My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP08870
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
8001-9000
>
WSP08870
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:49:58 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 3:19:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8210.470
Description
Pacific Southwest Interagency Committee
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
9/4/1980
Author
PSIAC
Title
Minutes of the 80-2 Meeting - September 4-5 1980
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
90
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />PART C-6 <br /> <br />U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service <br /> <br />Region 2 <br />Albuquerque, New Mexico <br /> <br />REFUGES. <br /> <br />Recently, Director Greenwalt determined that, cons~dering all factors, <br />it is in the best over~ll,interests to permit Southern California <br />Edison to route a 500 f0I line across Kofa. The line is to carry energy <br />from a newly constructed nuclear power plant near Phoenix for distribution <br />in California. . Arrangements are being made to authorize a route that <br />follows an existing El Paso Natural Gas Company pipeline right-of-way <br />and to utilize the El Paso's roadway across the refuge. <br /> <br />During a June 1980 meeting, El Paso Company officials expressed concern <br />regarding heavy equipment crossing over the pipeline. They contend that <br />the weight of 90-ton cranes, ready-mix trucks, etc., crossing over the <br />line would damage the pipe, possibly resulting in explosion, fire, etc. <br /> <br />Several possible safeguards have been discussed. They are as follows: <br /> <br />1. At each of a possible 200 cross~ngs, cover the pipe with at <br />least five feet of earth fill. This is not considered feasible because <br />the fill material would have to be hauled in and, following powerline <br />construction, removed from the refuge. <br /> <br />2. Pour 30 feet wide concrete pads over each crossing and along <br />sections of line where the road follows directly over the line. This <br />too is considered not feasible because the pads would have to be broken <br />up and removed after pow~rline construction. <br /> <br />3. Construct a new ,access road parallel to the existing road but <br />away from the gas line. This alternative was not addressed in the EIS. <br />Also, it would disturb ateas\ where there has been no prior disturbance. <br />As the situation now stands, the refuge manager has passed the "new road" <br />request to the .Area and Regional Offices for consideration. <br /> <br />Another bit of information, the SCE desert bighorn study is finding more <br />sheep activity near the pipeline than is occurring immediately north of <br />the refuge along the Brenda Route (Interstate 10). <br /> <br />\ENDANGERED SPECIES <br /> <br />San Juan River Project: <br /> <br />Appropriate agency Regional Directors agreed at a meeting on October 30, 1978, <br />that Water and Power Resources Service, Amarillo, Texas, would consult on <br />the water withdrawal aspects of the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project and <br />all phases of other projects under their jurisdiction involving the San Juan <br /> <br />C-SO <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.