WSP11852 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 00u301 River water, thereby developing ICUA. When the Secretary is satisfied that ICUA has been or will be developed, an equivalent quantity ofICUA will be released by the Secretary for use by the consuming entity. Based on a reformulation of the prospective transactions that may take place under the rule, the Department believes that the final programmatic environmental assessment (FPEA) is appropriate. Secretarial Discretion Comment: Several respondents commented that the rule should not be fina1ized or surplus water stored offstream before the Department clarifies exactly what discretion the Secretary has in providing water for habitat enhancement and how the proposed rule would affect that discretion. Response: In the Lower Colorado River area (LCR), the Decree apportions surplus among the Lower Division States as follows: 50 percent to ,California, 46 percent to Arizona, and 4 percent to Nevada. Entities with surplus contracts are currently using surplus and may store it off stream for intrastate use without the proposed Rule. The Department recognizes that the Secretary's management of the LCR to accommodate endangered and sensitive species and their critical habitat is being reviewed as part of the MSCP. ' FWS developed a Reasonable and Prudent Alternative (RP A) in the Biological and Conference Opinion (BCO) for the current and 'projected routine operations and maintenance of the LCR The RP A contains a number of provisions, one of which, 13(a), addresses the type and extent of the Secretary's discretionary action flexibility for all operations and maintenance activities on the Colorado River. Reclamation has provided a summary of its discretion to FWS. Reclamation complied with RP A provision 13(b) by providing a report to FWS on December 30, 1998, that identifies opportunities to increase the Secretary's discretion in Colorado River operations in order to provide water for fish and wildlife purposes. The Department believes that this final rule can be implemented without compromising the MSCP process. Adeauacv of the Environmental Assessment Comment: The level of environmental compliance proposed by Reclamation is inadequate and Reclamation should complete a programmatic EIS on the proposed rule and the entire operation of the Colorado River. Response: Please refer to the previous discussion of adequacy of the environmental assessment under the Environmental Concerns section of the Public Comments on Proposed Rule and Responses on General Issues. Potential Effects on Plants and Wildlife Comment: Compliance with the ESA for the proposed rule was not accomplished through the biological opinions for Central Arizona Project (CAP) or Lower Colorado River Operations and Maintenance Activity and Reclamation cannot defer them until a later date. 29