9582

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 9582
• Author: U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.
• Title: Final Environmental Impact Statement - Navajo Reservoir Operations Volume III Comments and Responses.
• USFW Year: 2006.
• USFW - Doc Type: Grand Junction - Durango, CO.
• Copyright Material: NO

Volume III - Comments and Responses
FEIS - Navajo Reservoir Operations
quality, and recreation. Reclamation believes that flexibility exists to reduce these impacts
in the interim period between the FEIS and future water development, particularly the
completion of NIIP.
The FEIS provides more detail on this issue and states that flexibility in reservoir releases
exists because water committed for present or future development is not currently being
fully used. This may be a significant amount of water in many, but not all, years. The
release of this water will be incorporated into operations to augment the 250 cfs minimum
release during the irrigation season; the goal will be to maintain irrigation season releases
above 350, while assuring the spring release as described in the Flow Recommendations will
not be affected and ensuring recommended minimum flows within the critical habitat can
be met downstream from Farmington and contracted water delivered. Water anticipated to
be available for this flexibility will be identified and quantified to the extent possible for the
spring Navajo Reservoir Operations meeting, and the scheduling of its release will be
discussed.
In the long term, flexibility will diminish; in certain drought years, flexibility to go above
250 cfs may not exist at all. Because of this, the HIS addresses long-term impacts as if
flexibility were not available, and significant impacts are discussed.
Concerning Flow Recommendations criteria, the Preferred Alternative was designed to
maintain a 500 cfs minimum flow downstream from Farmington, even after flexibility
diminishes.
General Comment 12: Several comments were made that decommissioning Navajo Dam
should not be presented as an alternative because it is beyond the scope of the EIS and does
not meet the purpose of and need for the project. Others suggested that this alternative was
the best way to recover the endangered fish species.
Response: Decommissioning Navajo Dam is an alternative that was suggested during the
public scoping meeting process by enough members of the public that Reclamation, as lead
agency, included it in the DEIS, in accordance with NEPA guidelines. This alternative is
included as one of several alternatives considered and eliminated from further discussion
because they did not meet the purpose of and need for the proposed action. Chapter II,
"VI. Alternatives Considered but Eliminated," includes a discussion of how this alternative
would affect endangered fish.
General Comment 13: The alternatives and the Flow Recommendations do not address
actions needed in a severe drought such as occurred in 2002. In addition, the Bureau's high
releases from Navajo during the drought of 2002 were irresponsible. Also, how will climate
change affect water availability and the Preferred Alternative.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•