Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />Agenda Item 24, Ruedi 2012 Contract <br />May 19-20,2003 Board Meeting <br />Page 2 of 4 <br /> <br />0/ <br /> <br />Discussion <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />The proposed contract (Attachment 1) is not the same as the annual contracts that have been <br />entered into since 1993. Rather it has been changed significantly to address the issues discussed <br />below and to remove certain operating constraints that were simply not realistic. <br /> <br />The proposed contract would now run through 2012. This contract was developed in formal <br />negotiating sessions that began on July 2, 2002 in Carbondale. Interested parties have supported the <br />previous I-year contracts so long as it was clearly understood that the issues listed below would be <br />addressed during the negotiation of the long-term contract. I believe all these issues have been <br />satisfactorily addressed except for the shortage provision discussed below. The major issues were: <br /> <br />. Ruedi Reservoir repayment costs and whether or not the water made available to endangered fish <br />should be paid for. If payment is required, who should pay and how should payment be <br />accomplished? Assurances are needed that we are not increasing costs to other water contractors <br />by providing water to the endangered fish. R~olution: Agreement has been reached between <br />Reclamation and the Recovery Program whereby Reclamation has agreed to absorb the capital <br />costs (plus interest) of the water provided pursuant to this agreement (see letter to the Recovery <br />Program dated December 20, 2002). Pursuant to the letter of April 24, 2003 from the Recovery <br />Program, the Recovery Program will acknowledge that contribution by Reclamation, which <br />contribution is in addition to the other commitments that Reclamation has made, in its annual <br />reports. The Recovery Program has subsequently agreed to pay the annual O&M costs .. <br />associated with providing this water, currently approximately $62,000 annually. Thus, there will ., <br />be no increased costs to other Ruedi water contractors as a result of making currently un- <br />contracted water within the Regulatory capacity available for endangered fish purposes through <br />2012. <br />. Assurances to the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project east and west slope water users and repayment <br />entities that for all Section 7 consultations on the Project there will be no loss to them in water <br />yield from the Project nor any increase in Project repayment or operating costs. Resolution: <br />Pursuant to the January 1999 amended Ruedi:biological opinion, the Programmatic Biological <br />Opinion for the Upper Colorado River will tak~ precedence over the amended biological opinion <br />and thus assures there will be no loss in project yield. The agreements described in the bullet <br />above address the repayment and operating cost issue. <br />. Are the operating guidelines in Article 7 of the annual contract concerning Ruedi release rates <br />and reservoir elevations appropriate or should they be revised in order to allow more flexibility <br />to use Ruedi water? All parties understand, that release rates could be more responsive to <br />biological parameters rather than recreational (wadeability) factors as they are at present. The <br />parties also understand the potential impacts tp the local economy of the Fryingpan Basin and <br />continue to look for win-win solutions to this issue. Any changes to the environmental <br />commitments already made, or substantial changes to the preferred alternative discussed in the <br />Record of Decision could create the need for supplemental NEP A compliance measures. <br />Resolution: Operational changes have been addressed in the environmental assessment <br />prepared for this contract. Given the increaSed use of Ruedi water anticipated in the future, <br />reservoir levels on specific dates have been removed. It remains an objective of Ruedi .. <br />operations to try and maintain releases within 250 cfs when possible as described in section ., <br /> <br />Flood Protection. Water Project Planning ~d Finance. Stream and Lake protection <br />Water Supply Protection. Conservation Planning <br />