WSP01996

• File Number: 8149.911
• Description: PSOP Background
• Basin: Arkansas
• Date: 3/1/2000
• Author: Montgomery Watson
• Title: Permitting and Regulatory Issues Prepared for Arkansas Basin Future Water and Storage Needs Assessment Enterprise
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Publication

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

2341
· Fry-Ark Reoperation- Operational impacts throughout the basin would need to be
addressed.
· Pueblo Reservoir Enlargement- As a part of the purpose the reduction of dam safety
risks should be addressed. Wetland impacts would also need to be addressed. For all
new projects both the impacts of the inundation pool and the impact of operations
should be addressed.
· Gravel Pits- NEPA issues would need to be addressed at the time of commitment for
the proposed reservoir site.
· Wiliams Creek Reservoir- Similar comments, it was also noted that this reservoir could
be a part of a water reuse and reclamation project for potable uses.
4. In regard to permits it was noted that both an EIS on Administrative Actions and on
Legislative actions would be required.
5. In regard to Elephant Rock Reservoir, the agreement with Friends of the Arkansas should be
addressed to show how it ties to these projects as an alternative considered but to be dropped.
6. A chart of reasonably foreseeable future actions should be prepared.
7. A TMDL type of analysis should be prepared for all water quality impacts.
8. USEPA concurred with the USBR that the USBR is the most likely lead federal permitting
agency.
9. USEPA could be either a cooperating or reviewing agency. USEPA usually does not ask for
reimbursement of their costs.
10. The NRCS should be added as a permitting or review agency. The Limestone Graveyard EA
should be reviewed for input on water quality issues.
II. The baseline analysis should reflect current conditions rather than historical conditions.
12. The Lake McConaughy FERC relicense studies should also be reviewed for discussion of
current versus historic baseline condition studies.

2