Laserfiche WebLink
<br />1 2.2.3 Evaluation and Screening Criteria <br />Participants in this Phase 1 investigation indicated the importance of three criteria for evaluating and <br />screening alternatives: <br />¦ Reduction in existing projects' yields is not to occur, <br />¦ Existing projects' operations and maintenance costs should not be increased, and <br />r Existing projects operational flexibility, and/or reliability are not to be affected. <br />Analysis has been completed in Phase 2 to help quantify these evaluation criteria for the alternatives <br />to supply the average annual 20,000 acre-feet. <br />2.2.3.1 Impact on Existing Projects' Yields. The term "yield" is used in this investigation to <br />indicate the historic yield of a project under historic hydrologic conditions and does not refer to the <br />decreed yield of the project's water right. In Phase 2 of this investigation, extensive analysis has been <br />completed to determine the effect, if any, of implementing the alternatives described in this report on <br />existing projects' yields and storage. These effects were determined by comparing hydrologic model <br />simulations with and without the proposed alternatives. <br />2.2.3.2 Effect on Existing Projects' Operations and Maintenance Costs. Analysis of effects of <br />alternatives on existing projects' operations and maintenance costs has been completed as part of this <br />investigation in those situations where operations and maintenance costs could be affected. <br />2.2.3.3 Effect on Existing Projects Operational Flexibility or Reliability. Analysis of effects of <br />alternatives on existing project operational flexibility or reliability has been completed as part of this <br />investigation in those situations where operational flexibility or reliability could be affected. <br />' 2.2.4 RIPRAP Alternatives <br />The feasibility of expanding or modifying certain of the RIPRAP alternatives as listed in the PBO and <br />the Recovery Implementation Program (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, December 20,1999) was <br />considered and these alternatives were investigated. Yield available from a specific modification <br />and/or expansion of the RIPRAP alternatives is counted toward meeting the 20,000 acre-feet target if <br />(1) this yield was in addition to the yield of the original RIPRAP alternative and (2) the . <br />modified/expanded alternative would not diminish the yield of the original RIPRAP alternative. <br />1 2.2.5 Incentives for Participation <br />Participation in actions identified in the PBO is voluntary. The PBO examined both existing and <br />future depletions on the Colorado River and its tributaries upstream of the confluence of the <br />Gunnison River associated with Federal, State, and private projects which rely on, or will rely on, the <br />Recovery Action Plan (RAP). The Service believes that these RAP items are sufficient to avoid the <br />likelihood of jeopardy and/or adverse modification of critical habitat from: (1) depletions occurring <br />as of September 30, 1995 from existing individual projects, and (2) future depletions up to <br />120,000 acre-feet/year. Individual Section 7 consultation will still be required on specific Federal <br />I PAData\GEN\CWCB\19665\Report Phase 2\FinalReport9.03\Final_CFOPS_Report(9-03).doc 17