Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~-_. - <br /> <br />'-' <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />, , <br /> <br />- 49 - <br /> <br />available when the applicant needs it. The DEIS con- <br /> <br />firms discussions with numerous BLM officials over the <br /> <br />~, <br /> <br />past year in which they have indicated that there is <br /> <br />no water issue or problem associated with the Rangely <br /> <br />site. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />It is understandable that REA's Washington-based <br /> <br />staff lacks familiarity with western water issues. But <br /> <br />it is surprising that REA has not deferred to the BLM's <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />conclusions in this matter, inasmuch as BLM must deal <br /> <br />with western water issues on a far more regular and in- <br />*/ <br />tensive basis than REA.- <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />1. Water Availability <br />The DEIS imparts no information as to how REA <br /> <br />reached its conclusion that the Rangely site lacks a <br /> <br />dependable and timely water supply or the reason(s) why <br /> <br />its opinion differs from BLM's. The water discussion <br />'(DEIS at 12-13, 78-87, 138) is general and superficial. <br /> <br />It does not give the reader the necessary step-by-step <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />*/ Rio Blanco's concerns are compounded by the fact that <br />REA has apparently not had the benefit of consultation <br />with the one federal agency that claims expertise in <br />western water issues -- the Water and Power Resources <br />Service. For an agency (which lacks expertise in water <br />matters) not to seek the opinion of the federal govern- <br />ment's own experts on the so-called paramount issue in <br />this DEIS, strikes us as unbelievable. CEQ's regulations <br />mandate such consultation. .' See 40 C.F.R. 55 1501.6, <br />1501. 7. <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />0383 <br />