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 O.fJ 0.3 ,) 5 Comment: Banking in Lake Mead is illegal and it should not be listed as an alternative to the rule. Response: The Department does not agree with the comment from a State agency that banking in Lake Mead is illegal. Moreover, under NEP A, Reclamation is charged with the responsibility to analyze reasonable alternatives, and the Department believes that it has appropriately complied with NEP A in this regard. Comment: The DPEA misstates Arizona law with regard to the ability to create ICUA during a shortage year. Response: The Department agrees with the comment from a State agency that the statement in the DPEA that "Interstate recovery of storage credits in Arizona for California and Nevada will not be allowed in a shortage year" is not accurate. The FPEA has been revised to clarify that A WBA has discretion to decide whether it is in Arizona's best interests to enter into a Storage and Interstate Release Agreement that would require decreased diversions of mainstream water by Arizona during years when the Secretary has declared a shortage on the Colorado River. Consultations Comment: The requirement for consultation under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act is broader than described and consultation is required with the State wildlife agencies on an equal footing with FWS, Response: The Department does not agree with this comment from a State agency that Reclamation is required to consult with State wildlife agencies, Reclamation's responsibility under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act is to coordinate with FWS who in turn is expected to interface and represent fish and wildlife concerns based on; among other things, coordination with State game and fish agencies. In addition, the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act requirements will be met through both ESA and NEP A consultations. The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act requires Reclamation to consider fish and wildlife resource needs in operation and management of water projects. Sunset Clause Comment: The need for a permanent rule was questioned and it was suggested that the rule should have a termination date, such as the end of the time that storage is anticipated. It was suggested that a sunset date will allow the Department an opportunity to do a programmatic reevaluation of how the rule is being used. Response: The Department does not agree with the suggestion from a Federal agency that there should be a sunset date. Under this fina1 rule, a consuming entity will be able to enter into Storage and Interstate Release Agreements and pay for storage of water that the Storing State 33