My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP11719
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
11000-11999
>
WSP11719
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 3:18:38 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 5:07:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.101.10.D
Description
Glen Canyon Dam/Lake Powell
State
AZ
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
10/19/1994
Title
CWCB Agenda Item 21 (c) - Experimental Flow (Spike Release) - Flood Frequency Reduction
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Board Memo
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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 />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Charles A. Calhoun - Glen Canyon Dam operations <br />September 23, 1994 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />long-term yield to the upper Basin from reserving exclusive flood <br />control space in the reservoir by using lower storage levels. <br /> <br />Apparently, the comments to the DEIS (which we have not seen) were <br />to the effect that the environmental impacts of installing the <br />flashboards were not adequately analyzed in the DEIS. If this is <br />true, then it is equally obvious that the environmental impacts of <br />reserving "flood control space" have not been analyzed. In fact, <br />there is no analysis in the DEIS of the environmental impacts <br />associated with this alternative. Therefore, this alternative <br />could be implemented only after the preparation of a supplemental <br />draft EIS. Although the surface level of Lake Powell does <br />fluctuate widely in the course of normal operations, the Lake level <br />would not be as high, and would be lower on a more frequent basis, <br />if "flood control" space were expanded. <br /> <br />Perhaps more importantly, the alterative of "reserving additional <br />exclusive flood control space" is specifically prohibited by the <br />terms of the Grand Canyon Protection Act. Therefore, this <br />alternative cannot be implemented absent a change in the Law of the <br />River. The Act provides that interim and long-term operations at <br />Glen Canyon Dam must be undertaken: <br /> <br />[I]n a manner fully consistent with and subiect to the <br />Colorado River Compact, the Upper Colorado River Basin <br />Compact, the Water Treaty of 1944 with Mexico, the Decree <br />of the supreme Court in Arizona v. California, and the <br />provisions of the Colorado River storage Project Act of <br />1956 and the Colorado River Basin Project Act of 1968 <br />that govern allocation, appropriation, development, and <br />exportation of the waters of the Colorado River Basin. <br /> <br />Grand Canyon Protection Act, section 1802(b). <br /> <br />In order to make it clear that operations of Glen Canyon Dam are <br />subject to the Law of the River, the Act specifically provides that <br />the long-term criteria be "separate from and in addition to <br />operations specified in section 602(b) of the Colorado River Basin <br />Project Act of 1968." section 1804(c) (1) (A). Operating criteria <br />under the Grand Canyon Projection Act are prepared only after the <br />preparation of annual operating plans specified in section 602(b) <br />of the Colorado River Basin Project Act of 1968. The determination <br />of operations related to "flood control" under section <br />602(a)(3)(iii) is part of the overall river operations, to which <br />operations under the Grand Canyon Protection Act are subject, and <br />subservient. <br /> <br />This interpretation of the Grand Canyon Protection Act of 1992, and <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.