Laserfiche WebLink
<br />,. <br /> <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />Fish and Wildlife Service (past decade), studies related to quantification of flows for recovery of endangered <br />fISh SPecies4 <br /> <br />National Water Commission (circa 1970 -1974)~ <br /> <br />Salinity control and management planning (by the Bureau of Reclamation and others over many years). <br /> <br />Western Water Polley Review (1997) and the many topical and basin reports. <br /> <br />· Assumptions used fOf constructing plans within the SWSI need to be clearly presented~ For exampJeJ there <br />are many estimates, based on a variety of assumptions, as to the amount of \Vater from western Colorado that remains <br />available for development and consumption under various projections for precipitation, climate trends, and utilization <br />of existing absolute and conditional water rights. Such assumptions selected for use in the SWSI should be clearly <br />identified, expl~ned, and documented. <br /> <br />* The SWSI process should fully and specifically address the breadth of sroping issues related to water supply <br />and development identified in scoping for proposed large water and other regulatory programs. Examples for the <br />Gunnison Basin are: <br /> <br />Scoping comments submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for the Dominguez <br />Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 11515-000, 1997); Rocky Point Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. <br />7802) and particularly the "Blue Book" of scoping issues submitted by intervenors from within the Upper <br />Gunnison Basin; and the scoping comments assembled recently for consideration in the study of what is now <br />usually referred to as the "Big Straw' or Colorado River Return Proj~ ~ <br /> <br />Studies prepared by the Bureau of Reclamation and Corps of Engineers related to emergency planning for <br />flooding and catastrophic events such as earthquakes producing dam breaches. <br /> <br />* The SWSI appears intended to identify some projects requiring federal financial assistance, federal pennitting" <br />and qualification under programs such as for storage construction1 for flood insurance, for drinking water protection, <br />and for water pollution trading. Therefore} SWSI should reflect the necessary public participation requirernen1s of <br />these programs. To the extent feasible~ the SWSI should also assemble infonnation in a manner that facilitates <br />compliance with the National Envirorunental Protection Act requirements for resulting recommendations. <br /> <br />* Even though most of the proposals to surfiwe during the SWSI process may not be considered as <br />""megaprojects." the following reference has very applicable guidelines for avoiding major problems in the planning, <br />constrnction, and operation of water resource projects. It is particularly relevant to the avoidance of underestimated <br />cost and overestimated revenues and benefits suoh as recently became evident with the Animas - La Plata Project. <br /> <br />Ftyvbjerg B4, Bruzelius N~1 and Rothengatter W. (2003) Mel!8.oroiects And Risk: An Anatomv Of Ambition~ <br />Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 207 pages~ <br /> <br />I would appreciate being kept informed of any materials~ notices, reports, and publications available to the public <br />during the course of the SWSI. <br /> <br /> <br />c. Others <br />