FLOOD11220 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

totally non-federal. The type and structure of the storage space contract will have to be determined. Steve Cone commented that USACE has a standard water storage agreement. It may be helpful to build in a water cooperative component in order to recognize environmental and recreational mitigation. It probably will be helpful to build this into the Project Cooperation Agreement (PCA) and water storage rights. The most recent agreement developed was Washington state's Howard Hansen Dam (City of Tacoma). The Corps performed all of the work. This is similar to Chatfield except locals are more actively involved. The project involved water supply, ecosystem restoration and the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Columbia River Channel Howard Hansen Dam was authorized in the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) 1999. Dan asked how did the City of Tacoma finance the project? Steve answered that Tacoma supplied their financing share during construction and is paying for water storage over 30 years with interest. Steve added that this was similar to the Waco Lake, Texas project, which was undertaken several years ago. He noted that the federal government was responsible for this project, but there was recognition that locals also performed work. There was no WRDA authorization for this reallocation, but there was an agreement to relocate recreation facilities. Dan commented that the Corps has a concessionaire contract with Colorado State Parks and there is ongoing work at Chatfield. Steve said that Waco Lake was simple a reallocation project and did not go to Congress. Rick McLoud asked whether the Corps is concerned about an agreement between CWCB and the water users? Steve answered no - he sees no reason for concern. There is a provision in Corps rules regarding water storage that recommends to the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works that a decision be based on usable water calculated utilizing a water computer model factoring updated cost of storage figures. This is based on the average yield that would be the initial starting point in order to figure the cost of storage. Steve Cone said that based on some rough estimates he believes that there would only be water to store in Chatfield five out of six years. That alone would argue for a one-sixth reduction in the cost of storage to be paid for by water users. It wasn't clear whether the state and water users could argue for more generous reductions. John Micik asked if there are any functions that are inherently governmental (federal). He noted that under the 1958 Water Supply Act mitigation costs are 100 percent non- federal. Larry Prather noted that under the current WRDA legislation now being dealt with by Congress there is a section on mitigation that should be examined. Planning should be more substantive and mitigation will have to meet the federal standard. Dan stated that it is a question of governmental responsibility. John Micik said that the government owns the dam; government must perform, but it doesn't change what CWCB would do. 2