I do not remember that testimony this year. I believe the Senator from Alabama is probably correct about some such testimony for years past. But to exactly the extent that that is true, the amendment which we are discussing is irrelevant and has no impact other than probably to drive up costs because it drives up the paperwork involved in the entire system.
Discussing the relevance and impact of an amendment during Senate debate.
Share
More from T. Gorton
I agree with his statement that the Committee intends for Interior to study the entire NRC report carefully and to adopt a rule that is consistent with the findings and recommendations of that report.
I agree with that view. It should be the U.S. Forest Service's priority to use the most effective, environmentally protective aerially applied fire retardants.
I would agree that maintaining dual suppliers of high performance, environmentally acceptable fire retardants is critical to the mission of the Service.
I would agree that the U.S. Forest Service should preserve the option to use such fire retardants in order to minimize the long-term visual impacts of wildfires.
Other voices in this conversation
