Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Colorado Water Conservation Board <br /> <br />Department of Natural Resources <br /> <br />721 State Centennial Building <br />1313 Sherman Street <br />Denver. Colorado 80203 <br />Phone (303) 866-3441 <br />FAX (303) 866-4474 <br /> <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />Roy Romer <br />Governor <br /> <br />MEMORANDUM <br /> <br />James S. Lochhead <br />Executive Director, DNR <br /> <br />Daries C. Lile, P.E. <br />Director, CWCB <br /> <br />TO: <br /> <br />Colorado Water Conservation Board Members <br />Chuck Lile ~r <br /> <br />.- <br />,. <br />~ <br />, <br />., <br /> <br />FROM: <br /> <br />DATE: August 30, 1994 <br /> <br />SUBJECT: Agenda Item 17(d), September 13-14, 1994, Board Meeting -- <br />Glen Canyon Operations - Spike Flow Issues <br /> <br />Presently the proposed spike flow release from Glen Canyon Dam is planned for in April 1995, and <br />the annual Operating Plan for the Colorado River and Glen Canyon Dam is being designed to allow <br />for the moving of a block of water into April. This means that beginning in October 1994 <br />adjustment will be made in the amount of releases from Lake Powell on a monthly basis to <br />accumulate enough water for the release in April. <br /> <br />We still continue to raise opposition to the release for two reasons: 1) we believe, and the Attorney <br />General's Office concurs, as well as several of the basin states and the power users that this release <br />is a violation of the Law of the River, and 2) that there will be severe environmental impacts in the <br />Grand Canyon to endangered species as well as other Canyon resources which have not been fully <br />analyzed, nor has the Bureau of Reclamation met proper NEP A and ESA compliance. <br /> <br />At the cooperating agency meeting recently held in Phoenix, the Bureau's attorney, Robert Moller, <br />reported in his opinion that the release was legal, but that he has advised his client that a legal <br />determination through the court process was not without a down side and that it was not necessarily <br />a given that they would prevail. He did not issue a formal written legal opinion. <br /> <br />Additionally, staff of the U.S.B.R. reported that there will not be enough water in Lake Powell under <br />present hydrological forecast to allow for an elevation in the reservoir sufficient for release from the <br />spillway gate, and consequently the bypass amount would need to be in the range of 42,000 cfs, <br />rather than 52,000 cfs. This raised an issue as to the value of the data being collected since the flow <br />would be less, however, 42,000 cfs would still exceed the 32,000 cfs capacity of the power plant. <br />