BOARD01355

• Board Meeting Date: 5/19/2003
• Description: WSP Section - Colorado River Basin Issues - Coordinated Facilities Operations Study
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

\"

Agenda Item 27 - Coordinated Facilities
May 19-20, 2003 Board Meeting
Page 2 of 12

operations). Following the analysis, the agreements andldr operating protocols will be developed, .
as needed. The analysis should be completed by September 2000 and agreement on implementation
reached by March 2001. An example of the benefits of this proposal is that if an additional 20,000
acrejeet is released in a given year, it would augment spring peakflows by approximately 1,000 cft
for 10 days in the IS-Mile Reach.

Reproductive success and natural recruitment are dependent on high spring flows to create and
maintain habitat. Augmentation of the spring peak is an essential recovery action upon which the
Recovery Program depends to avoid the likelihood of jeopardy and adverse modification of critical
habitat. Increased spring peak flows in the IS-Mile Reach, would likely benefit all reaches
downstream to Lake Powell. "

Thus, the primary purpose of the Coordinated Facilities Study (CFOPS) is to investigate
alternatives for supplying an average of20,000 acre-feet of water to the IS-Mile Reach of the
Colorado River during years with spring peak flows between 12,900 cfs and 26,600 cfs. The water
supplied is in addition to other sources identified in the RIPRAP and will be done on a voluntary
basis without diminishing usable project yield or causing project sponsors to incur significant costs.
The water will be made available to supplement spring pe;U<: flows by about 1,000 cfs/day over a 10-
day period. A secondary purpose is to enhance flows in the IS-Mile Reach during the late summer
and fall period.

A consulting team led by McLaughlin Water Engineers and Leo Eisel (now at Brown &
Caldwell) was selected to perform the study and put under contract in March 1999. The total study
cost was set at $395,000. The study was divided into two phases. An Executive Committee was
also formed to guide the study, help develop and analyZe alternatives, and distribute information
about the study.

.

Phase I looked at a wide range of possible alternat~Yes that were subjected to a preliminary
screening process in order to arrive at a short list of alternatives that would be intensively studied
in Phase II. Phase I was completed and the final report released in September 2000.

Funding for Phase II of the project was secured iand forwarded to the National Wildlife
Foundation along with a contract amendment on Octoher 13, 2000. Brown & Caldwell (B&C)
began Phase II modeling in November 2000. They p~esented their initial modeling results and
corresponding technical memorandum regarding altern~tive 1a.l to the Executive Committee on
December 21, 2000. After reviewing the modeling assUmptions and procedures and the technical
report, the Executive Committee made suggestions and revisions and established modeling and
reporting guidelines for evaluating all alternatives. '

It was agreed that B & C would use CDSS, the C-l data set, and historical data for 1975 -1991
for their analysis. Spring peak flows in the 1S-Mile Reach were within the recommended 12,900 efs
to 26,600 cfs during only six of the 17 years considered! B & C was asked to consider an additional
two years in which peak flows were slightly below 12,9PO cfs but could be enhanced to be above
12,900 cfs. Therefore, B & C investigated eight years d,uring which CFOPS might enhance the
spring peaks in the 1S-Mile Reach.

.

Flood Protection. Water Project Planning and Fl)umce . Stream and Lake Protection
Water Supply Protection. Conservation Planning