My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP03009
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
3001-4000
>
WSP03009
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:48:10 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 11:29:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.101.08
Description
Glen Canyon Dam/Lake Powell
State
AZ
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
3/24/1997
Author
USDOI - Bureau of Re
Title
The Operation of Glen Canyon Dam During Spring Runoff Periods - Within the Constraints of the 1968 Colorado River Basin Project Act and the 1992 Grand Canyon Protection Act (working draft)
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />Describe the dispute over the 1996 BeachlHabitat Building Flow and the resulting <br />"agreement", Where is the div'iding line between the jurisdiction of these two Acts? <br /> <br />Interpret:nion of the legal meaning of the term "spills" was the heart of differing positions on the <br />release of water at rates greater than powerplant capacity. The States believe that the 1968 Act <br />provision of avoiding anticipated spills means avoiding releases greater than powerplant <br />capacity. while others believe that such releases, if used for the environmental benefit of the <br />Grand Canyon. are not spills but are actually releases used for project purposes. These positions <br />have not changed appreciably over the last few years and essentially blocked the testing of such <br />releases with threat of litigation. <br /> <br />In 1995. a proposal was offered by Reclamation to change the preferred alternative of the <br />GCDEIS. According to that proposal, beachlhabitat building flows would not take place in <br />years when the reservoir was low, but rather when Lake Powell storage was high. Powerplant <br />bypasses occur naturally under these latter conditions as a result of high runoff or large forecast <br />errors. Such releases would then be managed to the greatest extent possible to benefit the Grand <br />Canyon. The acceptance of this idea by all parties involved in the GCDEIS cooperating agency <br />discussions \cd to the March! April 1996 test of the beachlhabitat building flow and modification <br />of the preferred alternative in the ROD. <br /> <br />The extent of interaction het\veen the jurisdiction of these Acts is still not clear to :111 parties. <br />1\lost ackno\v \edge that they must coexist. The purpose of this paper is to clarify this issue and <br />identify the processes for consultation, coordination and information sharing during the annual <br />forecast and spring runoff period of January through July. <br /> <br />AOP Considerations <br /> <br />Is there a relationship between flood control operations at Hoover Dam and releases <br />from Glen Canyon Dam? When are we in flood control operations? Is there a <br />flood control diagram at Glen Canyon as at Hoover Dam? <br /> <br />The Corps of Engineers flood control diagram for Hoover Dam is a legally binding set of release <br />curves that dictate Hoover Dam releases based on basinwide storage and runoff forecasts. Flood <br />control diagrams are prepared by the Corps when projects have quantified flood control benefits <br />as part of the project cost allocation. The purpose of the diagram is to protect the downstream <br />inhabitants from large, controJled or uncontrolled releases. There is little, if any, flexibility in <br />determining releases using this diagram. In the case of Hoover Dam, either do\vnstream <br />consumptive use requirements or the flood control parameters specify releases. <br /> <br />Reclamation Discussion Paper n Working Draft -- 3/24/97 version <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.