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 000371 Agreement (now tenned a "Storage and Interstate Release Agreement") may give the authorized entities a greater sense of security that future obligations will be perfonned. Response: The Department recognizes in new ~ 414.3( e) that existing contracts may allow for the delivery of water under this rule. These include direct contracts between authorized entities and the Secretary. These also include subcontracts between authorized entities and an entitlement holder which has been authorized by the Secretary to enter into subcontracts for the delivery of Colorado River water: Section 414.3( e) also provides that the Storage and Interstate Release Agreement, to which the Secretary is a party, can serve as a water delivery contract. The Department agrees that when existing contracts or valid subcontracts provide for delivery of Colorado River water under this final rule, there is no need to combine these contracts with the Storage and Interstate Release Agreement. Comment: Another water district stated that if one of the parties to the Interstate Storage Agreement (now tenned a "Storage and Interstate Release Agreement") already holds an entitlement for delivery of Colorado River water under a BCP A ~ 5 cohtract, a new or amended water delivery contract may not be necessary. Response: The Department recognizes in the new ~ 414.3(e) that in certain circumstances existing contracts may satisfY the ~ 5 requirement of the BCP A so that additional ~ 5 authority would be unnecessary to perfonn activities under a Storage and Interstate Release Agreement. Section 5 authority is also unnecessary for the storage of Article II(D) of the Decree water by Federal or Tribal entitlement holders, In circumstances where additional ~ 5 authority is unnecessary, the Storage and Interstate Release Agreement would only cover the specific details of a transaction between the Secretary and the other parties to the Storage and Interstate Release Agreement. Comments on Question 3, Comment: One State agency and one water district stated that sufficient statutory and contractual authorities already exist under applicable laws and contracts to allow the authorized entity to take water for banking purposes. Therefore there would be no need for a new or amended contract. Another State agency and one water authority believe that an additional contract is necessary with the Secretary to ensure the Secretary's commitment to release water based on the development ofICUA by a storing entity. That contract could be executed concurrently with an Interstate Storage Agreement. However, as noted under comments on Question 2, those parties do not see a need for new and additional Section 5 contracts beyond those that now exist, One State agency responded that ifthere are two separate agreements, they should be processed, reviewed, and approved simultaneously. The two water districts commented that any necessary Section 5 contract, whether or not combined with an Interstate Storage Agreement, should be processed and approved simultaneously with the Interstate Storage Agreement. 39