My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Volume I Biological Opinion
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
5001-6000
>
Volume I Biological Opinion
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/28/2013 4:06:48 PM
Creation date
2/25/2013 3:17:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
related to the Platte River Endangered Species Partnership (aka Platte River Recovery Implementation Program or PRRIP)
State
NE
Date
7/1/1997
Author
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Grand Island, Nebraska
Title
Volume 1 - Biological Opinoin On the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's Preferred Alternative for the Kingsley Dam Project (No. 1417) and North Platte/Keystone Dam Project (No. 1835)
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Biological Opinion
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
191
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
5 <br />critical habitat." The Service further recommended that the Districts <br />cooperate with agencies conducting the Platte River Study i_n preparing and <br />implementing a protocol of experimentation with respect to the scheduled daily <br />releases from Central Nebraska Public Power and Irrigation District's <br />(Central) Johnson Power Plant Return (J -2 Return) into the upstream portion of <br />the designated critical habitat area. The Service also indicated in the <br />' biological opinion that: (a) it is important that any changes in operation be <br />implemented as soon as possible to prevent further encroachment and <br />' establishment of vegetation in the designated critical habitat area; (b) the <br />Districts file their applications for renewal of their respective licenses for <br />Project Nos. 1417 and 1835 within 18 months after publication of the Platte <br />River Ecology Study; and (c) to ensure that the data developed by the Platte <br />River Ecology Study are given prompt consideration, the Districts should file <br />a motion for expeditious consideration of their respective relicense <br />' applications when they file the relicense applications (U.S. Fish and Wildlife <br />Service 1980a). <br />' In November 1980, citing technical studies pertaining to fish and wildlife <br />resources that were underway on the Platte River, the Commission issued an <br />Order Approving Settlement (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 1980) <br />' requiring the Districts to file applications for new licenses for Project Nos. <br />1417 and 1835 within 18 months after publication of the final "Platte River <br />Study Report" (i.e., the Platte River Ecology Study was published in 1981). <br />In addition, the Districts were required, in cooperation with the National <br />Wildlife Federation and resource agencies conducting the Platte River Study, <br />to prepare a protocol of experimentation with respect to a daily schedule for <br />release of water from Kingsley Dam into the designated critical habitat area. <br />However, no such studies were undertaken. <br />' On January 6, 1981, the Commission issued an Order Amending Licenses to enable <br />installation of the.hydroelectric facilities and modification of Nebraska <br />' Public Power District's (NPPD) Keystone Diversion Dam. Articles 27 and 47 of <br />the amended licenses again required compliance with the procedures agreed upon <br />in consultation with the Service to ensure the projects operated in a manner <br />' that would aid in conserving the whooping crane and its designated critical <br />habitat (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 1981a). On February 2, 1981, <br />' the Districts filed a request for reconsideration of the Commission's January <br />6, 1981, order (Central and NPPD 1981). On March 4, 1981, the Commission <br />modified the January 6, 1981, order to delete the clause which required the <br />' applicants to ensure that the projects operated in a manner which would aid in <br />conserving the whooping crane and its designated critical habitat (Federal <br />Energy Regulatory Commission 1981b). These changes were not discussed with <br />' the Service prior to the Commission's decision. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.