Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.. ,....,-,-.". <br /> <br />'-' <br /> <br />I <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />-I..., <br /> <br />- 6 - <br /> <br />-.... <br /> <br />Rio Blanco sets forth in detail below the bases for <br /> <br />its conclusions and recommendations. In particular, it <br /> <br />'-' <br /> <br />documents that the socioeconomic impacts in Rio Blanco <br /> <br />County of a power plant built in Bonanza, Utah will be far <br /> <br />'-' <br /> <br />greater than those disclosed in the draft EIS, and that <br /> <br />the draft EIS is grossly inadequate in its disclosure and <br /> <br />analysis of the two alternative sites. The County also <br /> <br />sets forth its basis for concluding that, as a matter of <br /> <br />law, BLM and REA have the legal authority and the leqal <br /> <br />responsibility to issue rights-of-way and a loan guarantee <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />for either site only if terms and conditions are included <br /> <br />i~ those instruments which provide for full mitigation of <br /> <br />socioeconomic impacts in the affected jurisdictions. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Rio Blanco demonstrates below that the sole reason <br /> <br />offered for selecting the Bonanza, Utah site rather than <br /> <br />the Rangely, Colorado site -- the "proper timing for a <br /> <br />firm water supply and whether a firm water supply would <br /> <br />even be available" (DEIS at 125) -- is unfounded. The <br /> <br />County will demonstrate that concerns with respect to the <br /> <br />timing and availability of water supply for the Rangely <br /> <br />site are exaggerated and based upon misunderstandings and <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />0409 <br />