WSP06879 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~4/~~/1998 15:59 I I I I I I I I I I I 5206239797 0"0'0 6 4 9 PAGE !l2 SWC 4 BIODIV5TY Mr. Dale Ensminger April 3, 1998 Page 2 COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED RULE . According to Reclamation, Approval to deliver Colorado River water cannot obligate the Federal Government extra non-reimbursable expenses to store water of deliver it to a new loCation. We strongly suggest that Reclamation also specifically state that'" Approval to deliver Colorado River water cannot obligate the Federal Govenunent to store water or deliver it to a new location in such a way as would jeopardize endangered or threatened species, destroy or adversely modifY critical habitat, or preclude opportunities for conservation of threatened or endangered species." - . Production of this proposed rule is premature lacking a fum definition of the tenn "surplus_" . The term "intentionally created unused apportionment" is ill-defmed in the proposed. rule to the point of incoherence. . "Indirect" storage in the form of ground water savings should not be allowed under this rule as this form of storage will result in signifiCllllt net loss of Colorado River available for threatened and endangered species conservation, both in the United States and the Republic of Mexico. The fact that "indirect storage" will "used more often than direct underground storage" will significantly contribute to the availability ofless Colorado River water for biological resources, NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT ANALYSIS IS SIGNJFICANTLY INCOMPLETE We believe completion of-an environmental impact statement is required for this proposed rule. Any determination that an ErS is not required for this rule could only have been be the result of dismissal or ignorance of several direct effects. some potentially significant indirect effects. and virtually aU potentially significant cumulative effects, Based on the likelihood of effects to listed and proposed species and critical habitat alone, we strongly believe the proposed action is likely to result in significant impacts to the Colorado River, Las Vegas region. and Arizona environment, and that completion of an Ers is necessary prior to implementation of the proposed action. According to NEP A, an Environmental Impact Statement is required when a proposed federal action has the potential to "significantly affect the quality oftbe human environment. " The term "human environment" means the natural and physical environments and the relationship of people with those environments. Reclamation is. therefore. required to issue an EIS when a proposed action may cause significant (as defmed at 40 CFR 1508,27) impacts to the