Laserfiche WebLink
<br />OUJ874 <br /> <br />Federal Register I Vol. 46. No. 128 I Monday, July 6. 1981 I Notices <br /> <br />35069 <br /> <br />""cr. Howe\'er. no downstream user <br />would receive less than his actual legal <br />entillemcnl. The Central Ari::ona Project <br />would have the greatest ~duction in <br />supply because it holds significant but <br />junior righlll. The annual reduction is <br />estimated al88,OOO acre-feet. <br /> <br />Table,Q.-<:otorBdoRIverAverageAf111(J6/ <br />""""-2000 ' <br />fl.OOO'......-1 <br /> <br />"" <br /> <br />'---,..-.....-- <br />f*'Y DiIIIl C/Ml."DarIl <br /> <br />w_ <br />.,........_ 10.030 1.630 7,100 5.MO I._ <br />- <br />CMe.- 'A20 '.410 7.fQO S._ I.8AO <br /> <br />'Wolll--.o~_IO<CRSP_ <br /> <br />Z. Water Quality. Reduced Row, to <br />the Lower Basin would reduce the <br />dilution efrect and salinity . <br />concentrations wouJd increase. Analysis <br />of water quality impacts for the Lower <br />Basin waD limited to projected changes <br />in 8alinlly 81 Imperial Dam. FOf thill <br />determination. il was 8uumed that: (1) <br />the fitst and second stages of the La, <br />Vegas Wash Salinity Control Projecl <br />would be In operation. removing 124,000 <br />tons of salt annually: (2) the Grand <br />Yalley Projecl would be In operation <br />with salt removal increasing from 34,000 <br />tons in t982 10 410.000 Ions by 1990; and <br />(3) the Paradox Project would be <br />completed with salt removal of 180,000 <br />tons annually. Increased salinity of 14.9 <br />milligrams per liter would occur al <br />Imperial Dam under the accelerated <br />case. <br /> <br />VIII. Other PoteoUallmpacts From <br />Synfuels Development <br /> <br />A. Sociol And Economic Impacts <br /> <br />Population wilhout synfuels 10 the <br />Upper Colorado Region Is projected to <br />grow from 438,000 in 1975 to 1.1 million <br />in 2000. Under the accelerated cne, <br />population would increase to about 3 <br />mUUonpeople. Most of the growth <br />would be concentrated In 12 <br />communities within six counties. <br />Growth of this magnitude would ha\'~ <br />numerous impacts. Including need fer <br />expanded municipal waler suppl]' and <br />wastewater management systEms. both <br />with high capital Investment <br />requirements. <br />Depletions by synfuels developmenl <br />would decrease the water available for <br />hydroelectric power generation at <br />tesero'oira in both the Upper and Lower <br />Basins. For the accelerated case. <br />reduced annual generation of 435 <br />glgawatl hours can be anticipated. This <br />reduction would mean a 513 million los5 <br />in annual re\'enues. These losses would <br /> <br />be about evenly dislributed between the <br />Upper and Lower Basin. <br />The burden of reduced deliveries to <br />the Central Arizona Project (88.000 acro- <br />feet annually under the accelerated <br />case) will probably fall on agricultural <br />water users. However, agricullural <br />production could be maintained through <br />increased groundwater pumping. but <br />with a net income loss orS1.1 million <br />annually due to pumping costs, The total <br />income loss Is estimated at $.2.5 million <br />annually. <br />Economic Impacts from increased <br />salinity In the Lower Basin were <br />assumed to be proporlionalto changes <br />In salinity le\'e18. An estimate $4.3 <br />million (1916 dollars) of annual damages <br />to agricultural. muniCipal. and industrial <br />usen were linked 10 the salinity <br />increases. <br />B. Environmentallmpocu <br />Projected effects on Upper Basin fish <br />habitats from synfuels water depletions <br />would be minimal except where <br />Impoundments convert stream fisheries <br />to lake habitat, and for potentially <br />seriou. advef1le Impacts on the Colorado <br />Squawnsh In the Utah reaches of the <br />White River. <br />Recreational effects from synfuels <br />surface water depletions In the Upper <br />Basin were analyzed for the summer <br />monlhs only. The recreallonal qualities <br />of most stream reaches would be <br />unaffected by projected changes in now. <br />However. recreational opportunities In <br />the Colorado River from Rifle. Colorado. <br />to the Gunnison River: and the White <br />River from Meeker, Colorado. to Ouray, <br />Utah. would be reduced, but not <br />ellminated. <br />No environmenlallmpacts were <br />identified In the Lower Basin as a resull <br />of projected changes in streamflows or <br />salinity le...el.. Increased groundwater <br />pumpi~ in the service area of the <br />Cenu",1 Arizona Project would cause <br />min~r additional drawdown of the <br />f"oundwaler aquifer. <br />Conclusion <br />The production of synthetic fuels in <br />the Upper Colorado River Basin by the <br />extraction and processing of oil shale <br />and/or coal. will require significant <br />quantities of waler. A synfuels <br />production level of 3 million barrels per <br />day (oil equivalent) would consume <br />abouI450.000 acre-feet of water <br />annually (150.000 acre-feet per year per <br />million barrels of daily capacity). <br />The overall supply of ground and <br />surface waler resources in the Region i8 <br />sufficient to accommodate a synfuels <br />production le\'el of nearly 3 million <br />barrels oil equivalent per day. This <br />conclusion is reached after <br /> <br />consideration of present and projected <br />le\'els of conventional water uses (e.g.. <br />irrigaUon. water exports) and the <br />several inslilutional arrangementf that <br />govern use and management of the <br />Region's water supplies. <br />While the gross water supplies in the <br />Region are sufficient for the accelerated <br />.yofuel development case. water supply <br />problems are apparent in some synfuels <br />development areas. Of particular <br />concern is the White River development <br />area in Colorado and Utah. This area <br />contains the richest oil shale reserves in <br />the Region. But because of lack of <br />reservoir slorage. surface water supplies <br />in this area are subject 10 seasonllllow <br />flows and periodic droughls. In order to <br />provide dependable water supplies in <br />this area, the development of major <br />reservoirs and other water supply <br />facilities will be required. <br />Additionally. water uses by synfuels <br />de\'elopmentln Colorado and New <br />Mexico. in combination wilh projected <br />conventional uses, will raise the annual <br />depletions In these States to amounts <br />close to their compact entitlements. <br />Because each State is well aware of <br />this situation. the States can be <br />expected to manage water use as <br />needed and in cooperation with the <br />Upper Basin Compact Commlasion. <br />Conflict with other water uses is <br />possible. Instream uses. including water <br />quality management. recrealional <br />boating. and fishery habitats. could be <br />adversely affected by surface waler <br />depletions for aynfuels development. <br />ConfliCI over water rights and the <br />respective priorities for use during dry <br />periods Is also possible. However. <br />through continuing planning for water <br />management and the timely <br />implementation of planning <br />recommendations. many of these <br />conflicts can be avoided. <br />Since the analysis of impacts <br />presumed that water supplies would be <br />laken for synfuels production after <br />projected conventional offstream uses in <br />the Upper Basin were accommodated. <br />no significant adverse Impacls on these <br />uses were found. However, depletions <br />by synfuels will (1) reduce hydroelectric <br />power production. (2) reduce deliveries <br />to the Central Arizona Project. and (3) <br />increase salinity in the main 'Iem of the <br />Colorado River in the Lower Basin.. The <br />economIc value of the.e impacts are <br />estimaled at aboul S20 million annually. <br />While the aasessment provides very <br />positi,,'e flOdings on water supply <br />availability and minimal adverse <br />impact.. several factors must be viewed <br />with caution. The Colorado River is <br />presently utilized fully. Depletions In the <br />Upper Basin are already over 27 pert:'!nt <br /> <br />1 <br />