BOARD00582

• Board Meeting Date: 5/19/2003
• Description: WSP Section - Ruedi Reservoir - Proposed Contract to Deliver 10,825 AF Annually to Endangered Fish in the 15-Mile Reach Through 2012
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

.

\

e

e

e

Agenda Item 24, Ruedi 2012 Contract
May 19-20,2003 Iloatd Meeting
Page 3 of4

IIl.(/) of the contract. CWCB staff provided comments on the draft EA and has been party to the
contract negotiations. Sttiff has worked closely with the affected interests to assure that these
issues and others have been satisfactorily addressed.
· Does the contract for endangered fish water require site specific NEPA compliance and possibly
mitigation? Resolution: This matter was addressed by preparation of the draft EA.
. What is the overall strategy for managing flows in the IS-Mile Reach? How do releases from
Ruedi fit with the CWCB instream flow protections for the IS-Mile Reach, releases from Green
Mountain Reservoir given the settlement in the Orchard Mesa Check case and with other pieces
of the Recovery Program like Grand Valley Water Management, Coordinated Reservoir
Operations and other available water sources? There is a desire to have a clear understanding of
the objectives to be achieved in the IS-Mile Reach. Resolution: The December /999
Programmatic Biological Opinion for the Upper Colorado fully addresses these issues.
Furthermore, a display diagram has been prepared that illustrates the various sources of water
available to the 15-mile reach. This information will be included in the final EA. However,
affected interests are still concerned that Ruedi will bear a disproportionate share of the burden
for providing flows in the future and should not be expected to support any renewal of this
contract without further work to address this issue as indicated in the attached letter from
affected parties on the west slope.
. A process is required to balance the needs between recreational users, water supply interests and
endangered fish during the development of the annual operating plan for Ruedi Reservoir so that
people have a clear understanding of what to expect in any given year. Resolution: Operating
plan meetings are held annually and USBR continually strives to better coordinate Ruedi
operations with other parts of the Recovery Program. NEPA compliance, via the EA, for the
long-term agreement and the operational measures contained in the contract help address this
issue. However, the most important part of addressing this issue is found in section V/l.(B) of
the contract. Even though this provision is included in the shortage section, it provides for
consultations on a regular basis that should provide all interests the process that is requested.
· Sharing of shortages. Progress: This remains the one unresolved issue. The Service is of the
opinion that all Round II contractors should be treated equally and that this contract for
endangered fish water is and should be considered a Round II contract. While there is general
agreement that this is a Round II contract, several of the interested parties believe that the
Round II contracts that were executed prior to the 1999 Biological Opinion have preference over
the Round II contracts that will proceed following the execution of this contract. There appears
to be persuasive arguments on both sides of this issue that will not be easily resolved. Both sides
have agreed that this matter requires further discussion during the term of this contract and that
it needs to be resolved prior to any consideration of any contract extensions. However, all were
willing to allow this contract through 2012 to proceed for the greater good of the recovery
program.

Under the amended biological opinion, USBR has proceeded to process up to 6,135 AF of Ruedi
Round II water sale contracts. USBR will proceed with the full 17,000 AF (6,135 AF plus the
remaining 10,865 AF) of Ruedi Round II water sale contracts after this interim long-term agreement
is signed. Both Reclamation and the Service have provided the required reports documenting Ruedi
reservoir operations for the benefit of endangered fish in the IS-Mile Reach. However, future
reports will be submitted as part of the annual reports or standardized monitoring reports as noted in
Section xm.

Flood Protection. Water Project Planning and Finance. Stream and Lake Protection
Water Supply Protection. Conservation Planning