BOARD02122

• Board Meeting Date: 5/20/2002
• Description: WSP Section - Colorado River Basin Issues - Ruedi Reservoir - Long-Term Contract for Endangered Fish Water Navajo-Gallup
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

Agenda Item 23f
May 20-21, 2002 Board Meeting
Page 3 of 4

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 trying to be
achieved in the 15-Mile Reach. Progress: The December i999 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 i5-mile reach. This information will also be
included in the final EA.
. 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. Progress: Operating plan meetings are held annually and USBR
continually strives to better coordinate Ruedi operations with other parts of the
Recovery Program. NEPA compliance for the long-term agreement (EA) and the
proposed "Ruedi Futures Study" will help to better define the issues and
opportunities.

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 the
interim long-term agreement is signed. This 2002 water contract retains the statement
that USBR will make a reasonable effort to maintain the maximum release rate at 250 cfs.
Also, the reservoir storage target levels and dates have not been changed. Both
Reclamation and the Service (available on request) have provided the required report
documenting Ruedi reservoir operations for the benefit of endangered fish in the 15-Mile
Reach. However, the Service has requested that future reports be submitted as part of the
standardized monitoring report because progress and benefits are often not definable on
an annual basis. Therefore, we anticipate a change in reporting requirements during the
negotiations of the long-term contact.

Formal Contract Nel!otiations

The USBR must follow a fonnal negotiating process in the development oflong-tenn
water contracts. The negotiating sessions are open public meetings. The basis of
negotiation and designation of parties to the interim long-term contract have been
established. Related NEP A compliance is occurring in the form of an Environmental
Assessment that currently exists in draft form. Parties to the long-term contract
(Reclamation, Service and CWCB) met on May 2, 2002 in Lakewood to discuss the
formal negotiating process and identify concems to be discussed during the negotiations.
I have been selected to lead our negotiating team and I am in the process of identifYing
other team members. As I have done in other negotiations, I will also establish a group
of selected individuals with whom I will consult during formal negotiations.

Interested Parties

This memorandum and the attached I-year contract have been forwarded to
representatives of the USBR, the Service, the Colorado River Water Conservation