BOARD02075

• Board Meeting Date: 5/22/2000
• Description: WSP Section - Colorado River Basin Issues - San Juan Basin Section 7 Consultation Issues
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

.

.

~

Agenda Item 17g - San Juan Section 7 Consultations
May 22-23, 2000 Board Meeting
Page 2 of3

Recovery Implementation Program (SJRlP). This model of the San Juan River has also
provided the hydrologic basis for the following Section 7 consultations.

. Animas-La Plata Project (57,100 AF of new depletions).
. Navajo Indian Irrigation Project (122,000 AF oflong-term new depletions);
. Navajo Dam EIS and Consultation (No new depletions, but done to implement
the San Juan River flow recommendations); and
. Gallup-Navajo Pipeline (Either 17,000 AF or 34,000 AF of new depletions)

In addition, the Jicarilla Apache Tribe has a settlement agreement that would allow for an
additional 25,500 AF of new depletions that have not yet been consulted on and 6,500 AF
of depletions via the San Juan-Chama Project (Total Depletion of 32,000 AF). These
activities while within New Mexico's compact entitlement are creating a rush to get
Section 7 consultations and thus creating a ladder for Indian water that is outside the
respective states water right priority systems. Furthermore, these consultations are being
done based on model assumptions and results that the states and others are not fully in
agreement with.

Discussion

It has been proposed that a Hydrology Committee be formed as a formal committee of
the SJRlP, combing and replacing the ad-hoc hydrology committee and the existing
Navajo Dam Operating Committee. The Hydrology Committee would be a technical
committee responsible for the review and evaluation of all hydrology related information
pertinent to the SJRlP. The Committee would provide advice to the SJRlP Coordination
and Biology Committees regarding hydrologic, aspects of the SJRlP and evaluate
proposed changes to the San Juan Basin model and the flow recommendations.

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, as a member of the Hydrology Committee, has
committed to being the "permanent keeper" of he model, though they admit they do not
presently have the manpower or experience needed to make timely revisions to the
model. Currently a private consulting firm, under contract to BIA, is the only party that
has the expertise to run and understand how RiverWare operates.

In reviewing the RiverWare model of the San Juan and the results, two things have
become increasingly clear: (1) the model contains some input data and assumptions that
are not completely valid, and (2) the race to complete Section 7 consultations on Indian
Trust Assets is tying up vast amounts of water that well not be developed for years. Both
conditions well make it very difficult for any other water users to successfully complete a
Section 7 consultation because the flow recommendations may not be fully satisfied.

Colorado has run it's CRDSS San Juan model and can confirm that the Animas-La Plata
Project can be constructed as configured while still meeting the flow recommendations.
This is largely because the Animas River flows are more than sufficient to accomplish
both objectives. However, our results also indicate that any further development in the