Laserfiche WebLink
<br />o <br />c.) <br />(~..) <br />C"j <br /> <br />-.J <br /> <br />S. Comment: <br />Response: <br /> <br />6. Comment: <br /> <br />Response: <br /> <br />7. Comment: <br /> <br />Response: <br /> <br />appropriate. This determination is not made until the final EA is <br />completed, Reclamation believes that long-term operation changes <br />involving a 250 cfs release will have significant impacts; however, low <br />releases for a short-term test are not predicted to be significant, <br /> <br />What is the No Action alternative-is it realistic? <br />The No Action alternative in this case is simply not to conduct the low <br />flow test, If this alternative is selected, minimum releases will be 500 cfs <br />rather than 250 cfs during this test period, The E1S on Navajo Reservoir <br />operations would be completed without benefit of observing directly the <br />impacts of 250 cfs summer releases in the field, It is a realistic <br />alternative, <br /> <br />Edi torial comments wete suggested to better reflect actual language from <br />the endangered fish flow recommendation report, <br />An editorial comment suggested include replacing" implementing flow <br />recommendations" with "operating Navajo Dam to meetflow <br />recommendations", The use of the word "implement" is consistent with <br />the Proposed Federal Action for the Navajo Reservoir Operations Draft <br />Environmerrtallmpact Statement as stated in the Federal Register notice <br />dated October 1. 1999, As such, Reclamation will continue to use the <br />word implement as part of the Federal Actionfor this EA andfor the Draft <br />EIS, <br /> <br />A related editorial comment suggested changing the following sentence <br />(found at the end of the first paragraph on page 3 of the draft EA) from "It <br />is the position of the SJBRIP that these flow recommendations are <br />necessary 10 protect and improve habitat of endangered fish in the San <br />Juan River" to "It is believed by the SJBRIP that the flow , <br />recommendations will protect and improve habitat needed to recover <br />endangered fish populations in the San Juan River," The final EA will <br />reflect this change, <br /> <br />The City of Fannington opposes any operation which would result in <br />releases below 500 cfs, but does not oppose a 5 - 10 day test which will <br />demonstrate the many harmful effects of a 250 cfs release, <br />The CiTy believes that the low flow release test of 250 cfs will demonstrate <br />the many harmful effects of low flow releases, The CiTy plans to actively <br />participate in the test, with their engineer being the point of contact, The <br />City also plans to do cross section elevations of the river, water quality <br />testing, and take video footage, The City will also operate their power <br />plant during the test, to better detennine if the low releases will damage <br />their power facilities, <br /> <br />11 <br />