WSPC02244 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the Lower Basin States or California bear some of the costs for releasing water to endangered fish. It was suggested that flexibility be built into the contract to remedy problems that may occur with hlCJ"hJ30r C!nrino flnmC! C!11f"h ~C! rt~m~op tn thp tmnt nnnnbtinn Alli:11 it W::l~ ::Isked if ,._~.- .......b......... ...y..........b .............., .............. -.... -"".-0- ...... ......- .........-... r~r-..._.........-.... ---- -- ..--'- .,' increased bank erosion would result from higher spring flows, and if so, how this and related water quality problems would be mitigated. CREDA noted that impacts on the Gunnison River due to historic diversions of water through the Gunnison Tunnel of the Uncompahgre Project (since 1909) have been and will be modified by operation of the Aspinall Unit, They questioned if the Aspinall Unit should have any responsibility in mitigating impacts associated with the Uncompahgre Project, and suggested that the analysis separately identify impacts of the Uncompahgre Project from those of historic and contract-related operation of the Aspinall Unit. Several questions and comments were related to mitigation of possible losses in power revenues. According to the CRWCD, Aspinall Unit cost repayment allocations have been established for 30 years, and changes in operations for the Black Canyon or endangered species must not be allowed to shift the burden of cost repayment onto local water users or power customers. The NPS and FWS should carry a proportionate share of the cost-repayment obligation. Another respondent suggested that if power production changes occur, the difference could be made up by increasing prices to reflect current market value (both for energy and capacity costs, and for power provided during peak times). Also, non-traditional energy technologies such as conservation, solar thennal, solar photovoltaic, wind, and geothennal should be considered as replacement (mitigation) options in addition to traditional options such as coal or gas. Exchanges with utilities needing power during the spring runoff should also be investigated. V. CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION Item 21. Cooperating Agencies - Many affected agencies need to be involved as cooperating agencies, Refer to: Montrose meetings; Congressman Campbell; CREDA; CRWCD; FWS; Non-Federal Parties to the 1975 Exchange Agreement; UGRWCD; WAPA. (16 comments) Due to the interrelationships with the Endangered Species Act discussed in Item 6, the FWS assisted in the scoping effort and requested that they be party to negotiations leading to the development of a contract. Many questions were raised concerning impacts of the contract to power generation and the need forWAPA's involvement. CREDA asked ifWAPA was intentionally being excluded from the process, and suggested that they should be a cooperating agency similar to that of the NPS, BlM, and CWCB. CREDA also asked for a clearer definition of each agency's role, including 35 001'169