Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Gila, Salt and Verde rivers. Possible listing of the Round.tail is of some concern to Colorado given that <br />the species is relatively abundant in Colorado and other'portions of the Upper Colorado River basin. <br />Furthermore, the Colorado River Basin States have been developing a conservation plan for Roundtail, <br />Bluehead Sucker, and Flannelmouth Sucker over the P!lst few years. When the plan is adopted, it <br />would preclude listing of these species. <br /> <br />1..............................................1..................................... <br />Navajo Nation vs. Department ofInterior, Norton et 81: On March 14 the Navajo Nation filed an <br />action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizoo;a alleging that Interior failed to consider the <br />water rights ofthe Navajo Nation or to protect the interests ofthe Navajo Nation. <br /> <br />The Navajo Nation is seeking relieffor the breach of fiduciary trust responsibility in: (I) <br />implementation of the Interim Surplus Guidelines; (2) ad9ption of the FEIR Implementation <br />Agreement, Inadvertent Overrun and Payback Policy andi Related Federal Actions; (3) implementation <br />of the Interstate Water Banking Regulations; (4) refusingito contract for delivery of CAP water to the <br />Navajo Nation; and (5) failing to provide Colorado Rive~water to meet the needs of the Navajo <br />people. The action also alleges violation ofNEP A and AI> A requirements. In response to this action, <br />the states of Arizona, and Nevada and water agencies in both states filed motions to Intervene. <br /> <br />On June 13, Interior and the Navajo Tribe filed ajoint motion requesting approval ofajoint <br />stipulation. In the joint stipulation Interior agrees to appoint a federal team to negotiate the water right <br />claims ofthe Navajo's in the Lower Basin and both parties agree to stay the litigation while the <br />settlement discussions are in progress. The Navajo's alsQ stipulated to Arizona's intervention. The <br />Central Arizona Water Conservation District intends to oppose the stipulation and seeks the courts <br />consideration of its motion to intervene. . <br /> <br />2004 Colorado River Annual Operating Plan Meeting: The first consultation meeting with the <br />Colorado River Management Work Group (CRMWG) for the development of the 2004 Colorado River <br />Annual Operating Plan (AOP) was held June 3 in Las Vegas. The next meeting will be Aug. 6 in Las <br />Vegas, with final consultation meeting scheduled for Sept. II. <br /> <br />A draft 2004 AOP will be distributed to the CRMWG prior to the August meeting. Key issues in this <br />year's discussion are 602(a) Storage determination, and limguage related to Surplus determination for <br />the Lower Basin in light of the fact that until a Quantification Settlement Agreement is reached in <br />California, there will be no surplus water available in 20(>4. Even if required actions are accomplished <br />(including execution of a QSA), only a partial domestic $urplus would be available for the Lower <br />Basin, because Lake Mead is projected to be below elevation 1145 on December 31, 2003 (as per the <br />Interim Surplus Guidelines). <br /> <br />Proposed Wolford Hydroelectric Project: The River Qistrict is evaluating the feasibility of a small <br />hydroelectric power project at the existing Ritschard Dain at Wolford Mountain Reservoir near the <br />Kremmling. The proposed facility would generate enough electricity to meet the needs of <br />approximately 350 households in western Colorado. Th~ hydroelectric project would take advantage of <br />the reservoir's normal water supply operations and by-p~ss flows to generate energy. <br /> <br />To obtain a FERC license or license exemption, project proponents can use either a "traditional" or an <br />"alternative" licensing procedure. The alternative procequre emphasizes early consultations between <br />the applicant, government agencies, and the public to id~ntify and resolve issues. The River District <br />prefers the alternative procedure because it provides mote opportunity to work with interested <br />stakeholders. To proceed with the alternative procedure,i the River District must develop a <br />"communications protocol" and determine ifthere is a cpnsensus among stakeholders that the <br />alternative procedure is appropriate for this project. CWCB has been identified as a stakeholder. <br /> <br />20 <br /> <br />e <br /> <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br />