We await for some form of intellectual post from…TeleHomemaker and 0Patrick0 or any of their other aliases as well as others regarding project facts presented. Unfortunately, lack of education and knowledge is in full display bogging-down meaningful advancement. As far as SCOTUS accepting or rejecting Alaskas petition, certainly this has implication to EPAs veto. However, whether successful in reversing EPAs veto IN ANY COURT, it does not change basic fundamental project non-advancement facts as repeatedly posted. EPAs veto is just one of many moving parts to this saga. The proponent has positioned themselves, as well as Alaska, into this situation with many embarrassing and counter-productive actions hindering development advancement. Should not stakeholders be directing their frustrations to the proponent?