9600 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1 1 t peak flow release. The ability to implement this recommendation depends on successfully addressing the institutional issues and uncertainties discussed in the report. The effectiveness of CFOPS for peak flow enhancement and its impact on the Service's Environmental Pool, its operation in coordination with CROPS, and all institutional issues will be assessed and reported annually. Reservoir Storage: In addition to the two recommendations above, the CFOPS study identified a mainstem reservoir alternative at Webster Hill, just downstream from the City of Rifle, that could have multiple benefits and provide greater certainty of instream flow augmentation to benefit the endangered fishes. Although new storage to provide water for only the 20,000 acre-feet peak-flow augmentation was found to be expensive in the CFOPS study, a multi-purpose storage project, possibly including run-of-the-river hydropower and other water supply and recreation functions, may be much more cost effective and provide added benefits for endangered fish and their habitat as well. At some point in the future the water users may conduct an independent feasibility study of options for a multi-purpose reservoir to provide water for both 20,000 acre-feet of peak-flow augmentation and 10,825 acre-feet for base-flow augmentation. The feasibility study would be funded outside the Recovery Program and address a set of environmental questions and criteria provided by the Service, which would include among other things measures of direct adverse impacts to endangered fish and their habitat. Upon completion of the feasibility study, the Recovery Program would consider whether or not to participate in the proposed multi-purpose project. If the Program wished to participate in the proposed multi-purpose reservoir project, further negotiations would be required to determine the level and means of Program participation. POLITICAL AND INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS Executive Committee Recommendation No. 1, Maximize CROPS, is an expansion of the existing CROPS program, no new issues associated with this alternative were identified that would hinder the expansion of this program. There are, however, several potential issues associated with implementation of Executive Committee Recommendation No. 2. Some of the reservoirs, e.g. Ruedi and Green Mountain, operate under federal authorizing legislation and operating criteria. Other reservoirs, e.g. Wolford Mountain and Williams Fork, operate pursuant to federal and local permits or licenses, such as federal rights of way or local 1041 permits. These authorities define purposes and prescribe limitations on the use and operation of these facilities. Additionally, all of the reservoirs operate under state water right decrees that define the purposes for which water may be stored and released. Before further considering implementation of the Executive Committee recommendation, the implementing agencies should undertake a joint analysis of the legal issues associated with this recommendation. For example, implementing the recommendation may require amending authorizing legislation, operating criteria, permits, or licenses, or may require changes of water rights or new water rights decrees, or may require new or amended contracts. Additionally, implementation of the recommendation may entail compliance processes with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA). These issues may apply both for using each of the reservoirs that would make releases for augmenting the spring peak by using up to 20,000 acre-feet of stored water in addition to CROPS, and for providing an insurance pool to release stored water for replacement purposes to other reservoirs. P:\Data\GEN\CWCB\19665\Report Phase 2\FinalReport9.03\Fin4_CFOPS_Report(9-03).doc 9