OF THE ESA. 10 <br /> 15 A. The ESA Strictly Prohibits Actions That Cause Jeopardy to Listed <br /> Species or That Result in Unlawful Take. 10 <br /> 16 <br /> B. To Comply With§ 7,Federal Agencies Must Either Implement RPAs <br /> 17 as Written or Bear the Burden of Proving That Their Actions Avoid <br /> 1 S Jeopardy. 12 <br /> 19 C. By Not Implementing the RPA or Any Alternative that It Has <br /> Demonstrated Will Avoid Jeopardy, FEMA is Violating § 7 of the <br /> 20 ESA. 14 <br /> 21 1. FEMA Has Not Implemented RPA#2. 15 <br /> 22 2. FEMA Has Not Implemented RPA#3. 18 <br /> 23 i. Inadequate and untimely compliance. 20 <br /> 24 ii. Omission of RPA development standards. 21 <br /> 25 iii. FEMA's habitat assessment guidance lacks substantive <br /> standards or clear definitions. 23 <br /> 26 <br /> 27 Earthjustice <br /> PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY 705 Second Ave.,Suite 203 <br /> Seattle, WA 98104 <br /> 28 INJUNCTION(Case No.2:11-cv-02044-RSM) -i- <br /> (206)343-7340 <br />