Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />"tmn117 <br /> <br />current and projected routine operations of the LCR as analyzed by these documents and <br />consistent with the BCP A and the Decree, Reclamation initiated informal consultation with the <br />Service and other Federal agencies with an informational meeting on August 22, 1997, The draft <br />Rule and DPEA were released to the public on December 31, 1997 and copies provided to the <br />Service, Reclamation and Service staff met bi-monthly between January and June 1998 to clarify <br />the consultation process, storage and retrieval scenarios, potential impacts on endangered species <br />and designated habitat, and to clear up any ambiguous or incomplete information. Reclamation <br />prepared the BA to analyze the potential affects on listed species and designated habitat from <br />implementation of the Rule, The BA utilized the species list identified in the LCRBA which is <br />incorporated by reference into the BA as Table IV-I, By memorandum dated June 5, 1998, <br />Reclamation submitted the BA and requested concurrence from the Service that implementation <br />of the Rule: <br /> <br />. Will have "no effect" on the American peregrine falcon, bald eagle, desert tortoise, flat- <br />tailed homed lizard, brown pelican, and Colorado squawfish; <br /> <br />. Is "not likely to adversely affect" the razorback sucker, bonytail chub, Yuma clapper rail, <br />or southwestern willow flycatcher, Effects on these species are expected to be <br />discountable or insignificant and a take of the species is not expected to occur; and <br /> <br />. Will "not adversely modifY' critical habitat for the razorback sucker and bonytail chub in <br />the LCR. <br /> <br />The foUowing commitments apply to the review and execution of all SIRA developed pursuant to <br />the Rule: <br /> <br />. A SIRA between California and Nevada and the A WBA is limited to the foUowing: <br />maximum storage in Arizona for interstate use is 200 kaflyr; and by Arizona law, no more <br />than a total of 100 kaflyr oflCUA may be developed for release to authorized entities in <br />California and Nevada in any given year, <br /> <br />. Reclamation will consult with the Service on potential effects to listed species and <br />designated critical habitat from a SIRA when it is presented to the Secretary for <br />consideration, participation in, and prior to execution, In addition, a SIRA proposed after <br />the completion of the MSCP will be included or incorporated into the consultation for the <br />MSCP, <br /> <br />. Reclamation considered the potential for storage and retrieval scenarios to effect <br />implementation of the provisions of the terms and conditions of the present BCG on LCR <br />operations and maintenance. The adoption and implementation of the proposed Rule will <br />not inhibit or diminish Reclamation's ability to implement the provisions and terms and <br />conditions of the BCG nor have any affect on efforts by the MSCP or others to obtain <br />water for fish and wildlife. The proposed Rule may permit stakeholders to acquire water, <br />through contracts, for specific fish and wildlife purposes through the MSCP or other <br />procedures (see Number 3 page 42 ofBA). <br /> <br />17 <br />