My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP10769
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
10001-10999
>
WSP10769
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 3:14:37 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 4:31:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.105
Description
Colorado River-Water Projects-Navajo
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
7/1/2001
Author
BOR
Title
Revised Draft Environmental Assessment for the Jicarilla Apache Nation Water Subcontract-aka USBR/PNM Water Contract Renewal and Extension
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.
/
139
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 />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />year (Pfeifer 2000). The USBR will address the fish passage system in a separate environmental <br />assessment. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />The assumptions that USBR is including in its assessment of the proposed action include the following: <br />. There will continue to be a strong demand by SJGS customers for electrical energy. <br />. The amount of water SUbject to the jicariiia Apache Nallon vlaier Sub\.:ulli.r~~i (1l1\j \..l.il1~i.I\.:Y <br />contracted waters obtained from BHP (8,000 AF per year) is the minimum required to allow SJGS to <br />meet the increased demand over the length of the contract. <br />. Alternative nonriver water sources or management practices are insufficient to provide the amount <br />and quality of water required for efficient operation of SJGS. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />4.2 Alternative Sources of Water <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Two other sources of water were considered in this analysis: (I) purchase of existing irrigation water <br />rights and conversion to industrial use and (2) development of groundwater. These alternatives were also <br />considered but ultimately rejected as part of the analysis in the 1977 environmental impact statement <br />(EIS) for development of the SJGS (USBR 1977). <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />4.2.1 Irrigation Water <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Purchase of existing irrigation water rights would require changing the waters designated for irrigation to <br />municipal and industrial (M&I) waters. This could result in the immediate loss of numerous agricultural <br />jobs in the local area. as well as loss of agricultural production and support services. Use of water <br />currently being diverted for irrigation is not feasible and inappropriate since conversion of agricultural <br />water to M&I water is subject to public interest criteria under the NM 1985 amendment to water rights <br />transfer statutes. Also, since PNM does not have the power to condemn water rights, this alternative may <br />not be possible or financially feasible and, therefore, may not provide an adequate amount of water rights <br />and a reliable water supply for SJGS. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />4.2.2 Groundwater <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Studies conducted to consider development of groundwater indicate that such an alternative would result <br />in high costs for water treatment. would not provide a sufficient quantity of water, and would adversely <br />affect other users of the groundwater resources. Groundwater quality in the vicinity of SJGS has been <br />found to range from 1,500 to 25,000 milligrams per liter (mglL) total dissolved solids (TDS) (USBR <br />1977). Feasibility studies conducted by PNM have demonstrated that the cost of treating water <br />containing such high levels ofTDS would make its use prohibitively expensive. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />With respect to the available quantity of groundwater, the 1977 EIS states that recoverable groundwater in <br />the first 100 feet of aquifer in the vicinity of the SJGS would be no more than 300 AF per square mile <br />(USBR 1977). Based on that estimate, the area required to extract the required 16,200 AF could be as <br />much as or more than 54 square miles. This also would make the use of groundwater impractical. These <br />sources of water would be identified as a non-Federal action and are administered through the New <br />Mexico State Engineer's Office. Utilization of groundwater would have a significant impact on the <br />existing San Juan Basin groundwater availability. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Because of these limitations, the alternatives to acquire other sources of wateT were determined not to be <br />reasonable alternatives and were not considered further. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br />OOHn <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.