My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WAP 2001-2002 PRRIP
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
5001-6000
>
WAP 2001-2002 PRRIP
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/8/2013 3:46:55 PM
Creation date
1/28/2013 2:43:42 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Staff Notebook for Platte River Research Cooperative Agreement (aka Platte River Recovery Implementation Program or PRRIP) Water Advisory Committee (WAC) Meetings including memos, comments, emails, minutes, letters, agendas, notes, etc. 2001-2002
State
CO
NE
WY
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
1
Date
1/1/2001
Author
CWCB Staff
Title
Staff Notebook for Platte River Research Cooperative Agreement Water Advisory Committee (WAC) Meetings for 2001-2002
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Meeting
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
500
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
JUL -08 -2002 MON 0911 AM FAX NO, P. 09 <br />�T 1 l of Pros any watcr, is intended to ``determine and prevent new water <br />lr-ackut� and stcrauuUt � _r <br />rc�lated aaivides From increasing shortages to target flows" (Cooperative Agreement, 1997). <br />�L <br />o micstller or not a specific project is "covered" by a p:irticlllar depletion plan will be decided its <br />( Co W,11-t or the fiSA Section 7 consultation process. A flow chart and explanatoly text describing the <br />U1 ti basic stel)s 01'1110 eollsulttttioll process for proposed projects, once a Progrartl is in place, was <br />Lbw• �L re;comme laded to the Governance Conantittee by a "depletion plan subgroup" of the Water <br />1,� Mttn,ti;emctlt C�OiY1111itlCC 111 2l)(a 1 (Af.iryCllmG'nt F). This flow chart addresses the requirenlcilt P,n�s Q��k <br />Ci W <br />,4� � (uncicr ltlilctotles Wl -cxt, W2 --exl, W4 -ext and W10-ex t) that state and federal future cicplc:tiou n, Vv' <br />>✓c �� lil�lns hlChido analysis for "potential eflccts the plan may have on pulse flow frequency and V <br />�j X•^ 111 "1( ?111tudc ". 13ox 15 of' the flow chatt .5peei.fics tilat when the FWS, the state, and the project �Ae��jJ•� �''/`�`i'��r/{A <br />proponent review whether - a proposed project is covered by the corresponding state or federal t(1 q <br />e� li, �llctioll elan impacts of the proposed project oft VIII pulse flows, including peak flows, will be <br />c ,1 1 p <br />r„ .:111 lniport irit consideration. That is, si stantial reductions in the lnagn'' ode and/or frequency of QE� <br />c 4 lleal� flatus restYlth1g fronn tl osed project may be considered a bs sis for deternllning that ���5t v f <br />tilts project is l cred by any state or federal depletion plats. 5 . fck et, <br />M,1 �J�S� <br />Major now >torage projects are the inost likely projects to not be covered because of their likely N� <br />ir►lliact 111 ak flows. 011icrwise, llie depletion plan subgroup anticipated that the vast majority 01� <br />6 n ' oltoseti. projects will be covered., as descrihed in the text accompanying the flow chart: <br />� w <br />"i3n0a11sc the Staic's depletion plans were each designed with an eye towards the majori <br />C� <br />of potcnt't.al new developments /actions that are anticipated to occur in that State, it is <br />tlliticipttlod that the vast majority of new depletions will be viewed by the Service and <br />Slate as bcinv covered by the State's existing plan. if the Service or State potentially <br />thought it was an anomaly, or "outside" of a State's plan, then the respective State and �'�;�5i�" <br />Service would 11111tually decide if the proposed project fit within the State's plan. Tn t110s <br />irI5tC1riccs where disagreement renla111s tile Service will first brills" the issue to the <br />C avorriailce Committee". <br />cZ:I,►crillcT1t Obligations Mulder State and f eder�tl Future D letirnt Flans, for_ Proie_c.ts <br />f `.cyve.rcc:t l?Y_I?lati - -_ . <br />a <br />l3ocausc 111:1ny flow re- regulation activities of benefit to target species in the central Platte River <br />lttay ll<avo solnc nuc;ative effect on the frequency and /or magnitude of peals flows, FWS has %Gk <br />r <br />agreed that replacom ut oblig�:ttioils forpr•vjects cover "ed by ca corr"espv�lcling.stralc� or'fecleral R� <br />e rky)1elion plan will be cletermincd on the basis of the extent to which they create or increase <br />sliorlages to species flows and annual pulse flows only, on average, relative to pre -1997 <br />Ctl1ldl.tiC)C1S. "('here are no repIncement obligations relative to peal: flows for projects covered by a <br />futiu-0 dellle,lion plan. <br />Cr)..JAS "171(1 i3iolp.(ict11 Clpitlion RC)) cvaluatio>ls of ills Pro_ t sod Erpgraill . <br />The 01lvir011111cnt,11. impacts of't11c Proposod Prograun will be analyzed in ail 74"nvironnlelltal <br />. Impact ,S1.tte;tllent (EIS), and compliance orthe Proposed Program with the requirements of the <br />1i11dattgerCd Spccies Act will be evaluated separately in a Biological Opinion (130). <br />0 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.