WSP09857

• File Number: 8200.400
• Description: Colorado River Basin Briefing Documents-History-Correspondence
• State: CO
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Water Division: 5
• Date: 10/1/1999
• Author: DOI-BOR
• Title: Programmatic Environmental Assessment-Rulemaking-Offstream Storage Colorado River Water - Development-Release Intentionally Created Unused Apportionment - Lower Division States - Final-Appendices A-G
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

'1)'rro lIS

flood control releases available to Mexico by 23 kaf7yr from 1999-2015 as described in the
Biological Assessment (BA) Table IV-3, The offstream storage of 1.2 mafin Arizona under the
Rule will not affect the delivery of treaty waters to Mexico,

No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, without the Rule the Secretary will continue to deliver annual
apportionments to the Lower Division States and treaty water to Mexico, Nevada's declining
unused apportionment would be available for use in California and Arizona in a normal year,
Without the Rule it is possible that California and Nevada could enter into a SIRA to provide for
offstream storage, development, and release ofICUA. Reclamation would complete the
appropriate level ofNEP A analysis for such actions on a case-by-case basis.

C, BiololJ:ical Environment

1. Wildlife and Threatened and Endangered SDecies

Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires Federal agencies to consult with
the Services to ensure that they are not undertaking actions likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of any listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat. Reclamation has prepared numerous NEP A documents and entered into many section 7
consultations under the ESA with the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) for LCR operations,
facilities, and water delivery contracts pertaining to the CAP in Arizona, the SNWS in Nevada,
and the LCR mainstem affecting the States of Arizona, California, and Nevada that address
potential effects to wildlife and threatened and endangered species and designated habitat
(Appendix A and C), These NEP A and ESA consultation documents are directly related to the
analysis of potential impacts on threatened and endangered species and their critical habitat from
the Rule and subsequent actions taken under the Rule and are hereby incorporated by reference
into this FPEA. These documents provide compliance for and represent the baseline for current
and projected routine LCR operations, facilities, and water delivery contracts. The noted section
7 consultation documents are incorporated by reference into the BA prepared for this proposed
action, The developing LCR Multi-Species Conservation Program (MSCP) is also incorporated
by reference into the BA. Storage and Interstate Release Agreements under the Rule have been
identified as actions to be included in the MSCP and those proposed after the completion of the
MSCP will be included or incorporated into the consultation with the Service for the MSCP.

Preferred Alternative

Reclamation has reviewed the Federal actions associated with the Preferred Alternative for
potential impacts on threatened and endangered species and their critical habitat as identified in
the Biological Opinion (BO) for CAP delivery, consultations for the SNWS, and the LCRBA and
Biological and Conference Opinion (BCO) on LCR Operations and Maintenance, Reclamation
believes the development and release ofICUA under the Rule will be accomplished within the

16