OCR Text |
Show Issue 25: The Bureau of Reclamation has shown a lack of sensitivity for adverse environmental impacts of the Bonneville Unit mmmmm* mm* m* m** mmmiimiimi*-* » • ' 1 n » 1 1 n 1 r » n » > 1 • « 1 1 1 1 1 1 » « . < u and has viewed the Environmental Statement as an unnecessary and annoying expense. Sierra Club Environmental Protection Agency and various individuals Response: The Bureau of Reclamation cannot fully acknowledge and accept the criticism that the Bonneville Unit plan shows little concern for adverse impacts and that the function and importance of the Environmental Statement is being treated lightly. It is important that critics of the Bonneville Unit and the Bureau of Reclamation understand the evolution of environmental planning within the Bureau of Reclamation in order to objectively analyze the Bonneville Unit plan. A comparison of the draft environmental statement and the final environmental statement for the Bonneville Unit should reflect that the Bureau of Reclamation is very concerned about the impacts of its water development projects upon the environment and is actively trying to improve both new and ongoing Unit plans. The fact that an honest effort is being made to prepare an adequate environmental statement in full compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act should also be readily apparent. - .•"'•• ' l * - Early reclamation projects formulated and constructed by the Bureau of Reclamation were primarily single purpose, irrigation projects. Later on, under the multi- purpose concept, consideration was given to other project purposes such as hydroelectric power, municipal and industrial use, fish and wildlife propagation, recreation and flood control. These different purposes competing for the use of water necessitated a more thorough evaluation of the plan and was a first step in environmental awareness. Passage of the National Environmental Policy Act of I969 brought about a greater concern for environmental factors and required a full disclosure and assessment of all impacts associated with a proposed action. Progress on the implementation of NEPA was slow at first and was hampered by the lack of guidelines, differing opinions on the applicability of the new law to projects in various stages of development, and in some cases indifference or insensitivity to the provisions of the Act. Gradually guidelines were developed and application of the Act was clarified by court decisions as it became more fully implemented. The Bureau of Reclamation recognizes the merits of NEPA and accepts the responsibility to conform to the spirit and intent of the Act. In evidence thereof, the Bureau has: ( l) Hired environmental specialists at the project and regional levels to direct and assist in the preparation Issue raised by: A7 « |