Laserfiche WebLink
<br />c. Water Sup..uh: Storage Contract IssueS <br /> <br />Statement Cl: <br />· The CWCB will contract directly with Corps for the entire 20,600 AF of storage space <br /> <br />Considerations: <br />· Assume M&I use only, even if there is temporary Ag use <br />· CWCB to manage individual contracts with each water user based on previously allocated amounts <br />· CWCB will assist in the contract management of the reallocated space, but will formulate an acceptable <br />strategy to transfer the use of the storage space. <br /> <br />Questions for Vertical Team: <br />· Can the entire amount of the reallocated storage space be contracted directly to the CWCB? <br />· What monitoring or reporting requirements, if any, will be required from the non-federal sponsor once <br />the space has been contracted? <br /> <br />Statement C2: <br />· The storage space rights in Chatfield can be transferred and/or assigned to water users. <br /> <br />Considerations: <br />· Corps should not need to look "beyond" its contract with the CWCB for the storage space <br />· The existing coalition of water users and State agencies has developed over several years and represents <br />a cooperative merging of interests. <br />· Contracting with CWCB may provide the best chance that reallocated storage would go to the highest <br />and best use in a publicly and politically acceptable way. <br /> <br />Questions for Vertical Team: <br />· Will the federal government have any concerns related to the Chatfield storage space being transferred <br />or assigned from the CWCB to local water users? <br /> <br />Statement C3: <br />· The CWCB will only reallocate M&I storage space, even though there would be temporary Ag use and <br />continued recreation use. <br /> <br />Considerations: <br />· Simplifies the analysis and the implementation tremendously, and is a part of the "best possible <br />schedule" scenario. <br />· It is the most advantageous to the Government (maximum revenue). <br />· It empowers State & local decision making in distributing the reallocated storage on an ongoing basis, <br />and alleviates the Government from that burden. With 15 users there could be many changes in highest <br />and best use distribution over time, and State and local decision making and market demand would be <br />most efficient. <br />· It may eliminate the need to work with DOl to price agriculture. Ifthis is the case, it is assumed the only <br />interagency coordination focused strictly on agriculture would be to send a letter to BOR to request <br />whether the proposed reallocation would affect any BOR projects. <br />· It reflects most probable change to M&I as the highest and best use of scarce water supplies over time <br />and within the 50-year period of analysis. <br />· This approach is consistent with the approach taken by Larry Lang (CWCB) and Rick Miner (Corps <br />PM), both now retired, from the beginning. <br />· Only potential disadvantage foreseen to this approach is the Sponsor could lose out on a possible price <br />break on the cost of storage from potential reallocation to Agriculture. <br /> <br />4 <br />