Laserfiche WebLink
<br />; . <br /> <br />CDM Camp Dresser & McKee Ine. <br /> <br />T. Crumpton (9/5/95) <br />Page Number 3 <br /> <br />a revenue enhancer because releases could benefit the endangered fish, but could also be sold <br />after power use. What is particularly disturbing is that this filing appears to be included in <br />the RIPRAP as an action item and, thus, USFWS views on this are critical. <br /> <br />The issue of subsidence risk was also discussed. Since there is a risk of subsidence along the <br />pipeline route, risk is an issue which, in BLM's view, must be addressed in the EA. . <br />However, BLM may have access to previous subsidence investigation based on the original <br />mine permitting. BLM will investigate its records and make a determination on usability by <br />the September coordination meeting before determining that a separate risk assessment is <br />warranted. <br /> <br />Regarding future demand projections, both Mesa County and Grand Junction have requested <br />that Spencer Pearse overlay the three pending growth plans (County Study) over the District's <br />service area to assess the percentage of future county growth area which is likely to be <br />served. Since zip code breakdowns conducted by Pearse are in close agreement with other <br />independent analysis, the exercise seems unnecessary (especially since it would be a change <br />in scope). The BLM wants to observe reaction to the public demand workshop prior to <br />making a determination on this issue. <br /> <br />Scheduling items were also discussed. The next BLM coordination meeting will be held on <br />Monday, September 18, 1995. Items which should be complete enough for BLM review in <br />September include wetlands, final demand projection report, purpose and need (EA), draft <br />alternatives TM, groundwater viability, average and safe yield TM. The cultural study is <br />pending BLM assignment of a reviewer and BLM will review the fisheries study as soon as <br />provided. <br /> <br />Other Meetings <br /> <br />USFWS (August 2. 1995) - An informal consultation meeting was held with the USFWS in <br />Grand Junction on August 2, 1995. Participants included Steve Jamieson (GEl), Catherine <br />Robertson (BLM), Peter Evans (CWCB), Mike Tucker and Keith Rose (USFWS), and Brent <br />Uilenberg (BOR). Purpose of the meeting was to clarify confusion and rumors related to the <br />consultation process under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. Two rumors which have <br />been circulating are that Ute Water will not get through the consultation process until there is <br />a "backing off" on the opposition to the BOR's Vega Reservoir Filing and that there is a <br />volume of 3,000 AF that the USFWS is seeking for endangered fish from the pipeline <br />consultation process. USFWS indicated these are merely rumors, but BOR indicated there is <br />a "grain of truth" in the rumors since they see a great opportunity to obtain approximately this <br />amount of water out of the Vega filing. <br /> <br />Discussion also focused on the preliminary depletion analysis from CDM. The details of the <br />analysis need to be reviewed further with the USFWS (see 8/24/95 meeting below), but the <br />issue of whether or not depletions within the 15 mile reach are relevant was discussed. Peter <br />