13all

• Board Meeting Date: 7/22/2008
• Description: ISF Section - Lower San Miguel Water Resources Planning Study
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

Lower San Miguel yVa~er Resource Planning Study
Page 20
changed water rights would seem the best opportunity for accomplishing the joint
use minimal impact objectives.
Miguel Power Company Canal Rights -
Factors Considered-
• There is local concern among water users that if the Miguel Power
Company Canal water rights were changed or rejuvenated that the
impact from administering these water rights could significantly affects
all other water users in the basin, especially during a drought.
• The history of use of these water rights is very limiting. Their full
decreed amount has not been used since 1939 according to the records.
f nnr~l»cinnc
Relinquishing the Miguel Power Company Canal rights to the stream
appears to be the best alternative, since it will help maintain the "status quo".
VIII. Future Use Recommendation
This recommendation from the SWCD should be considered preliminary in nature as the
SWCD board would like to have additional time to review the results from the study and to
provide for additional discussion between the various parties in the San Miguel Basin as well as
with the CWCB. The study has looked at a wide range of alternatives and considered the
advantages as well as the disadvantages of each. It has taken input from a broad cross section of
the public, including elected officials, agency representatives, special interest groups and the
public at large. It is apparent that this is a very important issue and one that deserves special
attention.
The SWCD has noted a number of things regarding timing and public participation. First, the
SWCD understands that the earliest Umetco expects to have all remediation completed including
the various governmental approvals is late 2009. Secondly, the new instream flow appropriation
being analyzed by the CWCB staff is expected to be brought to the CWCB for consideration in
January of 2009 (While the new instream flow appropriation is not a part of the Uravan Water
Rights, it will play a significant role in how the CWCB uses the Uravan Water Rights.). Finally,
through this study effort it is clear that the local residents, water users and providers, federal,
state and local governmental entities and various special interest groups want to participate in the
development of the SWCD's recommendation to the CWCB and provide input to the CWCB on
this matter. Since action on the Uravan Water Rights is not necessary at this time, and since the
CWCB's new appropriation evaluation is in progress, SWCD will continue to consider input
from the public and may change its preliminary recommendations as it deems appropriate.
~Iuly 2008